Diverse Cultural Patterns

Some taxonomies to classify cultures Geert Hofstede(1980) Michael Bond (1987) Kluckhobns and Strodtbeck(1960) Edward Hall (1976)

Hofstede’s Value Dimensions During 1980s, a hundred thousand workers in multinational organization in 40 countries Individualism-collectivism Uncertainty avoidance Power distance Masculinity and femininity https://geert-hofstede.com/ The Hofstede Center

Hofstede: individualism-collectivism All people & cultures have both individual and collective dispositions.  continuum Individualism 1)individual as the basic unit in a society 2) independence rather than dependence 3) individual achievement 4) competition rather than cooperation 5) personal goals over group goals

Hofstede: individualism-collectivism Collectivism: in-group vs. out-group 1) the in-group looks after its members, who are loyal to it. 2) the group’s view, needs, goals, beliefs before those of individuals 3) cooperation rather than competition 4) interdependent relationships 5) indirect communication

Hofstede: individualism-collectivism 一柱難支 (夫仁者) 己欲立而立人, 己欲達而達人 (論語 雍也篇) Negotiating tables Health care contexts About 70% of the population of the world lives in collective cultures(Triandis 1990) See table 3-1 on p.66.

Hofstede: Uncertainty avoidance The extent to which people within a culture are made nervous by situations un-experienced High-uncertainty avoidance Low-uncertainty avoidance See table 3-2 on p.69.

Hofstede: power distance Large-power distance socially hierarchical, centralized, Small-power distance inequality minimized, the powerful and the powerless live in concert. In classrooms

Hofstede: masculinity-femininity Masculinity : masculine traits are valued. Ireland, the Philippines, Greece, Japan, S. Africa, Italy, Mexico Femininity: caring, nurturing, interdependent behaviors

Hofstede https://geert-hofstede.com/south-korea.html

Michael Bond: Confucian Dynamism The cultures of Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, Korea, Singapore 6 key values: long-term orientation, perseverance, ordering relationships by status, thrift-centered, having a sense of shame, collective face-saving

Kluckhohns & Strondtheck’s Value Orientations what is important to the members of a culture, and guidance for living their life Human nature orientation Person-nature orientation Time orientation Activity orientation Relational (social) orientation

K & S: Human nature orientation Different conceptions of human nature lead to different views about what we oufht to do and how we can do it.(Stevenson & Haberman 1998) 1) Evil: Islam, Christianity, to become good with hard work, control, self discipline, 2) Good and evil: most of Europe. Learning/education 3) Good : Confucianism, Buddhism. Culture makes us evil.

K & S: Person-Nature Orientation Human beings subject to nature: India, parts of South America Cooperation with nature: East Asians, American Indians (Chief Seattle) Controlling Nature: the Western approach

K & S: time orientation 1) Past orientation: China, Korea, Japan, Great Britain, France, Native Americans 2) Present orientation: the Philippines, Mexico, Latin America; enjoy the present. 3) Future orientation: the USA

K & S: Activity Orientation Being orientation: spontaneous activity (of being in the present): Mexico Being-in-doing orientation: correlates with cultures that value a spiritual life more than a material one. Hinduism, Buddhism Doing orientation: American culture

K & S: relational (social) orientation Authoritarian orientation: Collective orientation Individualism orientation

Edward Hall: High-/Low-context orientation High or low context cultures depending on the degree to which meaning comes from the settings or from the words being exchanged. High context communication Low context communication See table 3-6 on p.80