The Stride towards Cultural Dimensions - Assignment Example

The Stride towards Cultural Dimensions INTRODUCTION Globalization has completely revolutionized the societies and business environment of today. Culture, the most integral part of a society is the most affected area of social system. Cultures of the world have become interwoven to such an extent that it is very difficult to identify the idiosyncrasies of each. In this paper we analyse some of the major efforts done to create distinctions among the cultures of today and then we move on to the major impact of globalization on countries like USA, India, and China. THE STRIDE TOWARDS CULTURAL DIMENSIONS To identify the peculiarities of each of the cultures of the world, several theories have been proposed; however, the most popular theories are those given by Greet Hofstede and Global Leadership and Organizational Behaviour Effectiveness projects. These are identified as follows: HOFSTEDE VALUE DIMENSIONS Geert Hofstede is one of the major contributors to the cultural dimensions that are defined in order to understand the impact of globalization on individual societies. Hofstede has boiled the cultural dimensions down to 5 major dimensions that make up the most integral characteristics of different cultures. These dimensions are identified below: POWER DISTANCE This index identifies the different cultures according to the amount of acceptance of power by the subordinates. If the power distance is higher in a country it means that the people want to have a supervisory power to regulate their work. This also means that the people respect the authoritative individuals and accept his orders. If the power distance is low in a country that means that the people want to make group efforts and decisions and reject any authority (Gannon, 2010). INDIVIDUALISM AND COLLECTIVISM This index identifies different cultures according to the degree to which the individual want to complete tasks in teams or individually. In purely individualistic societies, people are encouraged to take individual initiatives and personal achievements are appreciated. In the collectivist societies, group work and team cohesion are idealized. People try to make exchange relationships rather than emphasising on selfishness and egoism. UNCERTAINITY AVOIDANCE According to this index societies are distinguished according to the extent to which the people tolerate uncertainty and adapt to anxiety. Cultures with high uncertainity avoidance have people who want a codified format of each task that is given to them. They want to have a clear idea of their role perceptions in the organizations and are intolerant to anxiety. People with low uncertainty avoidance feel at home with unstructured decisions and ambiguous decision making processes. These people also want a free operating ground for themselves have as few rules as possible. People in this culture are more practical in approach while those of the former culture are more emotionally sensitive (Mcshane, 2010). MASCULINITY AND FEMININITY This index is related to the male oriented values such as assertiveness, ambition, materialism, power dominance, and competitiveness and female values such as relationship orientation, consideration, and helpfulness. Masculine cultures are characterised by more competitiveness among employees, and the relationships are more dramatic while Feminine cultures are more considerate and the people share same values of modesty and relationship building. More conflicts occur in masculine cultures rather than in feminine cultures (Hofstede, 1998). LONG TERM SHORT TERM ORIENTATION This index calls for time focus that societies are characterised by. Long term oriented societies have focus on future and they prioritise tasks accordingly. They might make decisions that are not beneficial for them in the short term but have positive ramifications in the long term. On the other hand, short term oriented societies have a strong emphasis on the traditions of the past and the protection of the present. The self concept of people is high in short term oriented cultures. GLOBE PROJECT VALUE DIMENSIONS The Global Leadership and Organizational Behaviour Effectiveness initiative is another prominent initiative that has attempted to define the value dimensions. Unlike Hofstede, this project has given 9 major dimensions to define cultures. These are: ASSERTIVENESS According to this measure if a society has more emphasis on assertiveness, it encourages competitiveness and toughness among its members. If a society score low on assertiveness, it encourages relationship building and consideration and tender heartedness among its members (Daft, 2012). FUTURE ORIENTATION This dimension measures the extent to which a society favours foresight and long term planning. A society having future orientation will have long term plans for executions while the case will be opposite in short term orientation. UNCERTAINTY AVOIDANCE This dimension measures the extent to which people of the society feel uncomfortable to the level of ambiguity. This measure is similar to that of Hofstede. GENDER DIFFERENTIATION This dimension categorizes societies according to the degree to which they identify gender role differences. In societies where gender differentiation is low women are able to reach top positions and male dominance is decreased. In societies with high gender differentiation, male dominance is present (Kinicki, 2008). POWER DISTANCE Power distance like that of Hofstede is the degree to which the subordinates accept the power and influence of the bosses and supervisors. SOCIETAL COLLECTIVISM This dimension categorises the societies according to the emphasis they put on group works rather than individual initiatives. INDIVIDUAL COLLECTIVISM Under this dimension societies are differentiated according to the extent to which individuals feel honoured in being part of the society. PERFORMANCE ORIENTATION This dimension takes into account the emphasis societies pay on achievement and performance of individuals. A low performance orientation means that the people are more relationship and loyalty orientated while a high performance orientation means the vice verse (Vinken, 2004). HUMANE ORIENTATION This dimension refers to the extent to which a society pays emphasis on rewarding altruism, generosity and care. High humane orientation means that the people are helpful and caring for each other. In low humane orientation, the people are more egotistic and want to take care of themselves. IMPACT OF GLOBALIZATION ON USA Globalization and its impacts have been most conspicuous on the developed economies of the world. As such, USA is the most affected country. Globalization and its introduction can be attributed to USA and so the companies of the country as well as the employees and the society have changed a lot (Haugen, 2010). Companies importing goods and exporting goods in the USA are affected by the currency and even the trade relations like China and India. On one hand globalization has given the chance to the companies to expand and transfer their businesses overseas while on the other hand, globalization led to the financial crisis of 2008 which almost crippled the entire economy and led to the bankruptcy of enormous businesses like Lehman Brothers. Employees have got a chance to discover new business markets and experience the culture of various MNC’s. Diversity is also prevalent in the market and organizations that has affected the local employees. The American society has developed a lot due to globalization as people are now exposed to various technological advancements. Globalization has also brought various problems in the society such as distributive injustice and increased crimes. IMPACT OF GLOBALIZATION ON INDIA Like many other countries, India is also a major victim of globalization. New companies like Uniliver and P&G have made their way into the country and taken a large share of the market. On the other hand, local companies have got a chance to expand offshore giving a tough competition to many companies in the world (Singh, 2010). The society as a whole has developed a lot. The music industry has been improved with the collaboration of so many foreign agencies. The education systems of the country have improved as more and more international universities are making their way into the country. The social media has totally inundated the Indian society (Steel, 2010). The employees on one hand suffer from issues like child labour by international companies while on the same hand get a chance to utilize their potential. Most of the jobs in the UAE are grabbed by the Indians and they are reaping the benefits. IMPACT OF GLOBALIZATION ON CHINA China is perhaps that one country whose benefits from globalization outweigh the short comings. With the help of globalization, Chinese companies like Dong Pheng, Sinopec, and china mobiles have expanded their operations and captured large international markets like those of South Africa, Brazil and India. The social impacts of globalizations are also widespread in China. The poverty level in urban areas has dropped from 30% in 1978 to 3% in the 21st century. Major cities like Beijing and Shanghai have been transformed into the most developed cities of the world (The Chinese journal of international politics, 2006). The workforce of china is reaping a lot of benefits from globalization. Most of the MNCs have come to china in search of cheap labour and the workforce as a result is reaping the benefits of such an opportunity. Chinese employees have been able to achieve top executive positions as a result of the business expansions and corporate imperialism (Hall, 1990). CONCLUSION No country in the contemporary world is isolated from globalization. It is omnipresent to such an extent that the cultural idiosyncrasies of the world have been synergized. A lot of work has been done in order to disintegrate the interwoven cultures and Hofstede and GLOBE have come out to be the successful initiators. The impact of globalization on economies has been huge and while some societies like China have benefitted from it Countries like USA and India have been marred by the negative implications of globalization to quite an extent. Bibliography Top of Form DAFT, R. L. (2012). Management. Mason, Ohio, South-Western Cengage Learning. GANNON, M. J., & PILLAI, R. (2010). Understanding global cultures: metaphorical journeys through 29 nations, clusters of nations, continents, and diversity. Thousand Oaks, Calif, SAGE. HALL, E. T., & HALL, M. R. (1990). Understanding cultural differences. Yarmouth, Me, Intercultural Press. HAUGEN, D. M., & MACH, R. (2010). Globalization. Detroit, Greenhaven Press. HOFSTEDE, G. H. (2001). Culture's consequences: comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks, Calif, Sage Publications. HOFSTEDE, G. H. (1998). Masculinity and femininity: the taboo dimension of national cultures. Thousand Oaks, Calif, Sage Publications. KINICKI, A., & WILLIAMS, B. K. (2008). Management: a practical introduction. New York, McGraw-Hill/Irwin. Bottom of Form Top of Form MCSHANE, S. L., & VON GLINOW, M. A. Y. (2010).Organizational behavior: emerging knowledge and practice for the real world. Boston, McGraw-Hill Irwin.Top of Form SINGH, A. (2010). Contemporary perspectives on globalisation and migration. Delhi, Kamla-Raj Enterprises. Top of Form STEEL, PIERS, TARAS, VAS, & KIRKMAN, B L. (2010). Examining the Impact of Culture’s Consequences: A Three-Decade, Multi-Level, Meta-Analytic Review of Hofstede‟s Cultural Value Dimensions. American Psychological Association (APA). https://dspace.ucalgary.ca/bitstream/1880/47917/1/Steel_JAppliedPsych_2010_Postpint.pdf. Top of Form Top of Form Top of Form Top of Form Top of Form VINKEN, H., SOETERS, J., & ESTER, P. (2004).Comparing cultures: dimensions of culture in a comparative perspective. Leiden, Brill. Top of Form Top of Form Top of Form 1Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Read More