Wednesday 19 March 2014

How does your culture score? Quest, p. 24, x. E.

After a little more thought, I've revised my idea as to how we might most usefully discuss the questions in Hartmann's exercise E. on page 24 (2007).

The two questions that Hartmann asks us to discuss are:

  1. Was your country listed in the chart on page 20? If so, do you think the scores are accurate? If not, what scores would you give your country for each area? ("dimension"): power distance, individualism, uncertainty avoidance and masculinity?
     
  2. How well to you "fit" into your culture? In other words, are you happy with the values of your culture? Would you prefer to see some different scores on the chart? (For example, someone from the United States might say, "I would prefer to see a lower score for individualism in my country. I think it's important to be part of a group.") 
Rather than following Hartmann's suggestion to discuss these questions in small groups in class, we are going to do it here. 

And we already know from the spread of answers to our quick survey (summary graphs here, table here) that there will be some disagreement, especially on at least one of Hofstede's measured dimensions of culture, so you might want to, or need to, give some support for your ideas. 


__________
Reference
Hartmann, P. (2007). Quest 2 Reading and Writing (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

15 comments:

  1. How accurate are Hotstede's four scores for Australian culture?
    I hadn't thought much about the power distance dimension of my culture before, but Hofstede's 36 sounds about right to me. In Australian offices, there isn't much obvious difference between employees and bosses, and my father always dressed and joined in the work that was being done on our properties, so a low figure sounds right. This also suits me - I would feel uncomfortable if had to make a big show of being either above or below someone else in status. I suspect this sometimes causes a bit of friction at AUA, where I speak to the Thai director in a manner he might not be used to, although he's aware of the cultural differences and takes it in his stride. The manager of our IT department is another story, but that's his problem.

    In contrast, Hofstede's 90/100 for individualism seems a bit high to me. It does fit my own personality, which I might have rated at an even higher 95, but I would have guessed 70 - 75 for Australians. Certainly, Australians do value being an individual and independence, but I think we also value team work, and not being a bludger on the efforts of others. Perhaps 30 - 40 years ago, the individualism figure would have been higher, but I don't think it's as high as Hofstede's 90 today.

    I disagree even more with Hofsteds's figure of 51 for uncertainty avoidance. Hartmann explains that this means things like attitude to rules and worrying about uncertainty. Well, Aussies are very suspicious of rules, of government and of officials, and unless they see a good reason to follow a rule, they often don't, and they say the rules are stupid, whether a bosses rules or government rules. I would have said about 35 - 40 here, which perhaps isn't that different to Hofstede.

    His oddly defined (it seems odd to me) "masculinity" figure of 61 does sound about right. We Australians do value success, but we also think relationships are important, not just within families, but between friends, or "mates" as we say in Australia.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I don't think the scores are accurate, but they aren't wrong too much. I think individualism and masculinity should increase, 45 for individualism and 55 for masculinity.
    I'm not happy with some values of my culture. I would prefer a lower score for power of distance. I want everyone have equality. For example, at school, a teacher may think he's better than students and doesn't listen to students' idea. I think sometimes teacher is wrong or doesn't have a good idea. Another thing that i prefer is a higher score for masculinity. I think success in business is important. It makes people try to improve themselves in order to be successful, so their countries will be developed too.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If she has read my own comment here, Kloy has probably already guessed that I agree with her in preferring a lower value for the power distance measure. I also like the effective example drawn from her own experience.

      Delete
  3. Our country, Thailand, was listed in the chart on page 20. I think the scores are quite accurate.

    I fit into my culture quite well, but I would prefer to see higher score for individualism. I think nowadays Thai people prefer to woke alone more than in the past.And, I would prefer a little bit higher score for uncertainty avoidance. I think Thai people don't like to face new unfamiliar situation or don't accept unfamiliar ideas easily. I also would like to see a higher score in power distance. Thailand has had social structure since many hundred years ago and now I think people in Thailand have different status. People in lower status always respect and believe in ideas or opinions of people in higher status.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I agree with Hofstede's scores on individualism, uncertainty avoidance and masculinity. In contrast, I don't agree with the scores of power distance because I think the score of power distance that Holfstede give is too low. Also, I think the score should be about 70-75 for Thailand because in Thailand now there are a huge gap between high and low status. I think that high status people don't really listens to all levels in the company. They usually listen to the middle to upper level than lower level. I think this may be because they think that the lower level voice is not too strong. However, I think that lower status opinion is also important and you shouldn't ignore that.

    ReplyDelete
  5. From the "Examples of Hofstede's Scores", I agree that Thai's culture, there is strong uncertainly avoidance. As most of Thais try the avoid the unknown or do something different from other Thais. Also I agree on Power distance. As nowadays life can clearly seen about this. For instance, in the government field. Anyway, I disagree on both individualism and masculinity. I this score are true for many year ago, but not this century. In my school, most of my friend appear to be work with his own better than in group. I donno why. And most of them don't like to have teamwork. If we have project to do in group, well, someone might say that "I will pay for everything, don't give me work.". And also in Thai's society too. I think most of people today don't like to work with other. Maybe they pround in themselves too much. Also in Masculinity, long time ago Thais are very friendly, but not today. Money have been big problem. Some of people changed because of it! Sadly, I also lose my friends because of money. They care about it too much.

    ReplyDelete
  6. No, I don't think the score are accurate.

    The score in each area should be:
    Power Distance 60
    Individualism 65
    Uncertainty Avoidance 70
    Masculinity 45

    Yes, I am happy with the value of my culture. I prefer individualism because in Thai culture they like to spend time with family and friends. In Thai culture we believes that stay in a group is better than stay single(individual). Thai culture is very different from American culture. For example, Thai people like to take an activity with their family and friends. Meanwhile, American people like to take an activity by themselves. Especially, "be on time" this phrase is very important in American culture, while Thai people think that time can be stable.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Yes, my country is listed in the chart and I think Hofstede's scores are quite accurate but some dimensions: I agree with the scores on power distance dimension and uncertainty avoidance but masculinity and individualism dimension. According to our class survey, the average score of masculinity is 60 while Hofstede's score is 34. In addition, although Hofstede scored individualism for 20 but our class survey indicates that an average score of individualism is 48.

    For the second question, I don't happy with some dimension of my country's scores: the power distance. I prefer this one to be fixed because the equality among people plays an important role on the way we work and the way we think, which affected to the public policy and our behavior with the senior or the high status people. Under the same set of law, no one can be higher than other which could help our society more understanding with each other and we all have opportunities to be better than present time.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Thailand's scores about cultural values was shown in Hofstede's table. There are some of them that I'm agree and some I'm disagree. firstly, In Thai's culture, We are taught to give respect to someone to have higher social status. For example, You must be polite to a teacher or a boss and sometime strong argument could lead to misunderstood of being aggressive or being rude. 64 score on power distance seem reasonable to me.

    Next is individualism, Thai people normally like to do activities in group. In a work place I think many decisions will base on a group's argument.

    But, I'm not agree with the score that said Thai people not keen to try new experiences. This might be true with 20 years ago.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am totally agree with you. When will we can express what we thought freely without social penalty by people misunderstanding between frankly expression and rude manner?

      Delete
  9. 1.Yes, I lived in Thailand that was in chart on page 20. And I think It might be true in Thai society but in my opinion, the score should be power distance 50, individualism 40, uncertainty avoidance 30, and masculinity 50
    2.I'm not happy with values of your culture because some of them should be decrease; power distance and uncertainty avoidance.For power distance, it was difficult to work together with co-worker or the boss because everyone want to upgrade themselves in high class and make competition between co-worker. And for uncertainty avoidance, we can't create new thing and live like robot; sometime we should cross the rule to find something new such as my career, we should think in difference way for create new design or accept the unknow thing more easily. However the uncertainty avoidance should use in the right way example me that used in my work, and not every time of them that you should avoid.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Personally, I partly agree with Hofstede's score on cultural intelligence of Thailand. He cannot convince that Thai culture is a low individualism and low masculinity because it depends on the context in both the survey was conducted and the society in these day, which are different period of time and I also assumed that his surveys is a bit out of time, so things change, people change so individualism in Thai society in the present day should be higher than this fingding which is 20, personally I more agree with 60. Another comment is about the terms masculinity - why being successful is equal to musculininty? I think he has some bias on gender role. Anyway at the present day, I always seen some high profile in the newspaper cover are described as the millionaire and the young ans rich along with old traditional landlord. Thai society rewards people on how success he or she is, compare to the past, at that time the only high social status person always in associate with beurucracy and royals family. In musculinity? I prefer 70 than 34 that Hofstede suggested.

    I agree with uncertainty avoidance, score with 64, and power distance- score with 64. I am not gonna discuss about the exact number but in this uncertainty avoidance is exist in old and present time.

    However, I am quite worried about the contrast between high power distance and high individualism, this may effect people on how the new generation can fit in the society with the old tradition. And how we deal with this fruustation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with you that he has some bias with the word "masculinity". In my opinion, such thing should be questioned because man is not always the one who physically strong. For example, women can be strong and aggressive as man and this trait depends on each person rather than simply define that this is a characteristic of man or woman: these traits are just traits and they has no gender in there.

      As I reread the Quest book again (p.19), this score seems too old for us to use because Hofstede has done it since 1980. I think an update version should be better but I don't know that he (or someone else) has updated it already or not.

      PS.
      This reminds me that the Hofstede's score has been used in a book that we've read: Gladwell's Outliers. You can check it again on the topic of changing Korean Airline with this cultural research as well.

      Reference
      Gladwell, M. (2008). Outliers: The Story of Success. New York: Hachette Book Group.

      Hartmann, P. (2007). Quest 2 Reading and Writing (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

      Delete
    2. Yes, this reminds me of The Outliers as well. His work also shows some positive bias on Asian culture, he use some examples which show advantages of practical Asian value, especially rice paddle chapter which different on other books.

      PS. after reading The outliers, you should read Edward Royce's work on Poverty issue, I think this relate to Gladwell's explanation about social structure which benefits some people, but in Royce's work, it shows the flipped side in which the same social structure leads to people suffering.

      Reference
      Royce, E. (2009). Poverty and Power: A Structure Perspective on American Inequality. Rawman & Littlefeild Publishers.

      Delete
  11. Your responses to Hartmann's questions about how accurately Hofstede's figures are for Thailand are excellent - with some healthy variation, which you are welcome to reply to if a particular comment gets your interest.

    ReplyDelete

Before you click the blue "Publish" button for your first comment on a post, check ✔ the "Notify me" box. You want to know when your classmates contribute to a discussion you have joined.

A thoughtful response should normally mean writing for five to ten minutes. After you state your main idea, some details, explanation, examples or other follow up will help your readers.

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.