11 Unit 1, Appendix B: Critique of Hofsted’s Theory
CRITIQUE OF HOFSTEDE’S THEORY
Additinally, Worthy, Lavigne, & Romero (2020) identify their critique of Hofstede’s theory as follows:
The cultural value dimensions identified by Hofstede are useful ways to think about culture and to study cultural psychology; however, Hofstede’s theory has also been seriously questioned. Most of the criticism has been directed at the methodology of the study beginning with the original instrument. The questionnaire was not originally designed to measure culture but rather workplace satisfaction (Orr & Hauser, 2008) and many of the conclusions are based on a small number of responses (McSweeney, 2002). Although 117,000 questionnaires were administered, the results from 40 countries were used and only six countries had more than 1000 respondents. Critics also question the representativeness of the original sample.
The study was conducted using employees of a multinational corporation (IBM) who were highly educated, mostly male, who performed what we call ‘white collar’ work (McSweeney, 2002). Hofstede’s theory has also been criticized for promoting a largely static view of culture (Hamden-Turner & Trompenaars, 1997; Orr and Hauser, 2008) that does not respond to changes or influences of other cultures. It is hard to deny that the world has changed in dramatic ways since Hofstede’s research began.
Material and nonmaterial aspects of culture can vary subtly from region to region. As people travel, moving from different regions to entirely different parts of the world, certain material and nonmaterial aspects of culture become dramatically unfamiliar. As we interact with cultures other than our own, we become more aware of our own culture, which might otherwise be invisible to us, and to the differences and commonalities between our culture and others.
Deeper Dive:
Individualism and Collectivism and Interpersonal Conflict Potential
*Adapted and Attributed to Robert Jersak, who attributes Language and Culture in Context: A Primer on Intercultural Communication (2020) by Robert Godwin-Jones.
By now, we understand that communication is about sending and receiving messages and that messages are all human behavior. We also understand that culture is much more than what we observe; culture is also the deep assumptions that groups of people have about what is right and what is true. At this point, we need a way to define and understand the differences in values and beliefs across cultures. This way, we can examine common areas of intercultural misunderstandings and conflicts. This leads us to the idea of cultural taxonomies.
In the academic study of intercultural communication, cultures are often characterized as belonging to particular categories, often referred to as cultural taxonomies (i.e., a classification scheme) — many of the characteristics used by Geert Hofstede in the 1970s. Hofstede studied the cultural dimensions of workers for IBM in various countries (1980). The most important and prevalent category often used to characterize and contrast cultures are one we already briefly explored in a previous lesson: individualism versus collectivism. Cultures labeled as individualistic (most often in Western countries, including those in North America and Northern Europe) are seen as emphasizing the individual’s rights to self-determination, with children brought up to be assertive and distinctive. In contrast, collectivistic cultures (seen as prevalent in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East) emphasize group identity and conformity, with children expected to be obedient and respectful.
So, how does a cultural taxonomy like individualism vs. collectivism become helpful to us? Let’s explore this dialogue sample from the book Understanding the World’s Cultures:
We observe and overhear two individuals chatting. By their clothing and their voice, they appear to be culturally different. We hear this in their conversation:
SHARON: So, Fatima, you’ll be graduating in May. Congratulations!
FATIMA: Thank you.
SHARON: Do you have a job lined up?
FATIMA: Yes, I do. I’ll be working for the Central Bank.
SHARON: Good for you. Have you found a place to live yet?
FATIMA: Actually, the bank is very near my parents’ place
SHARON: That’s nice. So you’ll be living quite near them.
This conversation is not a full-scale intercultural conflict; however, a crucial intercultural misunderstanding is embedded in this conversation. Sharon seems likely to come from an individualist-leaning culture, where it is common and expected for children to move away from their parents and start an independent life after graduation. She assumes that Fatima will behave in ways that are familiar to Sharon. Fatima, however, may come from a collectivist-leaning culture, and her most important priority may be to ensure her parents’ well-being rather than to move out of the house. It may even be a cultural expectation that she remain with her parents as they age. She may be confused as to why anyone would choose to leave their parents alone as they age.
Adapted from:
Language and Culture in Context: A Primer on Intercultural Communication (2020) by Robert Godwin-Jones.
The following TED Talk explains many of the ideas above.
TED Talk Description:
Beatrice Du Mesnil is the Academic Director of the Master « Management of International Competencies » and the Head of the Cultures & Languages Departement. With her double culture french-british and many experiences in an international context, she now focuses her courses and work on Intercultural Management and Management of International Carriers. Presentation (with Christine Naschberger) : After their own professional and personal experiences, they will give us the « The survivor’s guide to cross cultural communication ». Research Professor à Audencia Nantes School of Management, from Autria, Christine Naschberger is specialized in Diversity Management and Intercultural Management. Her main fields of research are gender equality, handicap management and life balance professional/personal. Presentation (with Beatrice Du Mesnil) : After their own professional and personal experiences, they will give us the « The survivor’s guide to cross cultural communication » (2013).
