Hofstede (2006)
Firstly, power distance index, measures the level of equality or inequality between people in the country’s society and the effects on the workplace. Secondly, individualism looks at the degree to which the society reinforces individuals or collective achievement and interpersonal relationships. Thirdly, masculinity focuses on the extent to which society reinforces or doesn’t reinforce the traditional masculine work role model of male achievement, control, and power. The fourth dimension is uncertainty avoidance index, which focuses on the level of tolerance for uncertainty and ambiguity within the society such as an unstructured situation. Finally, long-term orientation focuses on the degree the society embraces, or does not hold long-term devotion to traditional forward thinking values. Hofstede stated that “the position of a country on these dimensions allows us to make some predictions on the way their society operates including their management processes.”
Hofstede (2006)
Hofstede’s dimension can be applied to U.S.A and India as analysed below.
U.S.A low PDI score of 40 reflects its greater equality of power and wealth within society. This can be compared to India who has extremely high PDI score of 77 well above the world average of 56.5, which reflects its inequality within its society.
India’s LTO is above the world average of 48 ranking at 61 indicating a cultural which is perseverant and economical. U.S.A is also well above the world average ranking at 91 reflecting its power within the world economy.
With regards to masculinity the U.S.A is above the world average standing at 51 and India, 56 at 62. The higher the rank in this particular dimensions illustrate the greater the division of values between the male and female gender. The higher the rank may also generate the more competitive and assertive female population however may be less than the male one.
Uncertainty avoidance in India is ranked at a low 40 compared to world average 65 on the dimension. This can be U.S.A ranked at 46 showing both of these countries cultures may be open to unstructured ideas and situations. People have little or no guidance in terms of a few rules and regulations with which to attempt to control every unexpected event or situation.
Individualism in U.S.A is ranked 91 which is the highest against the world average where as India is collectivist. Hofstede believes that “High PDI culture tends to be collectivistic, whereas low PDI cultures tend to be individualistic.”
.
Hofstede (2006)
Figure 2: A graph to show the comparison between U.K and India using Hofstede
When doing business with India an Anglo Saxon manger from America, one should be aware of the cultural difference. In relation to Hofstede theory Trompenaars developed a model also to do with cultural difference the seven dimensions of cultural Model. This model illustrates how managing complexity in the international environment is a major challenge for managers and is an important component for long term success. Trompenaars believes that differentiating between cultures is clearly a complex area as every culture is diverse.
Trompenaars seven dimensions provide a way of examining and thinking about a new culture in which you might have to manage. The dimensions help to recognise culture values, belief and prejudices. Management from the U.S.A should be aware of India’s culture and belief when managing the organisation because U.S.A culture differs from India.
Fons Trompenaars (2003)
Firstly, Universalism vs. Particularism dimension questions whether you value rules of your country of origin and other national country and whether relationships are of value to you. Some cultures feel that people should be loyal to each other. U.S.A management should be loyal, when doing business with Indian management if they want the business meeting to be successful. U.S.A is a universalise country meaning culture you will see a contract as definitive and binding, but it will only be a rough guide or approximation to someone from a Particularist culture like India. Therefore U.S.A management have to be patient as Indian like to spend time building relationship and also they take more time than usual discussing the deal proposed before accepting it.
Fons Trompenaars (2003)
Secondly, Individualism vs. Collectivism dimension indicates Individualism as a prime orientation to an individual. Collectivism demonstrates a main orientation to common goals and objectives. India is a collectivist, they tend to negotiate and make decision in groups so the process can take time however this shows that Indian management is committed to objectives and goals. U.S.A is an individualist culture so management may get irritated and frustrated because they might see that taking a long time discussing the business contract is a waste of time
.
Fons Trompenaars (2003)
Thirdly, Specific vs. Diffuse. This is about showing emotions not, what we feel. Some cultures prefer to stick to the facts of a situation and not to enter into close relationships, while others want to get to know people better before doing any business.
Fons Trompenaars (2003)
Fourthly, Neutrality vs. Affectivity dimension questions about the amount of emotion a person shows not what a person feels. Some neutral cultures see control of the feeling as a sign of civilization. Affective cultures express their emotions openly. There are two important questions for workings with different cultures are: should emotion is exhibited in work relations? And should it be separated from reasoning processes in case it affects them for the worse? U.S.A tends to show emotion, but separate it from objective and rational behind decisions.
This dimension can also be illustrated well through speech patterns. In Anglo-
Saxon cultures, when one person stops speaking another starts as it
is seen as impolite to interrupt. In some cultures such as India there is often a silence between one person speaking and another person that replies back or speaks. This is to digest and understand what has been said and
it’s a sign of respect. U.S.A management and other western countries sometimes interpret this as a failure to communicate. Indian management will not be impressed if the U.S.A management do not respect what they believe is the right way to behaviour. Communication is seen vital when ever any business managers attain meeting. Indian’s enjoy opinionated conversations so Anglo Saxon manager should give their opinions when required; showing they are taking an active part in the conversation.
Fifthly, Inner Directed vs. Outer Directed dimensions also questions whether a person feels that they control the environment or that their environment controls them. Outer directed cultures feel that they must live in harmony within their environment. Clashes can occur when people from Inner Directed Cultures, e.g. Westernised countries, believe they can impose a strategy or way of doing things on non westernised countries.
Fons Trompenaars (2003)
Managers from directed cultures believe that behaviour is designed to motivate people into doing what they have already formulated. They try to win others over to their way of thinking, but it’s sometimes comes across as aggressive and uncivilized behaviour in outer directed cultures. The approach that U.S.A management should take when discussing business with India is, they should be careful about the way they pose them self and the way they speak to the Indian management. Indians believe that the way that people think and what they accept should be understood by others.
Sixthly, Achieved Status v. Ascribed Status dimension illustrates if the person status derivative from what the person does or who they are? Achieved status relates to what they do and what’s been achieved, while ascribed status means what’s being done is still in the process of what is going to be achieved.
Many Anglo Saxons believe that ascribe status for reasons other than achievement is inappropriate to a real business, getting things done.
However ascribe status can be seen to have the effect of making people live up to the expectations of their position.
When both countries negotiate business deals they will have a problem because U.S.A has achieved status whereas India has not. Some western cultures think that they have extensive knowledge about how business operates and their aim is to influence the other side. They often think they have reached that level of experience of the ascribed culture in half the time.
U.S.A has to comprehend that both management have different levels of expertise and be patient allowing the Indian management do what they believe is the right. U.S.A management should also take a translator to bridge the language difference. In ascribed cultures he or she would be expected to interpret not just the language, but gesture, meaning and context.
Fons Trompenaars (2003)
Finally, Sequential Time vs. Synchronic Time is the final dimension. This looks at whether a person does things in an order or multitasks. “Sequential indicates a series of passing events whereas synchronic sees
past, present and future as interrelated so that ideas about the future and
memories of the past both shape present action.” In these cultures they schedule tightly, so if the other country is late it’s considered to be unprofessional as it affects the remainder of the schedule. Synchronous cultures care less about punctuality meeting someone unexpectedly, for instance, would be given greater importance. To a synchronic person you show how you value people by giving them time.
Synchronous cultures are more collectivist and particularist in valuing people. They carry their pasts through the present into the future and will refuse to consider changing unless convinced that their heritage is safe.
Trompenaars seven dimensions framework may give U.S.A
methodology about the differences and how the management in U.S.A
can best address them. Also it will help them to understand and value the Indian culture and the way they do business with other countries. All cultures work at various points along the dimensions and finding ways to identify, accommodate and merge differences is likely to provide the most effective relationship with working country.
Trompenaars analyses the ways mangers should behave when dealing with other cultures. This theory compared to Hofstede is different. Hofstedes five dimension theory gives a manger the background knowledge of the country. U.S.A management have to know India’s background information for meetings with Indian management. Whereas Trompenaars dimensions illustrates the way to behave and value other cultures when doing business.
In conclusion the Anglo Saxon mangers from U.S.A have cultural pitfalls however to over come these; an Anglo Saxon manger should gain knowledge about the Indian culture. The Anglo Saxon manger should acknowledge that the definition of management differs in each culture, which also Hofstede and Trompenaars stated in their theory. The both theorist would help an anglo saxon manger to increase their knowledge about other national country. Both management differ because they both have different values and norms which they believe and way they lead their team is completely different. The U.S.A will definitely have many pitfalls while doing business in a country like India.
Bibliography
Fons Trompenaars (2003) Fons Tropenaars dimenesions URL [2nd April 2006]
Hofstede, G. (2006) India Geert Hofstede Cultural Dimensions ExplainedURL [2nd April 2006]
Hofstede, G. (2006) USA Geert Hofstede Cultural Dimensions Explained URL [2nd April 2006]
Hofstede , G. (2006) Geert Hofstede Cultural Dimensions
URL hofstede.com/hofstede_dimensions.php?culture1=42&culture2=95 [ 2nd April 2006]
JPEG Image(2006) political_map_India.jpg URL [1st April 2006]
Nina et al, J. (Year) Cross Cultural Investigations: emerging concepts. Beyond Hofstede and Trompenaars Vol. 18(2003) pg 514-528
