Hofstede Cultural Dimensions

Culture fills with unwritten rules that regulate what we value and despise, how we interact with others. In 1970, Dr. Geert Hofstede issued a cultural dimensions model (Team, 2009). Being a global team leader needs to understand the differences culture can act as a barrier to communicate. And work effectiveness is being perplexing, who work with people from a different culture. In this scenario, Hofstede is one of the foremost Ideologists and performs a critical role defined by the six dimensions of various cultural generalizations (Belyh, 2015).

Theoretical Approach (China vs. Switzerland)

We will be conveying the framework of two countries (China vs. Switzerland) against the above Hofstede theory, which can have a good overview of two different cultures. This deep theoretical dive allows getting a translucent view of the concept of how the leader approaches in this scenario. As per (Fig 1), showing the result of dimension measurement of two opponent countries (Hofstede Insights, 2017).

Fig 1: Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions (China vs. Switzerland)

Power Distance – It describes the extent to which people of society expect and accept an inequitable distribution of authority and resources. The thread of power distance culture seen in the workplace, political bodies, schools, family, etc.   China sit is obvious higher position equated to the European countries, like Switzerland. No defense against power abuse by superiors and accepts the discriminations. It is a challenging point for the leader from two different countries, who are managing the employees from distinct cultural, high-pitched impacts can occur.

Individualism vs. Collectivism - It designates the degree to which people of society feel bound either to high community interest (Collectivism) or own personal interest (Individualism). Undeniably, Europe is Individualism, whereby Asia is a highly collectivist culture, strictly interconnected, family and cohesive in-groups. However, relationships with colleagues are collaborative for in-groups, treated to out-groups as cold or even antagonistic.

Masculinity vs. Femininity - It portrays the degree to which people of society tendency for boldness, achievement, heroism, and material reward for achieving success (Masculinity). People represent in favor of dignity, cooperation, quality of life, and attentive for the feeble (Femininity). Switzerland's position for Femininity considers the quality of life, and stands out from the crowd is not splendid. China is Masculinity orientation and success defined by the winner. As a result of the dimensional consequence, both countries stand the degree firmly. 

Uncertainty Avoidance – It defines the degree to which people of society do not alleviate with vagueness and ambiguity. Swiss oriented for rules and protocols, clarity of work diameter, and authority level. Reversely, China acceptance for risk by working out of provisions and adopt uncertainty unconditionally.

Long vs. Short Term Orientation - Long-term orientation illustrates the degree to which society preference on seeking for morality. Short-term orientation concerns to the society who strongly leaning for the establishing of the utter truth. China is an intellectual culture and considers that fact depends on the situation and context. But Switzerland inspires for short term concert than long term philosophy.

Indulgence vs. Restraint - It depicts the extent to society can practice control across their instincts and aspirations. Westerner countries promote tolerance, enjoying life. In contrast to Indulgent societies, Asians convey restrained culture, the tendency to pessimism, and strict social norms.

Recommendation

As per the above critical analysis, MNC's success pivots on superior / leaders’ abilities to be mindful of different cultural values. The generous Hofstede's cultural dimensions are just the beginning, and managers need to steer the team by the balance to sheer base on the host country's culture. Westerner is more adaptive than Asian, able to fit in different cultures. In my assumption, is open-minded and taken suggestions is the critical success to a road map for Corporate. In this scenario, Western Leader leveraging the dimension to shift the style in engaging the employees from different cultures, eg. China.

Power centralization is endorsed to sole leadership, ignoring democratic management and subordinate's consultation. The leader should listen to subordinates' ideas, take initiative, and fair treatment is essential. Ingram added mutual respect between management and subordinates could attract top talent in the industry and accrue distinct competitive (Ingram, 2019). By taking a chance of collectivism, focus on the gap of teamwork and driven will be synergy leadership. Influential leaders know the limitation of employee boundaries, try to push beyond for company growth. China is slow and steady wins the race for business deals. It is arguably an area, raise a conflict with the reader's attention. Nevertheless, should try to earn the trust of employees, and loyalty is lasting relationships is vital for the leader. Ramsey explained the kind of “culture of caring" (Human, 2018) is an action that a leader needs to practice of treating the people on your team no matter of their background and country of origin, equally.

Reference

Belyh, A. (2015). Understanding Cultures & People with Hofstede Dimensions. [online] Cleverism. Available at: https://www.cleverism.com/understanding-cultures-people-hofstede-dimensions/ [Accessed 9 Apr. 2020].

Hofstede, G. (2013). Culture’s consequences : comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.

Hofstede Insights (2017). Country Comparison - Hofstede Insights. [online] Hofstede Insights. Available at: https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/china [Accessed 11 Apr. 2020].

Huhman, H.R. (2018). Putting Employees First Will Be Your Best Business Move for 2018. [online] Entrepreneur. Available at: https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/307776 [Accessed 3 Apr. 2020].

Ingram, D. (2011). A Workplace of Mutual Respect. [online] Chron.com. Available at: https://smallbusiness.chron.com/workplace-mutual-respect-11235.html [Accessed 1 Apr. 2020].

Komor, M. and Schumann, J. (2015). Cross-Cultural Differences Between Poland and Germany in  Light of Cultural Dimensions Theory. Gospodarka Narodowa, 275(1), pp.83–102.

Team, C. (2009). Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions – Understanding Different Countries. [online] Mindtools.com. Available at: https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newLDR_66.htm [Accessed 10 Apr. 2020].