Abstract
Geert Hofstede was one of the first to attempt to develop a universal framework for understanding cultural differences in managers’ and employees’ values based on a world-wide survey. Hofstede’s work focuses on ‘value systems’ of national cultures which are represented by four dimensions:
-
Power Distance. This is the extent to which inequalities among people are seen as normal. This dimension stretches from equal relations being seen as normal to wide inequalities being viewed as normal. The former West Germany scored (scores are nominally between 100 and 0) a relatively low 35, USA a relatively low to medium 40, Britain 35 and France a relatively high 68. Brazil scored 69 and Mexico 81. China was not included in the study. Hong Kong scored 68 and Taiwan 58. Eastern European countries were also not included in the study. An all white South African sample scored 49.
-
Uncertainty Avoidance. This refers to a preference for structured situations versus unstructured situations. This dimension runs from being comfortable with flexibility and ambiguity to a need for extreme rigidity and situations with a high degree of certainty. The former West Germany scored a medium 65, France a high 86 on a level with Spain. US scored a relatively low 46, with Britain at 35. Brazil scored 76 and Mexico 82. Hong Kong scored 29 and Taiwan 69. The all white South African sample scored 49.
-
Individualism-Collectivism. This looks at whether individuals are used to acting as individuals or as part of cohesive groups, which may be based on the family (which is more the case with Chinese societies or the corporation (as may be the case in Japan). This dimension ranges from collectivism (0) to individualism (100). USA is the highest (91). France scores 71 and Britain 89. The former west Germany scored 67. Brazil scored 38 and Mexico 30 (Guatemala was the most collectivist at 6). Hong Kong scored 25, and Taiwan 17. The all white South African sample scored 65.
-
Masculinity-Femininity. Hofstede distinguishes ‘hard values’ such as assertiveness and competition, and the ‘soft’ or ‘feminine’ values of personal relations, quality of life and caring about others, where in a masculine society gender role differentiation is emphasized. The US scored a medium to high 62, with the former west Germany at 66. Britain scored 66 and France 43. Brazil scored 49 and Mexico 69. Taiwan scored 45 and Hong Kong 56. The all white South African sample scored 63.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Brady, F.N. (1990) Ethical Managing: Rules and Results, New York: Macmillan.
Donaldson, T. (1989) The Ethics of International Business, New York: Oxford University Press.
Hofstede, G. (1991) Culture and Organizations, London: McGraw-Hill.
House, R., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M. and Dorfman, P.W., (2004) Leadership, Culture and Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies, Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Inglehart, R. (1997) Modernization and Postmodernization: Cultural, Economic, and Political Change in 43 Societies, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Jackson, T. (2000) Management Ethics and Corporate Policy: A Cross-cultural Comparison, in Journal of Management Studies, 37(3): 349–370.
Jackson, T. (2002) The management of people across cultures: valuing people differently, in Human Resource Management, 41(4): 455–476.
Schwartz, S.H. (1999) A theory of cultural values and some implications for work, Applied Psychology: An International Review, 48(1), 23–47.
Trompenaars, F. (1993) Riding the Waves of Culture, London: Nicholas Brealy.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2007 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Jackson, T. (2007). Cross-cultural Sensitivities in Developing Corporate Ethical Strategies and Practices. In: Zimmerli, W.C., Holzinger, M., Richter, K. (eds) Corporate Ethics and Corporate Governance. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70818-6_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70818-6_18
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-70817-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-70818-6
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)