Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind Analysis - Book Report/Review Example

No. Book Review: Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind The work of Geert Hofstede and his peers introduced a revolution in the study of culture and sociology and their relative impact on management sciences. His book Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind was first published in 1991, however with years of research and additions he has managed to present the rationale behind cultural differences and its impact on groupthink and how individuals from one group view members of other groups. According to Hofstede et al. (2010), there are four dimensions through which groups belonging to different backgrounds differ from each other; these dimensions define their identity and govern their mechanism of having a viewpoint about them. Since there are no empirical evidences which support the idea that one nation or cultural group is superior then the other therefore nations are required to extend their cooperation as they have similar set of problems. The book itself is an extension of a study conducted by Geert Hofstede on the workforce of IBM. Where the original work helped him analyze people working on same positions and having similar skill set but belonging to different cultures and establish the differences within this workforce, the outcomes helped him define the directives that provided a rationale for these differences. Later editions of this book including Hofstede et al. (2010) contain outputs of other surveys as well. With the help of these researches, Hofstede et al. (2010) concluded that there are four dimensions which define the differences between people with similar expertise but different cultural backgrounds: power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism/collectivism, and masculinity/femininity. Hofstede et al. (2010) found through this extensive research that analyzing the culture of various group with the help of these dimensions help in understanding the manner in which their culture is organized. The world has turned into a global village where cultures are not restricted to countries confined in boundaries and with the emergence of multinational structure of a society, it is important to understand what makes a culture different than the other and also how individuals from one group define their relationships with members of other groups. Similarly, it is important for a group to have an insight of the strength and weaknesses of their own culture so that they can work on these areas accordingly. In Hofstede et al. (2010), it is argued that where the borders within countries are still present, the distances between nations are reducing due to common set of problems. This is where the organizations supporting global causes emerge. World Health Organization and its efforts against poverty, malnutrition, health conditions etc. is just a simple example of this phenomenon. So, people all around the world are different by definition but it is the common set of problems that unites and requires them to cooperate with each other. Hence, here rises the need for intercultural cooperation, serving as the key for survival. Hofstede et al. (2010) has managed to define human mind as a computer system. The way humans are brought up define who they are and governs their thinking process. Where the lessons learnt during the childhood act as the foundation for one’s personality, there are few lessons that we have to unlearn in order function more efficiently or adapt to the situation. Hofstede et al. (2010) has defined the human brain and its functionality as computer system and software where basic program running main functions remains the same but peripheral softwares are added for better functioning. This analogy is not for the purpose of define humans as machines but to present it with the help of an example which is used worldwide and way more extensively than we think. It is further explained in the book that elements of social environment act as the basic functions of the permanent program and define our social functioning. Since everyone has a different family, neighborhood and other social components in their family and this is the reason why one human behaves differently from the other however it is the common values present in these social elements by virtue of culture which creates a bond between individuals and make them behave like a group with distinguished identity. Hence, culture is the bigger software which behaves as the foundation of other peripheral softwares and governs the fundamental behavioral patterns of humans belonging to same culture. Hofstede et al. (2010) further argues that this human mental programming has three levels i.e. human nature which is universal, culture (specific to a certain group) and personality (which is restricted to an individual). An amalgam of these three attributes gives rise to a distinguished human being. It is also argued that cultural traits have been considered inherent characteristics and they are used to define a certain social identity of individuals however there are no empirical evidences to prove that other ethnic group is superior to others in intelligence since the impact of cultural factors and unfavorable conditions cannot be nullified. Hofstede et al. (2010) presents a notion that cultures become obvious with the help of symbols, heroes, rituals and values attached to them. Where values act as the core of these four elements, they are reflected in rituals which are later on adopted by heroes who emerge as the symbol of a certain value in the most superficial manner. It is the values which define the criteria for actions of the individuals within a group and always have two specifically defined sides such as evil versus good and ugly versus beautiful. The way these rituals, symbols and heroes are portrayed and practiced by a group, defines how the group will be perceived by the outsiders. It is the learning of these elements which define our personality as a child and then further learning of new practices which makes us grow and get mature over time. The book further establishes an understanding that the culture reproduces itself. Whatever values are learnt by the parents are transferred to the child without empirical reasoning or apparent actions. These values are only transmitted in an inferred manner. And, there is no way that a culture would remain isolated or will become extinct. As long as there is a reproduction within a group, no group can escape culture, the values inherited in it and the moral circle. There are various elements which define this moral group such as religion, marriage and family. Where religion defines the moral boundary within which a certain community resides and attaches moral rights and duties to its inhabitants, there is a possibility that religion defines a boundary conflicting with the moral circle defined by a society or nation. Similarly, they may also complement each other. Hofstede et al. (2010) also explains that symbolic groups have more power than hereditary relationships. And, this is the reason why nations looking alike enter into war against each other in the name of being a nation. Hence, race, genders and ideologies act as the group markers and divide individuals into certain communities. The book has managed to define culture as the governing force which acts as an identity of a certain group. However, there are various layers within the culture itself, which provides a rationale for having sub-cultures within a broad umbrella. These sub-cultures are formed by national identity, region, religion, language, ethnicity, gender, generation, social class, organization, department etc. The values embedded in one sub-culture may conflict or complement each other. There are evidences which prove that culture shows evolution. However, careful analysis would show that where changes in culture are mere changes in practices (rituals, symbols and heroes) however fundamental values remain the same. Furthermore, nations cannot be seen as equivalent to societies. Societies have historical evolution and within nations, regional, gender-based, religious and linguistic groups may exist. Sources of differences between the countries may be their history which is defined by their identity, values, and institutions. Hofstede et al. further extended their study with the help of various other surveys (Chinese survey and Minkov’s study) and found that the national cultures and their differences can be defined by the way they respond to authority, individual identity and conflict resolution. Hofstede provides a notion that cultures are bound by their relativism which makes them incapable of having absolute criteria for judging the activities of another culture as "low" or "noble". Due to social anthropology, nations have common set of problems which require them to cooperate with each other and survive collectively. In the book, Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, Hofstede et al. (2010) used an various extensive surveys comprising of evaluation of individuals belonging to more than 50 different countries and explained that despite the nature of their skill set and jobs, it is culture which defines the fundamental differences between them. The environment in which one is raised provides the foundation of the fundamental implicit values which are later own reflected in the form of rituals, symbols and heroes. These explicit practices make one group perceive other differently. Although individuals from one group may view others as superior or inferior due to variation in their values, there are no scientific evidences to prove that. Other than basic heritage, there are also other criteria giving rise to various sub-cultures. However, since the human race or nations are facing similar set of problems despite being explicitly different, it is important for their survival that they show respect and tolerance for each other, shun differences arising from social, racial and religious conflicts and cooperate with each other. Work Cited Hofstede, Geert, Gert Jan Hofstede and Michael Minkov. Cultures and Organizations: Software for the Mind. 3rd ed. McGraw Hill Professional, 2010, Print. Read More