1. Chapter Two: 2.1
COMPARING CULTURES
INTRODUCTION
COMPARATIVE MODELS
COMPARING THE INFLUENCES OF CONTEXT
COMPARING STATUS AND FUNCTION
COMPARING VALUES IN THE WORKPLACE
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE MANAGER
SUMMARY
EXERCISE.
2. Chapter Two: 2.2
KLUCKHOHN AND STRODTBECK (1961)
designed an early comparative model, which has
been widely influential.
ORIENTATIONS: RANGE OF VARIATIONS:
1. What is the nature of people?
2. What is the person’s
relationship to nature?
3. What is the person’s
relationship to other people?
- Good (changeable/unchangeable)/
Evil (changeable/unchangeable)/
A mixture of good and evil
- Dominant / In harmony / Subjugation
- Lineal (hierarchical) / Collateral
(collectivist) / Individualist
3. (2.2)
ORIENTATIONS: RANGE OF VARIATIONS:
4. What is the modality of
human activity?
5. What is the temporal focus of
human activity?
6. What is the conception of space?
- Doing / Being / Containing
- Future / Present / Past
- Private / Public / Mixed.
4. Chapter Two: 2.3
HALL (1976)
HIGH-CONTEXT CULTURES
- RELATIONSHIPS (both positive and negative) are
relatively LONG LASTING
- because so much is communicated by SHARED
CODE, communication is economical, fast, and
efficient – in a routine situation
- people in AUTHORITY are PERSONALLY
RESPONSIBLE for the actions of subordinates
5. (2.3)
- AGREEMENTS (between members) tend to be
SPOKEN rather then written
- INSIDERS and OUTSIDERS are closely
DISTINGUISHED
LOW CONTEXT CULTURES have the opposite
characteristics.
6. Chapter Two: 2.4
HOFSTEDE (2001)
Cultures are compared on five dimensions:
- POWER DISTANCE; the distance between
individuals at different levels of a hierarchy
- UNCERTAINTY AVOIDANCE; more or less need to
avoid uncertainty
- INDIVIDUALISM / COLLECTIVISM; the relations
between the individual and his/her fellows
- MASCULINITY / FEMINITY; the division of roles,
and achievement/service values in society
- CONFUCIAN (work) DYNAMISM; temporal
orientation.
7. Chapter Two: 2.5
STRENGTHS and WEAKNESSES of
HOFSTEDE’s (2001) model
STRENGTHS
- the INFORMANT POPULATION (IBM employees) is
relatively controlled
- the DIMENSIONS tap into deep cultural values and
make significant comparisons between national
cultures
- the connotations of each dimension are RELEVANT
to management
- no other study compares so many national cultures
in so much detail. This is THE BEST THERE IS.
8. (2.5)
WEAKNESSES
- it assumes that the NATIONAL TERRITORY and the
limits of the culture group correspond
- informants were drawn from only ONE COMPANY
- possible BIAS in the questionnaire responses
- TECHNICAL difficulties; e.g., some connotations
overlap
- definitions of the DIMENSIONS
- AGE of the model?? (see Chapter Three)
- problems inherent in ALL COMPARATIVE models of
culture.
