Cultural Perspectives Analysis - Assignment Example

Cultural Analysis I. Introduction Asking other people about their world view is quite an eye opener. It reveals that our interpretation of the world and how things are done differs from one place to another. What is given and regular in our sociological context may be a novelty from another cultural context. This is what I learned from my interviews. To become an effective manager, it is imperative that we should understand their perspective about the world and their accompanying beliefs, values and attitude that we may effectively work with them. In this assignment, three different cultural perspective are compared and contrasted with the culture of their host country, United States. In the process, the exercise will reveal how different and similar our values and beliefs from the rest of the world. II. Value Measurement Used: Hofstede and Global Dimensions The Hofsted model distinguishes cultures according to five dimension with a scale ranging from 0 to 100. GLOBE stands for “Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness,” which involves 62 nations over a period of 11 years of study which includes 170 researchers worldwide (Grove, 2005).  Among the measurement standards used to determine the similarities and differences between cultures, nine dimensions were used which includes Uncertainty Avoidance, Power Distance, Institutional Collectivism, In-Group Collectivism, Gender Egalitarianism, Assertiveness, Future Orientation, Performance Orientation, and Humane Orientation and encompasses both actual society practices and values. These values ranked according to importance in a given society. For this assignment, the dimension covered by both models (Hoftstede and GLOBE) such power distance, uncertainty avoidance, in-group collectivism shall be tackled in the interview among respondents coming from three different clusters. For Confucian Asia, China shall be set as an example, for Middle East, United Arab Emirates and for South East Asia, the Philippines. a. Power distance Power distance is defined by GLOBE is “the extent to which a community accepts and endorses authority, power differences, and status privileges” while Hofstede Model defines it as the attitude of a given culture on societal inequality Saudi Arabia (Middle East) Saudi Arabia scored exceptionally high on Hofstede model scoring a high of 95 which means that people accept the hierarchical order of society which needs no further justification. The person interviewed expressed that this is so because they are ruled by a monarchy, where government comes from a single family in a society that stresses so much religion. The respondent explained that is in accordance with Sharia Law that there is an order in society as dictated by Allah that needs no justification. The findings of Hofstede model is consistent with the GLOBE with Middle East countries ranking high in Power distance. China (Confucian Asia) China scored 80 on Hofstede measurement indicating that its society is accepting towards inequality in society. The respondent expressed that in Chinese society, having a deep history of family dynasty followed by an authoritative government and each place in society is sanctioned for the greater good of society. Philippines (South East Asia) Philippines is a curious case because despite of its seeming westernized orientation, shares the disparity of power distance of other totalitarian regimes such as China and Saudi Arabia. It scored 94 on Hofstede almost similar to a monarchy government despite being a democratic government. The respondent explained that despite them being a democracy, the economic and political control of their government is confined within the few elite family as manifested by the present and previous government who came from wealthy families. b. Uncertainty avoidance In Hofstede model, Uncertainty Avoidance has to do with the way that a society deals with the uncertainty of the future. In Globe cultural dimension, it is "the extent to which a society, organization, or group relies on social norms, rules, and procedures to alleviate the unpredictability of future events”. Both models however measure the risk aversion of a given culture. Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia as a society shields itself from uncertainty by relying on the family and tried and proven methods. This is evident with its high score of 80 in Hofstede scale and high rank in Globe standard model. It manifests that Saudi society is risk averse. China The respondent readily expressed that risk taking characterizes Chinese society. As individuals, they do not recoil on the unknown be it in business or going to other places alien to them. This is validated by Hofstede measurement where China scored low (30) on uncertainty avoidance. Philippines The Philippines scored 44 on uncertainty avoidance on Hofstede measurement and places placing itself somewhere in the middle. The respondent explained that while they value the comfort of the familiar, they will also readily take chance if it means making their lives better. This is evident with the huge number of Overseas Foreign Workers the Philippines has who take chance of working abroad to have a better income. c. In-group collectivism Saudi Arabia Saudi is considered as a collectivist society scoring 25 on Hofstede scale. The respondent explained that this not surprising because Saudi society is tribalistic which is the norm in Middle Eastern Families. He stressed that unlike in the US where a child can leave the family after reaching the age of majority and decide on its own, this is non-existent in Saudi society because family dictates almost everything all dimension of an individual. This is evident in the Globe scale where Middle East cluster scored highest in in-group collectivism. China Both Hofstede and Globe ranked China low on individualism with Hofstede putting China at 20. China ranked second in Globe cultural ranking in terms of individualism making Chinese society collectivist. As explained by the respondent, family and society comes first before themselves. Philippines Unlike United States which is a highly individualistic society, Philippines is a collectivist society with a score of 32 in Hofstede and ranking low on Globe cultural model. It is a closed knit society where there is a strong emphasis on extended relationships and loyalty. The respondent explains that this trait common among Asians where families and immediate circles are important. Read More