REFERENCE PAPER 1 and 2 All readings are required unless noted as “Optional” or “Not Required.” After reading the introductory material on the home page, delve more deeply into three different typologies—or ways of classifying cultures. The module starts with a simple dichotomous typology—individualism/collectivism—expands to Hofstede’s six dimensions of culture, and rounds out with a more impressionistic framework—that of Gannon’s cultural metaphors. Individualism/Collectivism Perhaps the oldest construct in thinking about dimensions of culture is the dichotomy of individualism and collectivism. It is a good place to start in understanding cultural dimensions, because it represents one of the more readily apparent characteristics of a culture—the degree to which members of a society think of themselves as individuals separate and distinct from their fellows or as a part of a group that is greater and more significant than the self. Social scientists have studied the distinction between societies that value obligations to the group over the individual (or vice versa) for nearly 100 years. Beginning with the work of Emile Durkeim, the construct of individualism/collectivism was popularized in modern cross-cultural study largely by the work of Harry Triandis and colleagues. What follows is an extensive review of the topic that will give you a thorough understanding of the characteristics of individualistic and collectivistic cultures and help you understand how leadership styles and practices vary between the two. In addition, the article discusses how these two orientations can disparately affect economic development, organizational culture, group dynamics, job design and rewards, conflict, and communication. Later parts of the article cover research and methodological concerns—this section is optional. Note: Although this article was published in 1998, it still constitutes a solid review of a foundational construct in the field of cross-cultural studies. If you have trouble finding it in the library, check the Business Source Complete database after clicking on “Additional Library Resources.” Earley, P., & Gibson, C. B. (1998). Taking Stock in Our Progress on Individualism-Collectivism: 100 Years of Solidarity and Community. Journal Of Management, 24(3): 265–304. Hofstede’s Dimensions of Culture Currently, the most widely used framework for classifying types of cultures is Geert Hofstede’s dimensions of culture. Hofstede, a Dutch social psychologist, once worked with IBM International, where he became interested in cross-cultural influences on work behavior. In 1980, Hofstede published his groundbreaking work, Culture’s Consequences. In this work, Hofstede proposed four cultural dimensions, each forming a bipolar continuum. He argued that cultures can be measured along these dimensions, and that differences in behavior and customs can be explained by mapping these dimensions. The original dimensions were: · Individualism/collectivism · Power ...

1. REFERENCE PAPER 1 and 2
All readings are required unless noted as “Optional” or “Not
Required.”
After reading the introductory material on the home page, delve
more deeply into three different typologies—or ways of
classifying cultures. The module starts with a simple
dichotomous typology—individualism/collectivism—expands to
Hofstede’s six dimensions of culture, and rounds out with a
more impressionistic framework—that of Gannon’s cultural
metaphors.
Individualism/Collectivism
Perhaps the oldest construct in thinking about dimensions of
culture is the dichotomy of individualism and collectivism. It is
a good place to start in understanding cultural dimensions,
because it represents one of the more readily apparent
characteristics of a culture—the degree to which members of a
society think of themselves as individuals separate and distinct
from their fellows or as a part of a group that is greater and
more significant than the self.
Social scientists have studied the distinction between societies
that value obligations to the group over the individual (or vice
versa) for nearly 100 years. Beginning with the work of Emile
Durkeim, the construct of individualism/collectivism was
popularized in modern cross-cultural study largely by the work
of Harry Triandis and colleagues.
What follows is an extensive review of the topic that will give
you a thorough understanding of the characteristics of
individualistic and collectivistic cultures and help you
understand how leadership styles and practices vary between the
two. In addition, the article discusses how these two
orientations can disparately affect economic development,
organizational culture, group dynamics, job design and rewards,
conflict, and communication. Later parts of the article cover
research and methodological concerns—this section is optional.

2. Note: Although this article was published in 1998, it still
constitutes a solid review of a foundational construct in the
field of cross-cultural studies. If you have trouble finding it in
the library, check the Business Source Complete database after
clicking on “Additional Library Resources.”
Earley, P., & Gibson, C. B. (1998). Taking Stock in Our
Progress on Individualism-Collectivism: 100 Years of Solidarity
and Community. Journal Of Management, 24(3): 265–304.
Hofstede’s Dimensions of Culture
Currently, the most widely used framework for classifying types
of cultures is Geert Hofstede’s dimensions of culture. Hofstede,
a Dutch social psychologist, once worked with IBM
International, where he became interested in cross-cultural
influences on work behavior. In 1980, Hofstede published his
groundbreaking work, Culture’s Consequences. In this work,
Hofstede proposed four cultural dimensions, each forming a
bipolar continuum. He argued that cultures can be measured
along these dimensions, and that differences in behavior and
customs can be explained by mapping these dimensions. The
original dimensions were:
· Individualism/collectivism
· Power distance (high or low)
· Uncertainty avoidance (high or low)
· Masculinity/femininity
Although his work has been criticized on methodological
grounds and that his dimensions explain only a small part of the
variation in behavior across cultures, it remains popular due to
the value it has in helping people anticipate, understand, and
interpret cultural differences. The following interactive website
offers a quick overview of the original four dimensions.
Gill, C. (2017, March 23). Hofstede's cultural dimensions and
differences across cultures. Oxford University Press Blog.
Retrieved from https://blog.oup.com/2017/03/hofstede-cultural-
dimensions/
and
Hofstede, G. (n.d). National culture. Geert Hofstede. Retrieved

3. from https://geert-hofstede.com/national-culture.html
In the years since his first book, Hofstede has expanded his
typology to include two additional dimensions. Hear him
discuss his recent work in the following video:
Hofstede, G. (2013). Geert Hofstede—Recent Discoveries about
Cultural Differences Key Note Speech for the 2nd Hofstede
Symposium, January 2013. Retrieved from
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBv1wLuY3Ko
Cultural Metaphors
Dr. Martin Gannon has developed an innovative way of thinking
about and understanding cultural differences that employs a
more “holistic” approach. Rather than breaking down behavior
patterns into categories and using those categories to compare
cultures, Gannon uses metaphors to help us understand the
essence or “feel” of a culture. From Gannon (2002):A cultural
metaphor is any activity, phenomenon, or institution with which
members of a given culture emotionally and/or cognitively
identify. As such, cultural metaphors reflect the underlying
values of a culture. Examples of national cultural metaphors
include the Japanese garden, the Chinese family altar, and
American football.Gannon, M. J. (2002). Cultural metaphors:
Their use in management practice and as a method for
understanding cultures. In W. J. Lonner, D. L. Dinnel, S. A.
Hayes, & D. N. Sattler (Eds.), Online Readings in Psychology
and Culture (Unit 16, Chapter 4), Center for Cross-Cultural
Research, Western Washington University, Bellingham,
Washington USA. Not required.
Metaphors reflect the values and core beliefs of the society and
thus enable us to grasp the underlying meaning or rationale
behind the approaches to such things as negotiation,
relationships between boss and subordinate, or many other day-
to-day interactions. In other words, they give us a palpable
sense of what happens in real-world interactions. The advantage
of thinking about culture in terms of metaphor, is that it allows
us to compare something quite unfamiliar with something with
which we are already familiar. Take the Turkish Coffeehouse,

4. for example:
Turkey is a very unique culture, straddling the intersection
between traditional Turkish customs or ways of life and
Western ideologies. Turkey embraces the old and the new,
Christianity and Islam, modern cities and rural villages that
have not changes in decades. The people are known for being
hospitable, emotional, and devoted to rich traditions.
Significantly, Turks have never been conquered by an outside
civilization, but the culture’s origins can be traced to roots in
the Mongul, Slav, Greek, Kurd, Armenian, and Arab societies.
Gannon chose the Turkish Coffeehouse as a metaphor for
Turkish culture because in it one finds an emphasis on both
Islam and secularity; an outlet for community, discourse, and
recreation; a customer base reflecting a male-dominated culture;
and finally coffeehouses outside of major metropolitan areas are
modest— especially when compared with upscale cafes or
distinguished pubs characteristic of large cities.
To learn more about cultural metaphors, how they relate to
Individualism/collectivism, Hofstede’s dimensions, and other
topics to be covered in later module, review Chapter 1 of
Gannon’s best-selling book:
Gannon, M. J. & Rajnandini K. P. (2013). Understanding Global
Cultures: Metaphorical Journeys through 31 Nations, Clusters of
Nations, Continents, and Diversity. Sage: Thousand Oaks,
California. Chapter 1: Understanding Cultural Metaphors.
For some brief examples of other cultural metaphors described
in depth in the book, read the following review of the first
edition. If you have trouble finding this in the general library
search, click on “Additional Library Resources” and search the
Business Source Complete Database.
Vernon-Wortzel, H., & Shrivastava, P. (1996). Understanding
Global Cultures: Metaphorical Journeys Through 17 Countries.
Academy Of Management Review, 21(1), 288–291.
Application: Negotiation
Understanding or misunderstanding cultural differences can
have a profound effect on the successful process and outcome in

5. negotiations. The following short article indicates how
Hofstede’s dimensions can inform the best strategy to pursue
when negotiating across national borders.
Ramping up your skills for cross-cultural negotiation. (2010).
Leader to Leader, (56): 60–61.
PAPER ONE
Submit a 2- to 3-page proposal describing your cultural
experience. Your proposal should address the following
questions:
1. Intended contact culture group
a. What is the identified culture group with which you are
planning to have contact? Be specific.
b. Provide a brief description of any contact you have
previously had with this group.
c. Briefly explain why this target group qualifies as a culture
group.
2. Intended new cultural activity
a. Briefly describe your new cultural activity.
b. Does your intended activity meet all requirements of the
assignment (see expectations below)? Provide some details to
justify your answer.
c. Will this activity allow you to have meaningful contact with
members of the intended target culture group? Briefly explain.
d. What is the planned date, time and approximate duration of
the activity?
3. General
a. Have you selected a secondary contact group and cultural
activity as a backup? Please describe briefly.
b. Do you have any questions about the project? Please
describe.
Assignment Expectations
Here are the requirements—or parameters—of the exercise:

6. 1. Provides information concerning the date(s) and place where
this experience will take place.
2. The selected experience should be novel. The intent of this
case is to provide a kind of “lab” where you can apply your
learning in a new setting.
3. The experience must be with a group or culture that is largely
unfamiliar to you.
4. You should not be in a position of authority or dominance
vis-à-vis the target group. For example, you should not be a
customer in a restaurant, or interacting with individuals who
have lower rank than you in an organizational setting. Power
can influence behavior, and we want to keep power
relationships in check to provide the most meaningful type of
interaction.
5. The experience should allow for meaningful one-on-one
contact with members of the target group. Thus it is
recommended that you do not choose an impersonal spectator
event such as a large festival, parade, or sporting event.
6. The experience must be a minimum of 2 hours in length to
provide you with enough material for analysis.
7. The experience must not be illegal or place you at
unreasonable physical or psychological risk.
8. You need to be able to provide evidence of the experience
(such as photographs or a video).
9. Have a second choice experience in mind in case your first
choice does not meet the above parameters and is not approved.

7. PAPER 2
In this module, you will be measuring your personal cultural
values and comparing it to Hofstede’s dimensions of culture for
the culture in which you live. Please start by filling out the
following instrument: CVSCALE: The Five-Dimensional
Measure of Personal Cultural Values. Then in your weekly
journal, reflect on the following questions:
CVSCALE: The Five-Dimensional Measure of Personal Cultural
Values
Yoo, B., Donthu, N., & Lenartowicz, T. (2011). Measuring
Hofstede’s five dimensions of cultural values
at the individual level: Development and validation of
CVSCALE. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 23
(3/4), 193–210.
See the full paper at
http://people.hofstra.edu/Boonghee_Yoo/cvscale.pdf

8. Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with
each statement. There are no right or wrong answers—just give
us your honest opinion.
Score 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 7 (Strongly Agree)
Score (1-7)
People in higher positions should make most decisions without
consulting people in lower positions.

9. People in higher positions should not ask the opinions of people
in lower positions too frequently.
People in higher positions should avoid social interaction with
people in lower positions.
People in lower positions should not disagree with decisions by
people in higher positions.
People in higher positions should not delegate important tasks
to people in lower positions.
PO Total
0
It is important to have instructions spelled out in detail so that I
always know what I’m expected to do.

10. It is important to closely follow instructions and procedures.
Rules and regulations are important because they inform me of
what is expected of me.
Standardized work procedures are helpful.
Instructions for operations are important.

11. UN Total
0
Individuals should sacrifice self-interest for the group (either at
school or the workplace).
Individuals should stick with the group even through
difficulties.
Group welfare is more important than individual rewards.
Group success is more important than individual success.
Individuals should only pursue their goals after considering the
welfare of the group.
Group loyalty should be encouraged even if individual goals
suffer.

12. CO Total
0
It is more important for men to have a professional career than
it is for women.
Men usually solve problems with logical analysis; women
usually solve problems with intuition.
Solving difficult problems usually requires an active, forcible
approach, which is typical of men.
There are some jobs that a man can always do better than a
woman.

13. MA Total
0
Score the following from 1 (Extremely unimportant to me) to 7
(Extremely important to me)
Careful management of money (thrift)
Going on resolutely in spite of opposition (persistence)
Personal steadiness and stability
Long-term planning
Giving up today’s fun for success in the future
Working hard for success in the future

14. LT Total
0
Note: PO = Power distance, UN = Uncertainty avoidance, CO =
Collectivism, MA = Masculinity, and LT = Long-term
orientation

15. 1. What did the CVSCALE reveal about your cultural values?
2. How does this compare to your own country’s values
according to Hofstede’s research?
3. What other insights about cultural values have you gained
from this questionnaire, the readings, and other aspects of the
course so far that will be valuable to you in leading across
different cultures?
The following article may be helpful to you in interpreting your
results and reflecting on the insights from this assessment on
leadership:
Yoo, B., Naveen D., & Lenartowicz, T. (2011). “Measuring
Hofstede’s Five Dimensions of Cultural Values at the Individual
Level: Development and Validation of CVSCALE,” Journal of
International Consumer Marketing, 23 (3/4), 193–210.
SLP Assignment Expectations
· The journal is a cumulative document—you turn in all
previous entries with each module,
· Include the results from the assessment in your journal.
· Each module should add 2–3 pages.
· The journal should be thoughtful and insightful, integrating
learnings from the assessment with other activities in the
module and course.
· The format for the journal is less formal than an academic
papers (e.g. you can use the 1st person), but you should use
headings to organize your thoughts and guide the reader and
cite any sources where you are using information, data, or text
from an outside source.

16. · Any references should be prepared in APA format in a
combined reference list at the end of the journal.
· Your journal should be edited and error-free.

17. REFERENCE PAPER 3 and 4
Read the following excerpt from Bolman, L.G. & Deal, T.E.
(2003). Reframing organizations: artistry, choice, and
leadership (3rd ed). San Francisco: John Wiley. Note the
assumptions of the Human Resources Frame, as you will use
these to guide the writing of your Case:
Assumptions of the Human Resources Frame
Is the workplace really this bleak across the board? Are
individuals simply pawns, sacrificed to collective purposes and
casually cast aside when no longer needed? Is there hope that
work can ever fully engage people's talent and energy? Such
questions have intensified with globalization and the growth in
size and power of modern institutions. How can people find
freedom and dignity in a world dominated by economic
fluctuations and an emphasis on short-term results? Answers are
not easy. They require a sensitive understanding of people and
their symbiotic relationship with organizations. The human
resource frame is built on core assumptions that highlight this
linkage:
· Organizations exist to serve human needs rather than the
reverse.
· People and organizations need each other. Organizations need
ideas, energy, and talent; people need careers, salaries, and
opportunities.
· When the fit between individual and system is poor, one or
both suffer. Individuals are exploited or exploit the
organization—or both become victims.
· A good fit benefits both. Individuals find meaningful and
satisfying work, and organizations get the talent and energy
they need to succeed.
People want to know, ‘How well will this place fulfill my
needs?’ Organizations universally ask, ‘How do we find and

18. retain people with the skills and attitudes needed to do the
work?’” (Bolman & Deal, 2003, pp. 108).
Required Sources
Elaine Westbrooks’ presentation is a very good starting point
from which we will begin our exploration of Bolman and Deal’s
Human Resources Frame (sometimes referred to as the “Human
Relations” Frame):
Westbrooks, E. (2012). Reframing organizations: The human
resources frame. Prezi. Retrieved on May 4, 2014 from
http://prezi.com/8n7gntvkuzw8/reframing-organizations-the-
human-resources-frame/
Read this article by Chris Mabey, in which the merits of using
the Human Resources Frame are highlighted:
Mabey, C. (2003). Reframing human resource development.
Human Resource Development Review, 2(4), 430-452,
Retrieved from ProQuest.
Optional – yet highly recommended – resources:
The following optional readings should be useful in your
analysis of the Case:
Trahan, K. (2009). Make your company a magic kingdom. Sales
& Service Excellence, 9(2), 15. Retrieved from EBSCO –
Business Source Complete.
Shuit, D. P. (2004). Magic for sale. Workforce Management,
83(9), 35-40. Retrieved from EBSCO – Business Source
Complete.
Human Resources (2014). The Walt Disney Company. Retrieved
on May 7, 2014 from http://thewaltdisneycompany.com/about-
disney/human-resources
Working Here Overview (2014). Disney Careers. Retrieved on
May 7, 2014 from http://disneycareers.com/en/working-
here/overview/

19. PAPER 3
Using specific examples of “human resources” or “human
relations” as they are defined by Bolman and Deal, you will use
the Human Resources Frame as a lens through which you will
analyze the effectiveness of the Walt Disney Company.
Begin the Module 2 Case by visiting the Walt Disney Company
website:
The Walt Disney Company. (2014). Retrieved on May 8, 2014
from http://thewaltdisneycompany.com/
Then, read the following:
So just how does Mickey make magic? The following article
discusses how Disney’s excellent employee performance is
recognized. Note the section entitled “Disney Recognition
101”:
Ligos, M. (2009). How Mickey makes magic. Successful
Promotions, 42(5), 44-47. Retrieved from EBSCO – Business
Source Complete.
Case Assignment
After you have reviewed the contents of the Walt Disney
Company website, completed the readings provided at the
Background page of Module 1, and performed additional
research from the library and on the internet, write a 6- to 7-
page paper in which you do the following:
Using the following assumptions of the Human Resources
Frame, complete an in-depth assessment of the Walt Disney
Company:
· Organizations exist to serve human needs rather than the
reverse.
· People and organizations need each other. Organizations need
ideas, energy, and talent; people need careers, salaries, and
opportunities.
· When the fit between individual and system is poor, one or
both suffer. Individuals are exploited or exploit the

20. organization—or both become victims.
· A good fit benefits both. Individuals find meaningful and
satisfying work, and organizations get the talent and energy
they need to succeed.
Keys to the Assignment
The key aspects of this assignment that are to be covered in
your 6- to 7-page paper include the following:
· Describe Walt Disney’s approach to human resources. Is
Disney’s overall approach to human resources more or less
effective relative to its ability to help the organization
accomplish its stated purpose (vision, mission)? Explain.
· Using Bolman and Deal’s Human Resources Frame, analyze
two or three human resources/ human relations characteristics
of the Walt Disney Company. Because you cannot cover all
characteristics that are related to human resources/ relations in
a short paper, you will need to be selective; therefore, choose
two or three characteristics that are of particular interest to you.
These might include, for example the Walt Disney Company’s
benefits design, its employee orientation/training programs, or
its employee evaluation systems.
· For each of the human resources characteristics that you have
included in your Case, discuss the extent to which that
characteristic has been effective or ineffective relative to
helping Disney to attain its stated purpose. Defend your answer
in the context of the four (4) assumptions given above (how
well do the two or three human resources/ relations
characteristics you’ve identified ascribe to these assumptions –
if at all)?
· Having had applied the Human Resources Frame to the Walt
Disney Company, is there anything that you would you do
differently? Conclude Chapter 3 of your paper by giving
recommendations as to what you believe Disney should do, and
explain why.
· The background readings will not give you all the answers to
the Case. Therefore, you are expected to perform some research

21. in the library, using a minimum of 3-4 scholarly sources from
the library to support and justify your understanding of the
case.
· Your paper must demonstrate evidence of critical thinking (if
you need tips on critical
thinking, http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/college-and-
university-students/799 is an excellent resource). Please do not
restate facts – instead, be sure to interpret the facts you have
accumulated from your research.
· Remember that the Module 3 Case will serve as Chapter 3 of
your session-long thesis-style paper.
Assignment Expectations
Your paper will be evaluated using the following five (5)
criteria:
· Assignment-Driven Criteria: Does the paper fully address all
Keys to the Assignment? Are the concepts behind the Keys to
the Assignment addressed accurately and precisely using sound
logic? Does the paper meet minimum length requirements?
· Critical thinking: Does the paper demonstrate graduate-level
analysis, in which information derived from multiple sources,
expert opinions, and assumptions has been critically evaluated
and synthesized in the formulation of a logical set of
conclusions? Does the paper address the topic with sufficient
depth of discussion and analysis?
· Business Writing: Is the paper well-written (clear, developed
logically, and well-organized)? Are the grammar, spelling, and
vocabulary appropriate for graduate-level work? Are section
headings included in all papers? Are paraphrasing and
synthesis of concepts the primary means of responding to the
Keys to the Assignment, or is justification/support instead
conveyed through excessive use of direct quotations?
· Effective Use of Information (Information Literacy): Does the
paper demonstrate effective research, as evidenced by student’s
use of relevant and quality sources? Do additional sources used
in paper provide strong support for conclusions drawn, and do

22. they help in shaping the overall paper?
· Citing Sources: Does the student demonstrate understanding of
APA Style of referencing, by inclusion of proper end references
and in-text citations (for paraphrased text and direct quotations)
as appropriate? Have all sources (e.g., references used from the
Background page, the assignment readings, and outside
research) been included, and are these properly cited? Have all
end references been included within the body of the paper as in-
text citations?
PAPER 4
In the Module 2 SLP, you will write a 3- to 4-page paper in
which you will apply the Human Resources Frame to the
organization in which you are currently employed (or in which
you have worked previously).
Assignment
The Module 2 SLP requires that you write a 3- to 4-page paper,
in which you address the following:
After giving a brief description of the organization in which you
presently work – or in which you have previously worked –
apply the Human Resources Frame to the organization,
analyzing the effectiveness of two or three human resources/
human relations characteristics you have identified.
Keys to the Assignment
The key aspects of this assignment that should be covered in
your paper include the following:

23. · Briefly describe your organization – name, what it does, size
(number of employees, annual revenue, relative market share,
etc.);
· Choose 2 or 3 human resources activities within your
organization (e.g., recruitment, evaluation, development,
training, etc.); and
· Using Bolman and Deal’s Human Resources Frame as a lens,
discuss the relative effectiveness of the human resources
characteristics you have selected. If you were CEO of your
company, what (if anything) might you do differently? Why
would you make the changes you suggest?