Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions in Business Practice

Introduction 

Increased globalization in the recent years has been associated with growth in new markets especially in countries that were often seen to have culturally related issues. Many business organizations come with strategies that will enhance international expansions. These strategies are inclusive of Human Resources Management practices that are unique to the countries institutional and cultural practices as they are not transferable across nations. This is because cultural considerations help in increasing competitiveness and global flexibility. This paper, therefore, provides an overview of the definition of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions from different scholarly views. It will also examine the different aspects that make Hofstede’s framework and how they can influence various business practices, especially in HRM practice. 

The Development of Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions 

According to Minkov and Hofstede (2011), culture is a difficult concept to define explicitly because of its multidimensional nature and the different variation that exists in cultural aspects. However, culture generally to the ways of living and values that exist in a group of people living together, and are passed from one generation to the other ( Rinne, Steel, & Fairweather, 2012). Culture has also been described as how specific group of people behaves forming a society and the various rules and regulations that govern them when a problem faces them. The above definitions bring out a common theme in that culture must occur in a particular group of people, the way the people behave is a result of what is learned in that specific group, what is learned is passed from generations to generations, and lastly, the behavior absorbed influences how people think. Each of the particular element of culture works at the macro level and does not entail the specific expression of an individual. The behavior of individuals may vary, but the whole group must act towards the values and norms created to form a unique cultural heritage. The learned aspect of culture, allow researchers to compare the behaviors of people across different cultural backgrounds. 

Geert Hofstede born in 1928 in the Netherlands a city known as Haarlem and is popularly known for being a researcher in the fields of organizational management and cultural economics. When working as a management trainer and researcher in IBM international sought to understand people's behavior in organizations and how they collaborated. He, therefore, traveled all over the world conducting various opinion employees' survey to determine how they interacted with other employees and employers in their everyday business activities. He noticed that there were significant differences between cultures in many organizations. Besides, he found out that the different cultures significantly contributed to the performance of the organization depending on how the employees have been oriented in their different cultures. 

He, therefore, conducted another research to determine the relationship also between national culture and other work-related values. The studies conducted in over 60 countries and more than 116000 employees revealed that national culture has a significant impact on the attitudes and values of employees. It was therefore for business organizations to look at specific aspects when hiring employees as they will determine how they perform in the organization. He, therefore, developed a framework or a dimension that could be used in analysis differences in cultures among various people within groups as well as national cultures. Hotsefde generic frameworks were independent of therefore came up with six-dimensional structures. Theses frameworks included large vs. power-distance, individualism vs. collectivism, strong vs. weak uncertainty avoidance, masculinity vs. femininity and indulgence vs. restraint. Through these dimensions, he maintained the importance of cultural context in the business context especially human resources management practices. Minkov and Hofstede (2011), asserted that cultural aspect had a significant impact on the way organizations conducted since human resources management practices deal with how human being become socialized in the environment. 

Hofstede’s dimensions remain relevant even today. The aspects presented a new paradigm in social science research in studying cultures at the national level and the various ways of quantifying the differences using the characters. Psychologists, for instance, continue to use the individualism versus collectivism dimension to determine how wealth has contributed to individualism at the individual level as compared to the societal level in the United States. The dimension shifted from the culture level to an aspect of personality. In a business organization, the Global, Leadership and Organizational Behaviour Effectiveness (GLOBE) has expanded the scope of Hofstede and studied how organizational cultures influence various processes. This has resulted in the expansion of six Hofstede dimension into nine with collectivism being split into institutional communism and in-group socialism, and masculinity to gender equality and assertiveness ( Rallapalli & Montgomery, 2015). This shows that the dimension is still used but has been upgraded to fit into the various emerging issue in the globalized world. 

Hofstede Six Cultural Dimensions 

Large vs. Power distance 

According to Rallapalli & Montgomery (2015), this dimension takes into consideration to what extent a culture can adapt to the inequities of power, prestige and wealth distribution in an organization. According to Minkov and Hofstede (2011), there is a massive difference between those belonging to high-power distance and low –power distance cultures. Those in high –power distance tends to place a lot of emphasis on things such as status and rank as power is more centralized. Besides, they tend to have an authoritarian kind of relationship. This is in contrast with those in low-power distance cultures who have a type of interpersonal relationship and the type of vertical leadership. 

In business practice, employees in large-power distance cultures in most cases listen to their supervisors and think most of the decisions they make are right even when at other times they are wrong. This is because they are raised with a high emphasis on the importance of respecting the authority and carry this lessons up to adulthood. This kind of employees prefers organizations that are more centralized and an autocratic leadership so that they can be told what is expected of them instead of being involved in the whole decision-making process. On the other hand, low power distance cultures inequality is less tolerated. In these cultures, leaders are easily approachable and accessible in case of a problem that might arise ( Hofstede, 2011) . Gender differences and respect to status is less pronounced. Employees in this kind of culture prefer a typical sort of leadership in the organization so that can the play a part in the decision-making process and also for them to become more resourceful in the organization. 

Individualism versus collectiveness 

Individualism refers to the ability to become independent of one's actions ( Hofstede, 2011). Similarly, it relates to the societal preference of individuals focusing, recognizing and valuing their achievements. In this kind of culture, self-concept is highly emphasized making the primary group ties between individuals becoming very loose. This is a contrast with collectivist cultures that tend to place much emphasis on social units such as the family instead of focusing on the self ( Rallapalli & Montgomery, 2015) . 

In business organizations, employees from collectivist cultures expect organizations to take care of their needs. Besides, they require the management structures in the organizations to form relationships that will enhance cohesion and teamwork. This is because they tend to work efficiently and effectively in such kind of groups for them to achieve the various organizational goals. Individualistic employees often tend to work very hard to fulfill their goals and achievements, as they are usually oriented always to try their best to become better. They also have a strong upwards mobility hence the managers do not have to push them to perform their tasks. According to Minkov and Hofstede (2011) , selection of employees from individualistic cultures is often from personal achievement, whereas in collectivistic cultures managers often have to rely on other people they have worked together to determine how best they can perform tasks. According to Hofstede(2011), current business management practices tend to rely more on individualistic cultures as compared to collectivist cultures as most of the countries tend to be more individualistic when achieving high economic developments. It is therefore essential for business organizations to analyze the best culture to apply depending on the economic growth of the country the best is situated in. 

Strong versus Weak Uncertainty Avoidance 

Uncertainty avoidance refers to what extent a specific culture can accept particular alterations and as well as tolerate them being sure of what the future holds. According to Rallapalli & Montgomery (2015), cultures that have high uncertainty levels in most cases are very traditional and often tend to prefer changes that have been tried and tested. Moreover, they tend to focus more on stability as compared to innovative changes that might have positive implications on their lives. People in this kind of cultures do not work very hard to improve their lives. They also follow the rules and policies that have been stipulated without questioning them. In strong cultures, individuals often tend to have a high commitment in everything they do. They work very hard to see they have accomplished the set goals and tasks. Similarly, they embrace new innovative ideas as they believe that successful implementation of every change comes from the experimentation of innovative practices. Lastly, they are not scared of any risks but use the opportunity for growth. They believe that for any business to prosper, it must have a certain level of risk-taking propensity. 

In a business organization, working with employees from high uncertainty avoidance culture is often very difficult as they are likely to receive any change with a lot of resistance. It, therefore, makes it difficult for the organizations to implement any new change. This makes it almost impossible for the organizations to compete with other companies regarding innovative changes due to the duration of time taken to implement innovative practices. On the other hand, working with employees in higher tolerance cultures is quite easy as they focus more on exploring new possibilities and new creative ways of doing things. Besides, they inculcate a culture of innovativeness and research in the organization. This makes it easier for an organization to implement new changes in the organizations as the employees see that as an opportunity for business growth and development. 

In setting up business in a country like Mexico, people tend to be more risk-averse and prefer stability rather than new growth. It is the role of organizations to implement changes more deliberately for them to adopt the changes slowly. In the United States and the United Kingdom (UK), they are fewer rules, and people adapt to new changes quickly. The organizations should ensure they are keeping up with new innovative changes to gain a competitive advantage over other organizations ( Rinne, Steel & Fairweather, 2012 ). 

Masculinity versus Femininity 

Hofstede (2011) posits that this dimension entails to what extent gender roles are defined and prevail in certain cultures. In masculinity cultures, the society tends to have a high preference of heroism, achievement, assertiveness, competitiveness and material rewards for success. These characteristics often define the male gender as opposed to the female gender. Moreover, men are given high recognition regarding status and salary as compared to their female counterparts. In societies with femininity tendencies, femininity stands for preference in caring for others, modesty and cooperation. The society at large is more consensus-oriented and prefers to include everyone in every activity despite their gender orientation. Besides, much attention is paid to injustices that might be committed to any party. Work is also based on cooperation, and any gender can perform any role without being threatened by the other. In masculine societies, there is high competition as each gender try to prove what they are worth. Besides, work orientation is based on professionalism and wealth. 

In the organizational setting, individuals from low masculine societies tend to have a good relationship with their managers as they believe in values such as humility. Besides, they believe in working hard to be promoted rather than using specific factors such as wealth. Employees in high masculine cultures are very tough when it comes to the accomplishments of goals and can do anything to receive recognition. This often results to them experiencing high-stress levels as they try to devise various ways they can achieve tasks at hand. Besides, they tend to have a high preference for large corporations for recognition. In business, practice, when working with employees from this two different cultures, it is essential to consider the best ways to work with each of the cultures. Employees from femininity cultures prefer teamwork as they have taught the importance of cooperation in the achievements of tasks. On the other hand, employees from masculinity culture prefer working on their own and also like being recognized when they have achieved the set tasks. It is the role of the employer to reward them often regularly for getting the motivation to continue working hard. 

Long-term versus Short-term Orientation (LTO) 

This dimension was coined in 1991 by Hofstede himself based on answers of students from 23 societies. It was replicated in 2010 by Michael Minkov based on responses collected from Worlds Values survey (VVS). According to Rallapalli & Montgomery (2015), cultures with long-term orientation are often characterized by value thrift and willingness to fulfill various responsibilities. Besides, people who have high cultures in this dimension are more willing to compromise even with outsiders to achieve individual goals including subordination. This is in contrast with individuals' oriented short-term culture who emphasizes more on universal morality. They cannot compromise with the values despite the benefits associated with the compromise. They see this as a sign of weakness and diversion from what they have learned. Besides, they tend to oversell their abilities as they have high expectations to meet in their area of work. 

In business organizations, employees with high LTO may tend to focus on making achievements, for instance, ten years to come rather than the yearly profits. This sometimes may put the organization into financial crisis. They try to focus on perseverance to attain future rewards. However, this kind of strategy tends to work in countries that have a vision that they may want to achieve in maybe ten years to come. An organization should maintain excellent and long-term relationships with employees with such kind of cultures for the future success of the attainment of various goals. On the other hand, employees oriented in the short term dimension culture emphasize more on immediate achievements of goals as well as past achievement. Organizations should use such kind of employees when they want to achieve short-term goals. 

Indulgence versus Restraint (IVR) 

This is the latest cultural dimension by Hofstede. A culture inclined to tolerance suggests that individuals are oriented to seek quick gratification of basic needs without necessarily having a bit of restraint in the name of enjoying life and having fun ( Rinne, Steel & Fairweather, 2012). In short, this kind of culture encourages people to place a higher value on seeking happiness that they deserve. On the other hand, a restraint culture tends to set lesser amounts on leisure activities and immediate gratification. 

In the organization setting, employees from an excellent indulgence culture are likely to likely to be happier when working towards organizational goals as they have already achieved what deem to bring happiness. On the other hand, individuals with high restraint are less likely to be happy and also tend to focus more on negative behaviors. This may make it quite impossible for them to perform various tasks as they do not get any gratification in the accomplishment of the multiple functions 

Importance of Increased Cultural Understanding on Individuals and the Society 

Increased Cultural Awareness 

In today's world of globalization, the advancement of technology has made the world a global village hence the need to understand the cultural differences that exist in business and also in the society. Increased cultural understanding increases cross-cultural awareness ( Wood & Wilberger, 2015). In the world, there live enormous cultural diversities that are different from what we believe in. These cultures in most cases are even able to fulfill our human needs in ways that ensure sustainability in the environment. Understanding people cultures help individuals and the societies in gaining various ideas. These ideas can be implemented in multiple ways that can be beneficial in our lives and also improve what we have already learned as some cultures tend to intertwined the differences only exist in the diversity. Understanding and learning about other people cultures also help in learning how to respect other people's perceptions by paralleling them with our own. Most of the customs, to remain intact, have undergone various difficult processes. Discovering the history that made such cultures come into existent helps us in understanding that there is no dominant culture hence developing an egalitarian view towards cultural examination. 

Cultural Literacy 

Understanding people cultures help us develop the necessary knowledge needed in cultural literacy. To appreciate and respect others cultures means that we also need to possess the required knowledge and skills that are embedded in the traditions of those cultures. Formal knowledge tends to place less emphasis on practical information but place more emphasis on abstract and generalizable knowledge. For instance, by interacting with various individuals especially in an organization, we can incorporate the skills they display in the organization if they lead to the faster achievement of goals. Other people in the organization can also be taught on the importance of demonstrating such kinds of skills when performing tasks. This kind of collaborative approach creates a more enabling environment for further learning as increased understanding of all diversities in the world and their advantages, instead of destroying them ( Wood & Wilberger, 2015) . 

Most people tend to think that cultural understanding often leads to irreconcilable differences but on the contrary, cultural understanding create an opportunity for self-critique and self-reflection on the trajectory that society is taking. Self-reflection is a dialogue that encompasses the various aspects of cultural discourses between multiple groups of people. The kind of dialogue provide individuals with an understanding of the importance of appreciating cultural differences. Besides, they can assess how the knowledge of various cultures have helped the society move forward concerning development. For instance, the acceptance of different cultures into the organization may have helped the community acquire skills that they were not aware. The powers have created people get more job opportunities that are increasing revenue collection. 

In the globalized world, most people tend to think that understanding other cultures is not essential as most of them are embedded on traditional ways. However, understanding the various cultural diversities helps individuals cope when specific widespread changes take place. Understanding of different cultural systems requires that individuals seek out updated and reliable information. In the process of research, an individual can acquire particular skills. These skills play an important role when they are required to adapt to inevitable changes that they were not aware of. It makes it easier for them to navigate the various modifications as they have the necessary information of what is required when it comes to an understanding of certain things that they were not used to. 

In conclusion, the paper has shown the various cultural dimension developed by Hofstede. The aspect has used to demonstrate how a business organization, especially in the HRM practice, can use them in the hiring and retention of employees as well as the formation of rules and regulations that govern the organization. This is because employees come from various cultures that have different cultural orientation and may tend to bring the learned behaviors in the organization. It is, therefore, the role of managers to determine the impact of cultural dimensions on the organization's practices. Besides, it has focussed on the importance of understanding various cultures in the society as a way of promoting development and increased awareness. 

References 

Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing Cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online readings in psychology and culture , 2 (1), 8. 

Minkov, M., & Hofstede, G. (2011). The evolution of Hofstede's doctrine. Cross-Cultural Management: An International Journal , 18 (1), 10-20. 

Rallapalli, K. C., & Montgomery, C. D. (2015). Marketing strategies for Asian-Americans: guidelines based on Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions. In Minority marketing: Research perspectives for the 1990s (pp. 73-77). Springer, Cham. 

Rinne, T., Steel, G. D., & Fairweather, J. (2012). Hofstede and Shane revisited: The role of power distance and individualism in national-level innovation success. Cross-cultural research , 46 (2), 91-108. 

Wood, V. R., & Wilberger, J. S. (2015). Globalization, cultural diversity and organizational commitment: Theoretical Underpinnings. The world , 6 (2), 154-171.