UNIT 2 Culture
Part 3: Reading the text g2 Task 5: Read the following article.
Hofstede’s four dimensions of 5 10
cultural values Geert Hofstede is a well-known writer and thinker about culture. His ‘cultural dimensions theory’ has had a huge influence on the way in which people understand different societies. This theory, which he developed in the late 1960s, argues that different countries have different values. Over the years, many people have either added to his initial theory, which identified four dimensions, namely ‘power distance’, ‘individualism vs. collectivism’, ‘uncertainty avoidance’ and ‘masculinity vs. femininity’, or else they have challenged the basic
concept. Initially, he was looking in particular at the business context, but in recent years it has been applied to many different contexts.
15 20
The first dimension – power distance – concerns perceptions of inequality and power. A high score here (e.g., in the Arab World) would indicate that hierarchy is established and accepted in society. A lower score would show that people may question authority and want power to be more distributed. The second dimension concerns ‘individualism’ and ‘collectivism’. In individualistic societies (e.g., North America and Europe) people tend to have strong ties to their immediate family, but in collectivist societies (e.g., many developing countries) there tend to be close relationships with extended families.
25 30
The third dimension is ‘uncertainty avoidance’, which is loosely defined as the level of tolerance for ambiguity within society. A society with a high score here (e.g., Japan) would be one which has very strict codes of behaviour that govern what people can do, and where there is considered to be one ‘truth’ which influences the way that everybody thinks. A lower score would reveal more acceptance of different thoughts and ideas. The fourth dimension concerns ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ societies. The former societies (e.g., Japan) are defined as those where there is “a preference in society for achievement, heroism, assertiveness and material rewards for success”, whereas the latter adopt “a preference for cooperation, modesty, caring for the weak and quality of life.” In feminine societies, men and women share similar views and act in similar ways.
35
While some people have criticized Hofstede’s theory, it is still very influential nearly 50 years after it was developed. This is especially true in the business context, but it is also relevant in other fields.
21
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137
