Cultural dimension by Hofstede

Dutch psychologist Gerard Hendrik Hofstede, like Hall, studied human behavior in different cultures (Hofstede, 1978, 1981, 1991, 1993). In 1933, Hofstede grouped the most common behavior patterns into clusters according to five cultural dimensions. Hofstede emphasized the polarities (Adamovic, 2023) of power distance as short and long, uncertainty dimension as avoidance and tolerance, individualistic versus collectivist, masculine versus feminine, and time orientation short-term versus long-term (Exhibit 9-5).

Ex. 9‑5 Hofstede’s cultural dimensions

Keywords: power distance, assertiveness, time orientation, uncertainty, social relations

Source: (Hofstede, 1983)

Hofstede’s the five dimensions do not contradict Hall but are complementary and overlap somewhat in the time dimension (Sent & Kroese, 2021).
The dimension of power distance according to Hofstede is the prevailing understanding, attitude and tradition in society about the relationship between people concerning the division of power among members of society including those with power and those who do not. According to this dimension, societies are divided into hierarchical and egalitarian. In hierarchical societies, it is very common for each person to know his or her social position in society, and such obvious things as where one lives, what he wears, the model of car he uses, as it reflects a person’s status. Some hierarchical societies have castes, best example of that could be found India. In hierarchical societies, a person’s place in society is determined usually by birth. Ascension to a higher caste is of course possible and it does happen, but it is more the exception than the rule. In societies, more hierarchy is observed in southern Europe, South America, Africa, Asia. More egalitarian and more equal societies are located in Northern Europe, North America, and Australia. Scandinavian countries are considered the most egalitarian countries. In an egalitarian country, members of society are considered equal, not depending on status, wealth or power.
One of the aspects reflecting the dimension of power distance that is very noticeable in business is the manager-subordinate relationship. In hierarchical societies, if person casually walk into the office of an unknown firm, person can easily identify which person is higher in hierarchical ladder.
Business owner’s or executive officer’s characteristics, incudes a well-furnished working room, expensive clothes, an expensive watch, an expensive car with a driver, are characteristics with which the chief emphasizes his dominant position in relation to other individuals. In Spain, Italy, Mexico or China, when a person enters an office, the boss is easily recognizable. At the same time, entering an office of Swedish firm, it’s really hard or even impossible to tell who the boss is, because everyone is dressed the same, the workplaces set up is the same, and everyone comes to work by public transport by the same metro wagon or by same bus.
Power distance is also closely related to the political system of the state. In democracies, representatives of the nation, heads of government or presidents are elected for a term that usually ranges from three to six years. Elected persons are understood as servants who serve the public, not rule it. Of course, they have the power to set law and rules, but the people themselves have the power to choose the next leadership of the state in the next election. Societies in countries with long-standing and mature democratic systems tend to be less hierarchical, and therefore businesses in such countries have less signs of hierarchy. Meanwhile, businesses that are located in autocratic countries, monarchies, dictatorships, where people remain in power for several decades, have more hierarchical structures. Even in democracies, where democracy is relatively young and counts one or more decades, one can find still existing manifestations of hierarchy. Some countries, while formally calling themselves democracies, rig elections or use other means to elect one candidate for decades in a row and also have more hierarchies in business.
In countries where the value system is shaped by the fact that the elderly are highly respected there is a greater hierarchy in society and business than in countries where the elderly are not so highly respected. For example, in Japan, where respect for seniors has long been cultivated, employees work in the same organization for a very long time, some work for their entire lives, and career ladders are also climbed in the same company. In Japan, it is believed that the more experienced a person is, the more knowledge and ability they have, and therefore occupy higher positions in organizations. Managers of Japanese organizations are often long-term employees of the same organization, so they demand the same respect as management and loyalty from organization newcomers. In North America, Western European countries, and Scandinavian countries, people pay much less attention to age, and loyalty to work for one organization for a lifetime is a very rare and even surprising phenomenon.
At the corporate level, in hierarchical cultures, the orders of corporate leaders are often followed without questioning them, whereas in egalitarian cultures, employees tend to be skeptical of the manager’s instructions and even disobey them if they seem illogical to the employee. In egalitarian cultures, workers’ unions are very strong, and they often dictate working conditions to the employer, negotiate terms and conditions of work, salaries as well, and defend employees. In companies with hierarchical cultures, trade unions are a rarer phenomenon.
Decision-making in hierarchical structures is very often centralized; organization managers seek to control even micro-level processes. Heads of departments are given very clearly defined powers, and some decisions are delegated, but they report frequently and in detail to their immediate supervisor. In egalitarian cultures, decision-making is more decentralized, and department heads have relatively broad discretionary authority over decisions at the tactical, and sometimes strategic, level.
In hierarchical cultures, it is often considered a good tone of behavior to defer to the leader by providing additional services, bringing a gift, while in egalitarian cultures it is completely unacceptable, and is even considered corruption, bribery, trying to influence. The culture of giving gifts to superiors is quite widespread in hierarchical cultures, and not giving a gift, for example when congratulating on a birthday or meeting a new manager, can be considered a bad tone or even an insult.
Big challenges arise when representatives of these poles of different dimensions meet for business purposes. For example, in Japan, where it is common for the head of the organization to be grey-haired suit-dressed, a meeting with the head of the Swedish firm, who is a young man in jeans, can be very surprising and insulting, just thinking that it is not the head who came to the meeting, but an ordinary middle-level employee.
It is important to mention that a certain manifestation of the cultural dimension in the business environment is often determined by several cultural dimensions, for example, loyalty at work is strongly encouraged by another cultural dimension – the dominance of collectivist thinking over individualistic thinking.
Eastern cultures are considered to be collectivist cultures. In these cultures, belonging to a social group is highly valued. The smallest social group is the family, people maintain long and close ties with their families throughout their lives, often children live with their parents even after reaching adulthood. Southern countries have a very strong collectivist culture reflected in their families – Southern Europe, South America. Living with parents in Italy or Spain is not uncommon for a man in his thirties. In this type of culture, it is common for people to stay with their parents even after starting their own family, so multiple generations live together. On the beaches of the Mediterranean, it is common to see three or even four generations coming together and spending a weekend or holiday together in a group of 10-20 people – all members of one big family, grandparents, parents, children and great-grandchildren. The situation is completely opposite in Protestant Western Europe, Scandinavia, and the USA, where the individualistic culture is strongly dominant. In an individualistic culture, the family tradition is weak; children leave their parents and live separately as soon as they reach adulthood. Even in wealthy families, adult children rent apartments and live independently from their parents on their own. And this is due to the perception and feeling that being independent is a great value for an individual. In Asia, collectivism and family abundance as a value are very important for population growth. India and China account for about a third of the world’s population. Other Asian countries, such as Indonesia, Bangladesh, and Pakistan, have the same population as the whole of Europe and far surpass the United States. Meanwhile, the population in Europe and the US is much smaller due to the prevailing individualistic culture; the native population is even decreasing, while the total population remains the same or even increases due to immigration from that Asia or Africa. Very high population growth is often associated with countries with less education. The level of education in individualistic cultures is actually much higher. Individualistic cultures have significantly greater achievements in the fields of science, technology, and innovation, although there are a few exceptions – Japan, Singapore and currently China – collectivistic Asian countries, which compete successfully in these fields with the United States and Northern and Western Europe.
The collectivist and individualist way of thinking strongly determines business organization, business relations, employee motivation, and consumer behavior (Cui et al., 2022). In a collectivist culture, a person strives to be a part of the community, he perceives achievements through the achievements of the community, the interest of the community is above personal interest. In collectivistic cultures, employees get involved in teamwork much more easily, enjoy the success of their colleagues as their own, and are usually strongly loyal to their company. In collectivist cultures, it is common for people to work for one organization all their lives, or to change jobs only a few times during their lives, and people rarely compete with colleagues at work. In individualistic cultures, the individual achievements of the employee are more valued and encouraged, this often leads to internal competition in the organization among employees, employees compete for work results, bonuses and career advancement. Due to constant competition in individualistic cultures, individual people reach the heights of science and business, which determines the technological progress of those countries, but the internal environment of the organization is less stable, employees are less loyal to the company. In Scandinavian countries, Western Europe, or the USA, it is common for employees to change jobs frequently, often look for new opportunities in other professions, and often try to create their own individual businesses. The number of start-ups is unequivocally dominated in the world by the USA and Western Europe, where the desire of each individual to think differently from the majority is greatly encouraged. Thinking differently from others often means creating something new, inventing, adapting, and this is the hallmark of individualistic cultures. In collectivistic cultures, uniformity is more encouraged, not separating from the many. For example, in collectivist cultures, especially in Asia, even the clothes at work are much more uniform and this does not cause discomfort to employees when the dress code is in force.
Being part of a community, identifying one’s goals with those of the community, often stems from the need to feel safe and secure. People have lived in tribes since ancient times, it was much easier to survive, find food, and protect themselves from enemies in a large community. In the modern world, of course, such primitivism is no longer present, but the sense of security of belonging and sharing everything with a community has not disappeared anywhere. Collectivistic cultures often also have highly hierarchical structures. Since the society lives quite compactly and shares the space, there is a need to find out the subordination relations and obey them, thus ensuring a peaceful and peaceful coexistence in the community among the members of the community.
In individualistic cultures, people are often characterized by directness, openness, sincerity, they say what they think, the need for context in communication is lower. It is related to the fact that people in these cultures feel safe enough to act and say what they think, openness and transparency in business are considered values. In collectivistic cultures, where individuals stick together for safety, communication is less direct, less open, and rarely direct opposition or dissatisfaction. In collectivist cultures, more closed information about businesses prevail, information about organization data, employees, and income is more limited to the public. For example, in Western Europe and Scandinavian countries, even such sensitive information about average salaries, number of employees, income, profit and trends of these indicators over time is made public even in a private closed-type firm. This is much less common in collectivistic cultures, unless it is a publicly traded company.
Uncertainty avoidance is another Hofstede dimension on which people vary greatly across cultures. There are cultures that value precision, clarity, and try to do everything according to a strict order, as they are taught and trained to do. The British are considered the pioneers of standards in international business. Clear instructions on what and how to do for employees became necessary when companies had grown and expanded in other countries. In a small family business, improvisation and the ability of each individual is a strong competitive advantage, but large corporations cannot afford it. Strictness, rules and instructions have been used in warfare since ancient times and were successfully applied as far back as the Roman Empire. High accuracy and standards are also needed so that one employee can be replaced by another at any time. However, in different countries of the world, people do not feel equally comfortable being trapped in strict standards of behavior. Some peoples feel great in an unrestricted, even chaotic situation and uncontrolled environment. For example, if to compare the Istanbul market with the US or European mall, a buyer can see obvious differences – order, standardization of rules against complete chaos and diversity. Another comparison would be traffic in the streets of London or Egypt. Even compared to such a standardized international business facility as international airports. The duty-free shopping area at Frankfurt Airport looks significantly differently than at Hurghada Airport in Egypt, where there is no surprise to see traders lining the corridors with carpets and trading as if it were an oriental market. Thus, according to the degree of uncertainty avoidance, cultures are divided into rule-based and relationship-based. The rules try to describe the employee’s behavior with each other, the employee’s behavior with the customers, and any deviations from the rules are considered a formal offense and are punished. In cultures that are highly tolerant of ambiguity, a certain level of chaos, much more emphasis is placed on relationships between people.
Differences in this dimension can also be found in Europe. Spaniards, Italians tolerate uncertainty much better, but Germans, British, Scandinavians are also called as “culture of rules”. This dimension also explains the time dimension by Hall. People of those cultures who tolerate uncertainty are reluctant with time perception and punctuality, while people of rules are very punctual.
Hofstede, as well as Hall, distinguished the time dimension, but supplemented it more with aspects such as orientation to long-term and short-term goals, orientation to the past, present and future. It manifests itself differently in different countries and peoples, but it is even visible in the structure of language. The Spanish are a people focused more on the past and the present, there are many discussions in small talk conversations about what has already happened. In the Spanish language, it is possible to count about ten past tenses. Other nations do not have this either in the structure of the language, in the way of thinking or in the behavior. Orientation to the future is a trait that encourages hard work, accumulating savings, investing, and this give results in the long term. In long term and future oriented cultures, has born majority of large multinational organizations, so those countries have become the leading economies in the entire world.
Hofstede pointed out that the population of different countries also differs greatly in terms of the dominant masculine and feminine type of thinking and behavior. As the feminist and transgender movements develop in the 21st century, such a division may receive a lot of criticism and condemnation, even accusations for stereotyping and stigmatization of people, yet differences between cultures exist and affect people’s relationships, communication and business. Masculine-type cultures are dominated by the idea of competitiveness of each individual, the desire to compete, the desire to win and dominate. Businesses in these types of cultures are usually man-dominated, and businesses born in these countries are quite competitive and often aggressively developed. This type of culture values hard work, achieving results at any cost, sacrificing free time for work, striving for material values, and struggling to earn more money. In feminine-type cultures, more attention is paid to the work and life balance, well-being, relationships and quality of life in general. In feminine-type cultures, great importance is attached to social relations, the process of relations itself, but not the final result. Recently, in 2024, in the pursuit of political correctness and under the strong influence of gender equality and multi-genderism and criticism of the division into masculine and feminine cultures, this dimension has been renamed to degree of motivation towards achievement and success. Cultures that were previously considered and called masculine are now those that are motivated by achievement, victory, perseverance, heroism, material rewards for success, and those that were previously considered feminine are now those that are more motivated by altruism, compassion for the weaker, the pursuit of quality of life and happiness.
The lasts, and actually sixth cultural dimension added by Hofstede to first five defines human freedom in society and it is called as dimension of indulgence versus restraint. Some societies tend to give a lot of freedom to people, many desires and passions are tolerated and forgiven. Thus, in some societies, legal acts are adapted to such manifestations of freedom, even allowing the use of soft drugs such as marijuana or to provide legit prostitution. Meanwhile, other societies are very strict and do not forgive any desire satisfaction, even eating some foods such as pork or drink alcohol in Muslim countries, to eat beef in India. For using Marijuana possible to get long term in prison or even get life-long sentence in some case.