Business Administration

ESSAY
Geert Hofstede

Contents
1.

Introduction............................................................................................................ 3
1.1.

2.

Presentation of Hofstedes life..............................................................................3

Hofstedes Cultural Dimensions Theory........................................................................4

2.1.

Hoftedes most important publications and quotes...................................................6

3.

Conclusion.............................................................................................................. 7

4.

References.............................................................................................................. 8

GEERT HOFSTEDE
1. Introduction

~2~

1.1.

Presentation of Hofstedes life

Gerard Hendrik (Geert) Hofstede (born 2 October 1928 in Haarlem) is a Dutch social
psychologist, former IBM employee, and Professor Emeritus of Organizational Anthropology
and International Management at Maastricht University in the Netherlands, well known for his
pioneering research on cross-cultural groups and organizations.
Born to Gerrit and Evertine G. (Veenhoven) Hofstede, Geert Hofstede attended schools in
The Hague and Apeldoorn, and received his high school diploma (Gymnasium Beta) in 1945. In
1953, Hofstede graduated from Delft Technical University with a M.Sc. in Mechanical
Engineering. After working in the industry for ten years, Hofstede entered part-time doctoral
study at Groningen University in The Netherlands, and received his PhD in social psychology
cum laude in 1967. His thesis was titled The Game of Budget Control.
Upon his graduation from Delft in 1953, Hofstede joined the Dutch military, working as a
technical officer in the Dutch army for two years. After leaving the military he worked in
industry from 1955 to 1965, starting as a factory hand in Amsterdam. In 1965 he started his
graduate study in Groningen and joined IBM International, working as a management trainer and
manager of personnel research. He founded and managed the Personnel Research Department. In
1980, Hofstede co-founded and became the first Director for the IRIC, the Institute for Research
on Intercultural Cooperation, located at Tilburg University since 1998.
Since his retirement in 1993, Hofstede has visited numerous universities worldwide to
educate students on his theoretical approaches and to continue his research in this field. He
currently is Professor Emeritus of Organizational Anthropology and International Management at
Maastricht University in the Netherlands, and serves as an extramural fellow of the Center of
Economic Research at Tilburg University in Tilburg, Netherlands.
Hofstede received many honorary awards, and in 2011 was made a Knight in the Order of
the Netherlands Lion (Orde van de Nederlandse Leeuw). He holds honorary doctorates from
seven universities in Europe, Nyenrode Business University, New Bulgarian University, Athens
University of Economics and Business, University of Gothenburg, University of Lige, ISM
University of Management and Economics, University of Pcs in 2009, and University of Tartu
in 2012. He also received honorary professorships at The University of Hong Kong 19922000;
the Beijing University of International Business and Economics (UIBE), Beijing, China; and the
Renmin University of China, Beijing, China.
In 1955, Hofstede married Maaike A. van den Hoek. Together, they have four sons: Gert-Jan
Hofstede, who is a population biologist and social scientist in information management; Rokus
Hofstede, who works as a translator; Bart Hofstede, who is a Cultural Counselor of the Kingdom
of the Netherlands in Berlin, and Gideon Hofstede, who works as an international marketeer. He
also has ten grandchildren. Gert-Jan has worked extensively with his father and co-authored
several works in the realm of culture study.

2. Hofstedes Cultural Dimensions Theory

~3~

Geert Hofstede is a renowned author who developed a model to describe various

cultural dimensions, and has researched issues relating to cultural differences (for example in
the GLOBE Project). Geert Hofstedes model was based on a study of IBM employees in
over fifty countries.
Dimensions of national cultures
Hofstede identified four dimensions that he labeled individualism, masculinity, power
distance, and uncertainty avoidance.

Power distance index (PDI): The Power Distance Index is defined as the extent to
which the less powerful members of organizations and institutions (like the family)
accept and expect that power is distributed unequally. In this dimension, inequality and
power is perceived from the followers, or the lower level. A higher degree of the Index
indicates that hierarchy is clearly established and executed in society, without doubt or
reason. A lower degree of the Index signifies that people question authority and attempt
to distribute power.

Individualism vs. collectivism (IDV): This index explores the degree to which people
in a society are integrated into groups. Individualistic societies have loose ties that often
only relates an individual to his/her immediate family. They emphasize the I versus the
we. Its counterpart, collectivism, describes a society in which tightly-integrated
relationships tie extended families and others into in-groups. These in-groups are laced
with undoubted loyalty and support each other when a conflict arises with another ingroup.

Index is defined as a society's tolerance for ambiguity, in which people embrace or

avert an event of something unexpected, unknown, or away from the status quo. Societies
that score a high degree in this index opt for stiff codes of behavior, guidelines, laws, and
generally rely on absolute Truth, or the belief that one lone Truth dictates everything and
people know what it is. A lower degree in this index shows more acceptance of differing
thoughts/ideas. Society tends to impose fewer regulations, ambiguity is more accustomed
to, and the environment is more free-flowing.

Masculinity vs. femininity (MAS): In this dimension, masculinity is defined as a

preference in society for achievement, heroism, assertiveness and material rewards for
success. Its counterpart represents a preference for cooperation, modesty, caring for the
weak and quality of life. Women in the respective societies tend to display different
values. In feminine societies, they share modest and caring views equally with men. In
more masculine societies, women are more emphatic and competitive, but notably less
emphatic than the men. In other words, they still recognize a gap between male and
female values. This dimension is frequently viewed as taboo in highly masculine
societies.

Long-term orientation vs. short-term orientation (LTO): This dimension associates

the connection of the past with the current and future actions/challenges. A lower degree
of this index (short-term) indicates that traditions are honored and kept, while

~4~

steadfastness is valued. Societies with a high degree in this index (long-term) views
adaptation and circumstantial, pragmatic problem-solving as a necessity. A poor country
that is short-term oriented usually has little to no economic development, while long-term
oriented countries continue to develop to a point.

Indulgence vs. restraint (IND): This dimension is essentially a measure of happiness;

whether or not simple joys are fulfilled. Indulgence is defined as a society that allows
relatively free gratification of basic and natural human desires related to enjoying life and
having fun. Its counterpart is defined as a society that controls gratification of needs
and regulates it by means of strict social norms. Indulgent societies believe themselves
to be in control of their own life and emotions; restrained societies believe other factors
dictate their life and emotions.

Power distance defines how social inequality is perceived and accepted in different
cultures. Hofstede (1997) explains how in high power distance cultures children are raised
with a great emphasis on respecting elders, which is carried through to adulthood.
Therefore organisations are more centralised, employees prefer a more autocratic leadership
style where subordinates are expected to be told what to do and there are wide wage gaps in
the hierarchical structure. On the other hand, in low power distance cultures inequality is
not desired, employees prefer to be consulted with regards to decision making and thus
prefer a more resourceful and democratic leader.
Individualism (versus collectivism) is the preference of people to belong to a loosely knit
society where importance is placed on the self and autonomy. In opposition, collectivist
structures place importance on interdependent social units such as the family, rather than on
the self. In individualist societies, employees require the freedom to work independently and
desire challenging work (which is more important than personal relationships) that will help
them reach self-actualisation. In collectivist cultures, unquestioned management structures are
responsible for the organisation of teams of employees and the cohesion of the collective.
According to Hofstede, masculinity represents cultures with distinct gender roles where
men focus on success, competition and rewards while women focus on tender values such as
quality of life and modesty. Femininity represents cultures where gender roles overlap. In
masculine cultures managers are defined as more assertive and decisive, whereas feminine
cultures breed more intuitive managers who negotiate disputes and encourage participation in
decisions.
A reason for the widespread adoption of Hofstedes classification of culture lies in the large
number of countries measured and the simplicity of his dimensions, which are straightforward
and appealing to both academic researchers and business people. Comparison of different models
for the purpose of measuring cultural distance for international marketing strategy shows that the
more recent cultural frameworks provide only limited advancements compared with Hofstedes
original work. None of the cultural models was developed for analysing consumer behaviour.
When using them, the manifestations of culture that are relevant for consumer behaviour have to
be selected and interpreted. Too often, cross-country research begins with a research instrument
without consideration of the underlying conceptual framework and research method focuses
almost exclusively on sophisticated statistical analyses. There is a variety of manifestations of
the Hofstede dimensions to consider before setting hypotheses. The next section describes the

~5~

manifestations of the five Hofstede dimensions that are most relevant to branding and
advertising. These elements are based on findings from cross-cultural psychology and metaanalysis of consumer behaviour data.
He has received much recognition for his work in cross-cultural analysis.
In cross-cultural research we have noted an advance of methodological techniques but less
conceptual analysis of cultural dimensions when for mulating hypotheses. Some research
questions ask for better understanding of how dimensional models work. Examples are the
question as to which cultural dimensions are especially relevant to advertising, and the
suggestion that cross-cultural studies that examine the impact of culture should actually measure
how the individual respondents stand on the cultural dimension investigated

2.1.

Hoftedes most important publications and quotes

His most notable work has been in developing cultural dimensions theory. Here he describes
national cultures as describable along six dimensions: Power Distance, Individualism,
Uncertainty avoidance, Masculinity, Long Term Orientation, and Indulgence vs. restraint. He is
known for his books Culture's Consequences and Cultures and Organizations: Software of the
Mind, co-authored with his son Gert Jan Hofstede
Hofstede's model explaining national cultural differences and their consequences, when
introduced in 1980, came at a time when cultural differences between societies had become
increasingly relevant for both economic and political reasons. The analysis of his survey data and
his claims led many management practitioners to embrace the model.
Culture is the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of
one group from another. --Geert Hofstede
Culture is more often a source of conflict than of synergy. Cultural differences are a
nuisance at best and often a disaster. Geert Hofstede
Studying culture without experiencing culture shock is like practicing swimming without
experiencing water. Geert Hofstede

~6~

3. Conclusion
It appears that Hofstedes cultural dimensions are still valid today, supported by the recent
GLOBE study. It can be concluded that cultures have different learned values and norms
which can determine actions and play a significant role in influencing business outcomes.
The number of cross-cultural consumer behaviour studies has been increasing over the years.
The Hofstede model of national culture has proved to be a useful instrument for understanding
consumer behaviour differences across cultures. Applying the model to branding and advertising,
which originally sought answers to work-related value differences, needs conceptual insight in
the various manifestations that are relevant to these business areas. This paper has reviewed
many recent studies that help gain conceptual insight.
Hofstede's work established a major research tradition in cross-cultural psychology and has
also been drawn upon by researchers and consultants in many fields relating to international
business and communication. The theory has been widely used in several fields as a paradigm for
research, particularly in cross-cultural psychology, international management, and cross-cultural
communication. It continues to be a major resource in cross-cultural fields. It has inspired a
number of other major cross-cultural studies of values, as well as research on other aspects of
culture, such as social beliefs

~7~

4. References

Hofstede, Geert, Culture's Consequences: comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and

organizations across nations, SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, California, 2001

http://www.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/11711_Chapter7.pdf

https://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/sites/podcasts/files/Writing_for_a_PurposeExplanation-Structure-Explanation1.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geert_Hofstede

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hofstede's_cultural_dimensions_theory

http://www.mariekedemooij.com/articles/demooij_2010_int_journal_adv.pdf

~8~