1. Chapter Two: 2.1 COMPARING CULTURES
INTRODUCTION
COMPARATIVE MODELS
COMPARING THE INFLUENCES OF CONTEXT
COMPARING STATUS AND FUNCTION
COMPARING VALUES IN THE WORKPLACE
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE MANAGER
SUMMARY
EXERCISE.

2. Chapter Two: 2.2 KLUCKHOHN AND STRODTBECK (1961)
designed an early comparative model, which has
been widely influential.
ORIENTATIONS: RANGE OF VARIATIONS:
Good (changeable/unchangeable)/
Evil (changeable/unchangeable)/
A mixture of good and evil
Dominant / In harmony / Subjugation
Lineal (hierarchical) / Collateral
(collectivist) / Individualist
What is the nature of people?
2. What is the person’s
relationship to nature?
What is the person’s
relationship to other people?

3. (2.2) ORIENTATIONS: RANGE OF VARIATIONS: What is the modality of
human activity?
What is the temporal focus of
6. What is the conception of space?
ORIENTATIONS: RANGE OF VARIATIONS:
Doing / Being / Containing
Future / Present / Past
Private / Public / Mixed.

4. Chapter Two: 2.3 HALL (1976) HIGH-CONTEXT CULTURES
RELATIONSHIPS (both positive and negative) are relatively LONG LASTING
because so much is communicated by SHARED CODE, communication is economical, fast, and efficient – in a routine situation
people in AUTHORITY are PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE for the actions of subordinates

5. (2.3)
AGREEMENTS (between members) tend to be SPOKEN rather then written
INSIDERS and OUTSIDERS are closely DISTINGUISHED
LOW CONTEXT CULTURES have the opposite
characteristics.

6. Chapter Two: 2.4 HOFSTEDE (2001)
Cultures are compared on five dimensions:
POWER DISTANCE; the distance between individuals at different levels of a hierarchy
UNCERTAINTY AVOIDANCE; more or less need to avoid uncertainty
INDIVIDUALISM / COLLECTIVISM; the relations between the individual and his/her fellows
MASCULINITY / FEMINITY; the division of roles, and achievement/service values in society
CONFUCIAN (work) DYNAMISM; temporal orientation.

7. Chapter Two: 2.5 STRENGTHS and WEAKNESSES of HOFSTEDE’s (2001) model
the INFORMANT POPULATION (IBM employees) is relatively controlled
the DIMENSIONS tap into deep cultural values and make significant comparisons between national cultures
the connotations of each dimension are RELEVANT to management
no other study compares so many national cultures in so much detail. This is THE BEST THERE IS.

8. (2.5)
WEAKNESSES
it assumes that the NATIONAL TERRITORY and the limits of the culture group correspond
informants were drawn from only ONE COMPANY
possible BIAS in the questionnaire responses
TECHNICAL difficulties; e.g., some connotations overlap
definitions of the DIMENSIONS
AGE of the model?? (see Chapter Three)
problems inherent in ALL COMPARATIVE models of culture.