Cultural clusters by Trompenaars

Alfonsus (Fons) Trompenaars, a Dutch theorist of cultures, distinguished seven cultural dimensions in 1994 (Exhibit 9-6). Some of them, such as individualism/collectivism, the time dimension are defined in the same way as Hofstede. In addition, Trompenaars distinguished the dimensions specific to business (Trompenaars, 1993). For example, the dimension of role’s specificity and diffusion – describes the ability of a person or employee to learn and perform different jobs or functions. In cultures where diffusion dominates, people can often change occupations and can be assigned quite different jobs. Whereas the opposite is a behavior in which people are much more receptive to learning and repeating the same specific function or task. For global companies, which can break down their operational processes into very small functions due to the large scale of production or service provision, it is very useful to employ people who can perform the same function many times a day and do not get tired of it, i.e. individuals inclined to specificity. Meanwhile, people who are prone to diffusivity can hardly tolerate monotonous work. Yet the monotony of work introduced by Henry Ford back in the early twentieth century, as described in Chapters 1 and 2 of this book, provided the advantage of economies of scale and increased labor quality and productivity that became the basis of global business. Thus, global companies, when choosing places where mass production is planned, consider a specificity or a diffusion dimension dominate in the population of that country.

Trompenaars also distinguished a dimension which he defined as universalism versus particularism. Universalism is understood as the belief that all rules can be applied equally and without any exceptions, while particularism allows deviations from the rules depending on the circumstances. In cultures where universalism is prevalent, global companies quite easily implement standards of work, processes and behavior that are directly enforced, whereas in particularistic cultures, more room for improvisation can be left because people feel good about adapting rules and norms to a specific situation.

Trompenaars paid attention to the emotional dimension. In different cultures, it is acceptable to express emotions, joy, anger, surprise, but in others it is considered a sign of bad tone. For example, in Asia, the habit of not letting others know what a person thinks has been formed over a long period of time.

Ex. 9‑6 Trompenaars’ cultural dimensions

Keywords: Trompenaars, cultural dimmensions

Source: (Trompenaars, 1993)

This is associated with a sense of security, because the wrong word spoken in the history of Asian nations has cost many people their lives. So, this ability to hide emotions, or to mask one’s true emotions, is very widespread in Asia. In this cultural cluster, even in modern business transactions and meetings, it is common to smile restrainedly all the time and agree with the interlocutor all the time, agree with his opinion. However, this smile, agreement and approval is often only an external mask and in no way means that the offer is acceptable. It is quite difficult for entrepreneurs from other cultural clusters to get a sense of what the Asian business partners really think. On the other hand, in Southern European and South American cultures, even an exaggerated display of emotions, both positive and negative, is a cultural norm and tradition. Businesspeople from the English, German, Scandinavian cultural cluster often try not to show their emotions, but at least they speak directly and clearly verbally. They have no problem telling a counterpart straight and calmly to the face that the offer is inappropriate and there will be no business deal. Direct restraint prevails in this cultural cluster, and words spoken calmly can hurt and upset even more than the negative emotions expressed by Southerners.
Trompenaars singles out the desire of people to change and civilize the environment around them as a separate dimension. In cultures that value mastery, quality, human dominance over the surrounding environment, nature is considered a value. In the Anglo, Germanic, Scandinavian cultural clusters there is, or at least for a long time it was considered, that everything on earth must obey and serve man. Of course, this has led to the exploitation of the planet’s resources – the oceans are polluted with plastic, the air is polluted with emissions of burnt petroleum products, a lot of the Amazon forests are being cut down, there is no more wildlife left for entire species of animals, and cities resemble concrete jungles dominated by asphalt, steel, concrete and glass. The technocratic approach basically formed the culture of technocratic aestheticism, in which what is considered beautiful is what is orderly, has clear and strict forms, has great functionality and which is convenient for human life. Human activity has led to the fact that the pollution of air, water and soil has made it no longer comfortable for people to live, and the emission of CO2 and other greenhouse gases has increased natural disasters, floods, fires, heat waves, and tornadoes associated with climate change. Thus, although the Anglo, Germanic, and Scandinavian cultural clusters were the first to value man’s mastery and preference over nature, now a strong conservationist cultural wave began to spread in these societies. Many sustainability initiatives, such as reducing CO2 and limiting plastic, originate from Scandinavia, and representatives of the English and German cultural clusters are not far behind. In part, this can be explained by a certain collective sense of guilt, because it was the industrial revolution and the massification of production that led to these negative effects on nature. In other cultures, being in harmony with nature and striving to adapt to the surrounding environment and to nature is much more pronounced than the desire to change and adapt the surrounding environment and nature against oneself.

In a separate cultural dimension, the Trompenaars distinguish an approach to achievement and appointment. In some cultures, it is customary that higher positions, career, and social status are earned through hard work and personal achievements. In other cultures, it is not so important whether a person has acquired positions, wealth, social status by his own work and abilities, or simply inherited it, was appointed by political will or other circumstances. Although in both cases, whether power and influence are earned or simply acquired, the formal power of government works, but in the case of the first culture, if power is not earned, it can be questioned, sabotaged, and disrespected. This cultural dimension is highly related to the country’s political structure, democracy and its degree or authoritarianism. In societies where liberal democracy prevails, it is considered that every person has the opportunity to achieve everything he wants through his work – wealth, responsibilities, power, but in weaker democracies or authoritarian, totalitarian countries, such freedom does not exist, so societies and businesses do not value personal achievements as much.