Hofstede 's Cultural Dimensions Between Canada And Japan

The cultural behaviors of the “American” or “Japanese” in the video do not accurately reflect business behaviors in these countries so please do not generalize based on the video. The video is meant as a classroom exercise to analyze a specific cultural encounter. Total 20 points.

It is initially hard to distinguish which of these tangible or intangible factors are more important. Based on the cultural dimensions and values identified further in the report, it is clear that each has its own importance and merit. Understanding the cultural norms and expectations at play in the case study are critical to resolving the conflict at hand. Whilst Kelly believed she had adequate prior knowledge of the Japanese culture, it is clear that she is not as well versed as she thinks.

This paper provided an opportunity to take a deeper look into the country of Japan by conducting a Global Cultural Analysis. Throughout this paper the following four research areas were explored: 1.What is the major elements and dimensions of culture in Japan? 2. How are these elements and dimensions integrated by locals conducting business in Japan? 3. How does U.S. culture and business compare with the elements and dimensions of culture integrated by the locals conducting business in Japan? 4. What are the implications for U.S. businesses that wish to conduct business with Japan?

Hierarchy and status are considered highly important in both Japan and Mexico in addition to a strong separation between the work and home life. Both Mexico and Japan rely on strong work relationships and loyalty in addition to having top down style of commination and information flow. Both countries have a belief in collectivism over individualism, according to Hofstede’s Value Dimensions, with Japan slightly higher on the index, similarly for the masculinity index. The implications of these characteristics can be viewed in each countries’ management approach. These societal values and characteristics influence each countries’ business behavior and methodologies. (Deresky, 2014)

Power Distance is the dimension that deals with the fact that all individuals in societies are not equal it expresses the attitude of the culture towards these inequalities amongst us. At 80 China sits in the higher rankings of power distance a society that believes that inequalities amongst people are acceptable, therefore subordinate-superior relationship tends to be polarized and there is no defence against power abuse by superiors. Individuals are influenced by formal authority and sanctions and are in general optimistic about people’s capacity for leadership and initiative. People

When a business decides to venture internationally into different countries with its products, services, and operations, it is very important that the company gains an understanding of how the culture of the different societies affects the values found in those societies. Geert Hofstede conducted one of the most famous and most used studies on how culture relates to values. Hofstede study enabled him to compare dimensions of culture across 40 countries. He originally isolated four dimensions of what he claimed summarized different cultures — power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism versus collectivism, and masculinity versus femininity (Hill, 2013, p.110). To cover aspects of values not discussed in the original paradigm Hofstede has since added two more dimensions — Confucianism or long-term orientation and indulgence versus self-restraint (Hofstede, n.d.). Because of the way Hofstede’s cultural dimensions are given an index score from 0-100, it is easy for a company to get a general comparison between the cultures they are expanding into and the culture they are already in.

First, power distance is the first dimension in Hofstede’s six cultural dimensions. Power distance is the “extent to which the less powerful members of institutions and organisations within a country expect and accept that power is distributed unequally.” (Hofstede, 2017). When comparing China and the United States, China had twice as high power distance score than the United States. The high-power distance score in China shows that it is acceptable to have inequalities in their society, and that the people accept and expect power is distributed unequally.

There are significant cultural differences between Japan and the United Kingdom that need to be taken into account when doing international business. There are also a number of methods and systems by which these differences have been described. These include the Geert Hofstede cultural dimensions, Trompenaars seven dimensions of culture and the Globe Project's cultural dimensions. This paper will discuss these differences and similarities, and shed light as to the best approach to international business in these countries.

With the unstoppable trend of globalisation, it becomes extremely significant for international businesses to have a thorough understanding of different cultures. Hofstede (1980, pp. 21-23) defines culture as ‘the collective programming of the mind distinguishing the members of one group or category of people from another’. This essay examines Hofstede’s cultural framework and suggests that Hofstede’s cultural framework is an outstanding and authoritative tool to analyze culture differences. In this essay, cultural frameworks will be discussed firstly, following by a discussion of my cultural scores and background. Finally, recommendations on cross-cultural management between China and Australia will be provided.

Power Distance dimension according to Hofstede (2010) shows the degree of less or more accepts of inequalities within a culture; Canada was 94 while the Philippines was 32 clearly difference; therefore, showing one culture accept power inequalities more than the other. Power distance lower ranking is showing a culture expect and accept relationship that are more democratic. On the other hand, higher ranking accepts hierarchical. This cultural may believe that who every holds the power is right. On the Power Distance Index Hallale find that individuals have a solid dislike with saying "no'! especially in Asian nations. Saying no may be seen as form of disrespect Hallale (2013). I lived in the Philippines when President Ferdinand E. Marcos was President and the assassination of opposition leader Benigno Aquino. At that time, I was unaware of a hierarchical society but thinking back; I can now see how 32 power distance scale ranking is believable because social positions and statuses have more prestige in their culture. While working, and traveling to Canada; I was able to see human equality especially with respect to socials issues; rules are used to determine what is right; for example, health care. all

A world of system designed to keep people in unjust and unequal positions is held in place by several interrelated expression of "power over": political power, economic power, physical force, and ideological power (Bishop, 1994: 36). So, we can say power is defined as a possession of control, authority or influence over others. In terms of power of dominant groups over subordinate groups, we define power as domination of one group of people over another in major important spheres of life. Power inequities have been in existence throughout the history of humanity and the ways of manifestation evolved from extreme overt oppression to subtle, covert oppression. Three major forms of power inequalities discussed in this paper are

Power/Distance (PD), “refers to the degree of inequality that exists- and is accepted- among people with and without power. A high PD score indicates that society accepts an unequal distribution of power, and that people understand “their place” in the system. Low PD means that power is shared and well dispersed.” (www.mindtools.com) As an example from the article, Myers goes on to say, “there were basically four levels: VP, director, manager, and worker bee. You only talked to people at your level.” SK Telecom boasted that

Society is a structured hierarchical system of classes. The higher class you hold, the higher power often associated to you. With this construction of society one-group claims dominance over another doing so with “power over” (Bishop, 2015). Power over others can be visible through physical strength, wealth, resources, and access to opportunities, etc. These dominate groups not only spread ideas, but often are in charge of the creation of ideas, their importance, and the norms and roles for society and classes labeling groups different than their own as inferior.

The United States and China boast the two largest economies in the world but, despite this fact, these two countries have very little in common. At first glance, this may seem very obvious to most people but, what exactly is it that makes these two countries so different? How is it that such different perspectives and approaches can both lead to great success? Hofstede’s six dimensions of culture are an attempt to answer these questions and more. Dr. Geert Hofstede, studied employees of the computer firm IBM in over fifty different countries. When he examined his findings he found “clear patterns of similarity and difference along the four dimensions” (Manktelow, Jackson Edwards, Eyre, Cook and Khan, n.d.). The fact that he focused his research on solely IBM employees allowed him to eliminate company culture as a differentiating factor and “attribute those patterns to national and social differences” (n.d.). He used his findings to originally identify four dimensions, later expanded to six, that could “distinguish one culture from another” (n.d.). The six dimensions all on a scale from 0 to 100 are:

Dr. Hofstede performed a comprehensive study of how values in the workplace are influenced by culture. In the 1970’s, as a Dutch researcher Dr. Geert Hofstede, collected and analyzed data from 116,000 surveys taken from IBM employees in forty different countries around the world. From those results, Hofstede developed a model that identifies four primary dimensions of differentiate cultures. These include: Uncertainty Avoidance (UA), Masculinity-Femininity (MAS), Individualism-Collectivism (IND), Power and Distance (PD). After a further study of the Asian culture by researcher Michael Bond in 1991, Hofstede added a fifth dimension in his theory, Long- and Short-term time orientation (LTO), also referred to as the Confucian Dynamism. His research has framed how cultural differences can be used in professional business transactions. Geert Hofstede 's dimensions analysis can assist the business person in better understanding the intercultural differences within regions and between countries.