Individualism/Collectivism in 10 minutes Geert Hofstede August 2014

Origin of the terms “individualism” and “collectivism” Both terms were used in the 19th century for political ideologies, strongly value-laden In a 1920s publication they were presented as opposites In the 1960s “individualism” emerged also in personality psychology, “collectivism” did not Hofstede chose “individualism versus collectivism” as a dimension of differences between national societies, already described under different names by sociologists

Individualism/Collectivism as a societal culture dimension Individualism: A society in which the ties between individuals are loose: everyone is expected to look after self and immediate family only Collectivism: A society in which individuals from birth onwards are part of strong in-groups

Individualist societies Collectivist societies “We” identity Exclusionism: others classified as in- or outgroup Competition between “tribes” Relations before task High-context communication (many things are obvious) In-group harmony must be maintained Individualist societies “I” identity Universalism: others classified as individuals Competition between individuals Task before relations Low-context communication (everything must be specified) Confrontations can be healthy

Measuring the position of a society on the Ind/Col dimension A society’s position between individualism and collectivism can only be measured relative to other societies This position is expressed in an Individualism Index score (IDV) IDV values have been plotted on a scale from 0 to 100; scores close to 0 stand for the most collectivist, scores close to 100 for the most individualist society

Some Individualism Index (IDV) scores, out of 76 High 91 USA 90 Australia 89 Britain 80 Netherlands 74 Denmark 71 France 67 Germany Low 51 Spain 48 India 46 Japan 39 Russia 38 Arab ctrs 30 Mexico 20 China

Some examples of what these IDV scores correlate with Collectivist societies Lower per capita GNI (poorer) Less press freedom Human Rights less respected Lower divorce rates Older husbands, younger wives Slower pace of life Use of the word “I” avoided Use of social media guided by in-group Individualist societies Higher per capita GNI (richer) More press freedom Human Rights more respected Higher divorce rates Smaller age differences between spouses Faster pace of life Frequent use of the word “I” Active search in social media

Individualism versus Power Distance The Power Distance and Individualism/Collectivism scores are negatively correlated: low PDI societies score more often individualist, more high PDI societies score collectivist However, this is mainly an effect of national wealth or poverty: IDV is positively, PDI negatively correlated with wealth If we compare rich with rich and poor with poor societies, the negative correlation between IDV and PDI almost disappears So Hofstede treats these as two separate dimensions In the USA, some authors distinguish “horizontal” and “vertical” individualism. This is a combination of IDV and PDI

Do IDV scores change over time ? Like power distance values, individualism versus collectivism values are transferred from generation to generation Research by Sjoerd Beugelsdijk comparing answers to the same questions by two successive generations 30 years apart shows a modest worldwide shift towards individualism However, the position of countries relative to each other remained the same; and this is what the scores are based on Like in the case of power distance, country differences expressed in the IDV scores tend to be rooted in history So, these scores too can be assumed to be stable over time