Hofstede And Chinese Values Survey - Coursework Example

fstеdе and Сhinеsе Values Survey Name Course Institution Date Ноfstеdе and Сhinеsе Values Survey Part 1 Introduction The manner in which people behave in an organization provides a lot of information about their social background. An understanding of values and cultures is a recipe for proper leadership. This document seeks to analyze some cultural differences and how they influence the performance of the organization. Understanding how these factors affect the individual and team performance in an organization is indeed very important. Hofstede is one of the most renowned authors in relation to culture and his materials have been extensively used in this document. Moreover, a wider consideration has been made overall application of Hofstede’s models. Hofstede has been known for his comprehensive research on issues to do with cultural differences and the effect on the management of organization (Finkelstein 2012, p. 1640). Cultural differences work together either to contribute towards the success of the organization or its failure. Either way, culture is such a powerful tool. In this case study, Hofstede has provided an elaborate discussion on cultural differences. The author provides a number of dimensions that are used to explain cultural differences. In one of the cultural dimensions, the western cultures are perceived as different from oriental cultures (Bergmüller 2013, p. 192). This is seen as having not been affected by the current trends in the world. Such trends include technology and modernism. One of the dimensions that have been explained in this case study is the oriental dimension. This dimension brings forth a link to the economic activities and progress in a country. From the discussion that has been advanced in this case study, it brings forth the understanding of culture being a mental programming distinguishing members of one group from another. This is communicated through different levels of culture including national, regional, ethnic, religious, social, gender, (Yan, Mo, Cixin& Junqi S 2010, p. 192) etc. Regardless of the level of the culture as pointed, an individual is easily integrated into it with time. Whenever an individual agrees to be part of any kind of group, the individual is likely to loosen some of their personal practices in favor of the group norms. Such trends have a significant impact on the performance of any organization. The collective values adopted by individuals in an organization are as a result of the influences imposed by the various levels of culture. The Chinese value survey has been used to explain different variables about culture. Definitely, there is a correlation with the cultural dimensions advanced by Hofstede (Shulruf; Alesi, M; Ciochină; Faria, L; Hattie; Fu; Pepi & Watkins 2011, p. 182 ). The Chinese value survey has been used to explain how values vary across different personalities. When analyzing the Chinese value survey, it is established that indeed there is relationship with the four dimensions of individualism, masculinity, power distance and uncertainty avoidance (Tassell, Flett & Gavala 2010, p. 144). The results of the Chinese value survey try to portray such values as culture free. This indeed cannot be easily embraced as such. At the same time, Hofstede is also trying to portray the four dimensions of culture as culture free. Many scholars and critics have had so much to react over the same. The findings from the survey convey the reality of distance on culture. It seems evident that the Easterners and the Westerners have little in common, if any. The findings revealed a lot of correlation between the Hofstede’s dimensions and the CVS factors. Almost all the four dimensions expounded by Hofstede showed some close relationship with the Chinese values surveyed (Steele & Lynch 2013, p. 545). Another noted factor is the correlation between the country’s economic performance and the Hofstede’s individualism’s dimension. This denotes the fact that indeed the cultural values of a nation do not exclude the economic practices. The economic practices seem to be part of the country’s value system (Kim 2009, p. 570). This therefore implies that a country needs to be careful when setting policies that are aimed at promoting their economic growth. Part 2 Management and leadership in an organization are influenced by numerous factors. The personalities of employees in an organization determine the achievement of goals that are set. The individualistic and collective approach to understanding human values and behavior in an organization is very significant. Individualistic leaders tend to put their interest first and this has a negative impact on the performance of the organization (Hamamura 2012, p. 15). Collective leaders have the priorities of the organization before any other interest. Such leaders find it a bit easy working in a team in order to achieve the overall goals of the organization. Both the individualists and collectivists have a role in the success or failure of an organization. In real sense, both the individualists and the collectivists have their motivations to performance. For individualists, their motivation is the individual performance. They derive satisfaction when they achieve goals as individuals. On the other hand, the collectivists are motivated by group achievement. In an organization, the individualists will work hard to achieve self-reliant. It is important to appreciate the fact that tasks in any given organization take both individual and collective roles (Waistell 2011, p. 600). There are roles in an organization that can be better performed when the person in charge has an individualistic approach. Similarly, there are tasks which are better achieved when a collective approach is adopted. From the studies that have been undertaken, the individualists and collectivists are also special in the organization. This can be harnessed for the benefit of the organization if the management will learn how to vary employee reward based on different motivations behind impressive performance (Willis 2012, p. 215). That implies that the organization is in position to use the employees’ value assessment information and social backgrounds to understand their motivation and the most suitable positions for them. Nevertheless, the collectivism and individualism ideologies have literally failed to be well applied leading to financial losses in organizations. To start with, individualistic employees struggle so much to deliver in team performance (Kim 2009, p. 570). The significance of this lies in the fact that most tasks in organizations are achieved through team work. Organizations have come to understand the significance of team work and making every effort to make good use of teams. Audit firms are some of the organizations that have extensively adopted teamwork to achieve their daily objectives. Individualistic employees are often regarded as a hindrance to achieving optimal results (Bergmüller 2013, p. 191). On the other hand, collectivism has also had negative effects on the performance of the organization. The overemphasis on collectivism has hindered individual commitment to the vision of the organization. The reward system adopted by many organizations assumes that since the results have been achieved collectively, rewards are also issued collectively. This has failed to stimulate individual commitment to the goals of the organization (Finkelstein 2011, p. 408). This therefore highlights the need for continued research into the area in order to find out on how to make the best use of the various personalities of individuals in the organization. Long term and Short term orientation In setting of goals, individuals may differ greatly in an organization. There are managers whose greater focus is on the short term goals. On the other hand, there are those whose attention is more on the long term goals. The decision making for the two different kinds of people in an organization definitely differ to a very large extent (Omi 2012, p. 409). This perspective was also advanced by Hofstede as an addition to the four main dimensions of culture. Individuals who exhibit the emphasis upon future goals as opposed to short term goals have explainable cultural features. According to Hofstede, such individuals exhibit perseverance, persistent, saving and ability to adapt to new and untested conditions. Such players exhibit the willingness to forego current gratification so as to achieve future growth (Rego & Cunha 2009, p. 211). This means a lot to strategic managers in an organization. Strategic managers are concerned mainly by the long term goals of the organization. Even when the organization is financially strained, these managers will sacrifice the current resources to attain better returns in the future. On the other hand, the short term orientation people focus only upon the short term goals. An individual is concerned more by the immediate achievements as opposed to future goals (Dakhli 2009, p.99). Managers with such a focus sacrifice the available resources in order to attain present success. This is a demonstration of how an individual has been influenced by the past and the expectations due from the future. Short term orientation tends to use the past to solve the current problem as a way of achieving the set short goals (Beilmann & Realo 2012, p. 215). An organization that focuses on the short term goals alone may actually lack a going concern pillar. In an organization, having people with both short term and long term orientations is very important. This is based on the knowledge that both the short and long term goals are crucial in the organization. It is the role of the organization to ensure that it understands the various orientations among the employees (Kim 2009, p. 165). This is a recipe for designing the best motivation that will improve the level of performance in the organization. For those employees that are short term oriented, they should be rewarded by use of short term benefits. Similarly, those employees with long term orientation ought to be rewarded by means of long term benefits. This will ensure that all of them are equally motivated to discharge their duties optimally. Nevertheless, there are some challenges that organizations have to deal with when working with individuals whose orientation is as pointed out (Willis 2012, p. 216). All of them have weaknesses that if not well addressed can affect the performance of an organization. Employees that are too focused and motivated by long term performance seem to ignore the value of short term goals (Waistell J 2011, p. 215). They fail to understand that short term goals are supposed to act as a link and therefore failure to address them may plunge the organization into a crisis. At the same time, those who are fully focused on short term goals tend to overlook the essence of long term goals. Conclusion Hofstede has attempted to explain the various dimensions of culture with the aim of trying to bring out origins of behavior in organizational settings. The survey that was carried out about the value systems of the Chinese was one of the tools that have been used best to explain Hofstede’s model of cultural differences. Collectively, this helps to understand the various cultures in different organizations. The discussion about individualism vs. collectivism has also been discussed in detail. It has been made clear how individualists and collectivists can either influence the performance of the organization positively or negatively. At the same time, a focus on short term and long term orientation has highlighted how organizational progress can be hindered based on the employees’ culture. All that has been discussed are significant in handling leadership in an organization. References Finkelstein, M 2012, Individualism/Collectivism and Organizational Citizenship Behavior: An Integrative Framework, Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, Vol. 40 Issue 10, p1633-1643. Beilmann, M. & Realo, A 2012, Individualism-Collectivism And Social Capital At The Individual Level, Journal of the Humanities & Social Sciences, Vol. 16 Issue 3, p205- 217. Willis, R 2012, Individualism, Collectivism and Ethnic Identity: Cultural Assumptions in Accounting for Caregiving Behavior in Britain, Journal of Cross-Cultural Gerontology, Vol. 27 Issue 3, p201-216. Shulruf, B; Alesi, M; Ciochină, L; Faria, L; Hattie, J; Fu H; Pepi, A. & Watkins, D 2011, Measuring Collectivism And Individualism In The Third Millennium, Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, Vol. 39 Issue 2, p173-187. Bergmüller, S 2013, The Relationship Between Cultural Individualism- Collectivism and Student Aggression Across 62 Countries, Aggressive Behavior, Vol. 39 Issue 3, p182-200. Finkelstein, M A 2011, Correlates Of Individualism And Collectivism: Predicting Volunteer Activity, Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, Vol. 39 Issue 5, p597- 606. Laca, F.A.; Mejía, J.C; Mayoral, E.G. & Yáñez, C.L 2012, Violence Related Attitudes, Horizontal Individualism And Collectivism in Young Mexicans, Psychology Journal, Vol. 9 Issue 1, p2-12. Houston, J.M.; Edge, H; Anderson, L.E.; Lesmana, C. & Suryani, L 2012, Competitiveness and Individualism-Collectivism in Bali and the U.S., North American Journal of Psychology, Vol. 14 Issue 1, p163-173. Papadopoulos, C; Foster, J. & Caldwell, K 2013, 'Individualism-Collectivism' as an Explanatory Device for Mental Illness Stigma, Community Mental Health Journal, Vol. 49 Issue 3, p270-280. Yao, X; Wang, S; Dang, J. & Wang, L 2012, The Role of Individualism-Collectivism in the Individual Creative Process, Creativity Research Journal, Vol. 24 Issue 4, p296-303. Finkelstein, M.A 2010, Individualism/Collectivism: Implications for the Volunteer Process Social Behavior & Personality, An International Journal, Vol. 38 Issue 4, p445-452. Forbes, G.B.; Collinsworth, L.L.; Zhao, P; Kohlman, S. & LeClaire, J 2011, Relationships among individualism-collectivism, gender, and in-group/out-group status, and responses to conflict: a study in China and the United States, Aggressive Behavior, Vol. 37 Issue 4, p302-314. Rego, A. & Cunha, M.P 2009, how individualism–collectivism orientations predict happiness in a collectivistic context, Journal of Happiness Studies, Vol. 10 Issue 1, p19-35. Waistell, J 2011, Individualism and collectivism in business school pedagogy: a research agenda for internationalizing the home management student, Higher Education Research & Development, Vol. 30 Issue 5, p595-607. Yan L; Mo W; Cixin, W. & Junqi S 2010, Individualism, collectivism, and Chinese adolescents' aggression: intercultural variations, Aggressive Behavior, Vol. 36 Issue 3, p187-194. Hamamura, T 2012, Are Cultures Becoming Individualistic? A Cross-Temporal Comparison of Individualism–Collectivism in the United States and Japan, Personality & Social Psychology Review (Sage Publications Inc.), Vol. 16 Issue 1, p3-24. Kim, S 2009, Individualism and Collectivism: Implications for Women, Pastoral Psychology, Vol. 58 Issue 5/6, p563-578. Steele, L. & Lynch, S 2013, The Pursuit of Happiness in China: Individualism, Collectivism, and Subjective Well-Being During China's Economic and Social Transformation, Social Indicators Research, Vol. 114 Issue 2, p441-451. Omi, Y 2012, Collectivistic individualism: Transcending a traditional opposition, Culture & Psychology, Vol. 18 Issue 3, p403-416. Finkelstein, M 2011, Individualism/collectivism and organizational citizenship behavior, Psicothema, Vol. 23 Issue 3, p401-406. Dakhli, M 2009, Investigating the Effects of Individualism-Collectivism on Trust and Cooperation, Psychology Journal, Vol. 6 Issue 3, p90-99. Tassell, N.A; Flett, R.A. & Gavala, J.R 2010,Individualism/Collectivism and Academic Self- Enhancement in New Zealand Māori University Students, Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology, Vol. 4 Issue 2, p138-151. Read More