Cross-Cultural Analysis – are traditional techniques such as Hofstede, Wills et al, Hall and Hall, Trompenaars still relevant in the 21^st Century?”

This particular report would essentially examine the way how a diverse strategy could be adopted for conducting cross-cultural assessment and developing knowledge related to social as well as cultural disparities. Within the functioning sphere the marketers have employed methods for comparing and contracting customer marketplace and customer behavior across diverse nations and cultures. The techniques mentioned in this particular report include Hall and Hall (1987), Hofstede (1984,1994) as well as Trompenaars (1993).

All through this report an examination would be carried out for showing several different methods that have proved effective in developing this particular report. In addition, taking into consideration the Cross-Cultural Analysis technique, all the mainstream methods are even now applicable in present day’s globalised sphere. The Global marketplaces are modifying, making it vital for nations to comprehend domestic culture as well as the host nation culture. Moreover, culture is considered as being an important subject at the time when considering globalization for the reason that it enables corporations to grow their global existence by properly comprehending what actually will be applicable in their specific society and living standard.

Moving ahead, the model of cultural dimensions proposed by Hofstede’s (1980) is an important illustration to note since it was the foremost step engaged in sound cross-cultural management. Moreover, the mindfulness that cultural variances prevail and home approaches might be unsuccessful within host nations. Digital techniques along with digital media are greatly altering the surroundings wherein companies interrelate with the buyers (Nam, H. and Kannan, P. K. 2020)

Taking a step ahead, Gerard Hendrik Hofstede is basically a Dutch social psychologist, highly renowned for groundbreaking research and examination related to cross-cultural groups as well as companies. His study was directed towards staff members of IBM. He highly believed in the model of the 6 diverse aspects of the national culture. Also, he developed this particular model for the purpose of understanding the alterations in culture across diverse nations and an approach of conducting operations across several diverse cultures. (Hofstede Insights, 2020)

Hofstede six factors, which describe culture include:

1. Power Distance Index

Power distance basically involves the way in which members within the society feel understanding that members of the society that are less powerful expect and accept that control and power is unequally distributed. Hofstede holds the view that in individuals following a hierarchical order wherein everyone holds some place and doesn’t require justification. Within nations having low Power Distance, individuals are likely to balance the power distribution and need justification for power inequalities. Nations such as China as well as Egypt are placed at a high index of Power Distance.

• Collectivism vs. Individualism

Individualism is considered as the significance of other individuals within the society and the inclination of just considering themselves as well as their family. Moreover, collectivism is frequently considered as being a family model within society wherein people could expect their friends or relatives to look after them. Nations such as the United States are likely to be highly acquainted with individualism for the reason that they want everybody to look after themselves.

• Uncertainty Avoidance Index

Nations having high uncertainty avoidance index include a society wherein individuals don’t prefer taking risks and consider safety and security in daily life. Nations having a greater rank frequently encourage self-interest instead of group interest (Go.gale.com, 2019)

• Femininity vs. Masculinity

Hofstede’s theory stated that the roles are quite diverse within diverse cultures; males are regarded effective for the community for the reason that they hold low emotions that involves tougher decisions. Moreover, femininity could be seen as caring as well as willing to cooperate. nations such as Japan are regarded as being a highly masculine nation, nevertheless nations like Sweden is regarded as being extremely feminine.

• Short-Term vs. Long-Term Orientation

The Uncertainty Avoidance involves the way in which people respond towards a society being rough with vagueness. Nations having a high Uncertainty Avoidance ensure behaviour and beliefs as well as are also intolerant of unorthodox conduct and thoughts. Such nations frequently require several policies for constraining uncertainty. Nations having a low Uncertainty Avoidance are likely to hold a highly relaxed outlook wherein practice is considered above morals, tolerance for indecision is acknowledged and the requirement for guidelines for constraining vagueness is marginal.

• Restraint vs. Indulgence

The Indulgence aspect has been added new in the framework. This particular aspect refers to the level to which individuals attempt to have control over their impulses and desires, grounded upon the manner in which they were actually raised. Equitably weak control is termed as being Indulgence and comparatively stronger control is considered as being Restraint. Moreover, cultures could be considered as being Restrained or Indulgent. Indulgence refers to a society, which enables comparatively free fulfilment of rudimentary as well as natural human desires associated with enjoying living. Further, restraint is considered as a society, which actually overpowers fulfilment of wants and controls it through severe social standards.

Edward T. Hall theory

Edward T. Hall was highly renowned for developing the contexting framework within the cultural communication (1976). Moreover, his approach was directed towards identifying high-context as well as low-context within cultural communication. He developed the model of culture-grounded communication patterns, interpreting the way individuals within diverse nations decode messages grounded upon their cultural needs and expectations. High context culture is likely to hold a highly holistic approach of perception while in case of lower context it is likely to being linear with respect to thinking manner. Hall was of the view that cultures can be easily aligned from extremely LC towards HC cultures.

Trompenaars’ model of national culture

Trompenaars’ framework essentially refers to a model directed towards cross-cultural communication applicable for standard management and business. This particular model was an advancement of Hofstede model, nevertheless not all aspect could be substantiated. His database includes around 15,000 applicants. Few were even participants of the researcher’s cross-cultural training initiative. While, rest were staff members placed within 30 different corporations within 50 diverse nations. There are basically five groups including the manner in which individuals handle one another’s environment and time. (Trompenaars, 1985)

Universalism	Individuals lay a high significance upon values, rules and lastly, obligations. They attempt to manage impartially with individuals grounded upon such regulations, nevertheless regulations come before relations	Assist people in understanding the way their efforts are connected with beliefs and values.Providing clear directions, procedures, and actions.Keeping promises and being constant.Giving individuals time for making judgments.Using an objective procedure for making decisions and explaining decisions in case if others are engaged.
Particularism	Individuals hold the view that every situation and relation outlines the rules, which they actually live by. The response towards any circumstance might modify, grounded upon what is taking place during the moment and who is engaged.	Giving individuals independence for making their individual decisions.Respecting others’ requirements at the time when making decisions.Being highly flexible in the way one makes decisions.Taking quality time for building relations and getting to know individuals to ensure that one could effectively comprehend their wants.Highlight significant policies and rules, which must be followed.
Individualism	Individualism implies towards individuals considering themselves as being individuals, whereas communitarianism implies towards individuals considering themselves being fraction of a group. The research by Trompenaar’s proposed that cultures might alter more speedily than we actually realize. Trompenaars examination highlighted Mexico as well as the former communist nations of Czechoslovakia along with the Soviet Union hold high individualism. This diverges with earlier research by Hofstede, that discovered such nations being collectivist and signifies the complex and dynamic nature of culture. Nations having high communitarianism take in Germany, France, China, Japan and lastly, Singapore.

Q2

The Cultural Dimensions model proposed by Hofstede could be considerable in case of examining a nation’s culture. Moreover, the Hofstede’s cultural dimensions can also be condemned on the grounds of information being out-of-date and surveys can be supposed as being an ineffective means of measuring culture. Moreover, the IBM is too non-operational. Hofstede criticized, Hampden-Turner and Trompenaars, particularly Hofstede (1996) asserted that Trompenaars theory is not sustained through database. Additionally, Hofstede suggested that two aspects can be recognized, both which connected with his framework’s Individualism aspect. Turner &Trompenaars (1997) made a decision of changing their tactic through means of comparing several suppositions associated with Hofstede’s efforts as well as their own. The approach of Hofstede is related to the examination of the forces of national culture that is quit diverse from Hampden-Turner and Trompenaars since they are highly concentrated towards the procedure of cultural development. Trompenaars framework is ineffective in recognizing the individual traits of behavior. The framework displays the variance in cultures nevertheless doesn’t offer an elucidation on ways of working with diverse cultures.

Conclusion

To conclude, it can be clearly stated that the Hofstede’s framework offers procedures related to the examination of national culture. However, it greatly lacks the profundity in few spheres when contrasting it with other investigators like Trompenaars and Hall that condemn one another’s framework like the research process. Nevertheless, Trompenaars as well as Hampden-Turner put forward an approach that outlines national culture along with the way it could be computed at the time when examining the study it asserts that cultural variances are important and reconciliation of cultural disparities could result in competitive benefit within corporations occurring in globalization. Hampden-Turner’s and Trompenaars framework offers staff members that handle cross- cultural relationships, a framework for better understanding behaviors and value sets. This develops a fundamental standard and inevitability for companies looking for measuring it. On the whole, the frameworks have been established as being effective in assisting individuals in understanding cross culture since they have assisting in developing present day’s world through establishing the procedures. But, although they have shown the course beforehand establishing guidelines, it’s a question of is such methods are even now appropriate in the 21^st century community since the sphere is altering and several nations have adjusted themselves with the developing sphere. Such approaches will be highly advantageous within nations that aren’t in line with the present arena.

References

Amazon.com. (2019). [online] Available at: https://www.amazon.com/Management-across-Cultures-Developing-Competencies/dp/1316604039 [Accessed 15 Nov. 2019].

Eringa, K., Caudron, L., Rieck, K., Xie, F. and Gerhardt, T. (2015). How relevant are Hofstede’s dimensions for inter-cultural studies? A replication of Hofstede’s research among current international business students. Research in Hospitality Management, 5(2), pp.187-198.

Geert Hofstede. (2019). Geert Hofstede site CV work life theory 6 dimensions of culture Gert Jan. [online] Available at: https://geerthofstede.com/landing-page/ [Accessed 15 Nov. 2019].

Google Books. (2019). Cross-Cultural Analysis. [online] Available at: https://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=CU2BXnffuFoC&oi=fnd&pg=PR12&dq=cross+cultural+analysis+hofstede&ots=-5mDYobc3n&sig=1ZmEdfS9XqbeUsxKoez1TvSBTRo#v=onepage&q=cross%20cultural%20analysis%20hofstede&f=false [Accessed 15 Nov. 2019].

Hofstede Insights. (2019). Compare countries – Hofstede Insights. [online] Available at: https://www.hofstede-insights.com/product/compare-countries/ [Accessed 15 Nov. 2019].

Mulder, P. (2019). Trompenaars Cultural Dimensions, an analysis of 7 dimensions | ToolsHero. [online] toolshero. Available at: https://www.toolshero.com/communication-skills/trompenaars-cultural-dimensions/ [Accessed 15 Nov. 2019].

Www-sciencedirect-com.ezproxy.derby.ac.uk. (2019). www-sciencedirect-com.ezproxy.derby.ac.uk. [online] Available at: https://www-sciencedirect-com.ezproxy.derby.ac.uk/science/article/pii/S0148296306001974?via%3Dihub [Accessed 15 Nov. 2019].

Shah, Abhay. “Uncertainty avoidance index and its cultural/country implications relating to consumer behavior.” Journal of International Business Research, vol. 11, no. 1, 2012, p. 119+. Gale General OneFile, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A289620980/ITOF?u=derby&sid=ITOF&xid=60739cc2. Accessed 22 Nov. 2019.

Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations Across Nations.  Second Edition, Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications.

Hofstede Insights. (2020). About Geert Hofstede – Hofstede Insights. [online] Available at: https://www.hofstede-insights.com/about-us/about-geert-hofstede/ [Accessed 28 Feb. 2020].

References

Gale business insights handbook of cultural transformation. (2013). Choice Reviews Online, 51(04), pp.51-2176-51-2176.

Go.gale.com. (2019). shibboleth.derby.ac.uk. [online] Available at: [Accessed 22 Nov. 2019].

Google Books. (2019). The Future of Chinese Management. [online] Available at:[Accessed 22 Nov. 2019].

Steers, R.M. et al. (2013). Management Across Cultures: Developing Global Competencies. Cambridge University Press.

Aaker, J.L. & Maheswaran, D. (1997). The Effect of Cultural Orientation on Persuasion. The Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (3), 315-322

Nam, H. and Kannan, P. K. (2020) ‘Digital Environment in Global Markets: Cross-Cultural Implications for Evolving Customer Journeys’, Journal of International Marketing, 28(1), pp. 28–47. doi: 10.1177/1069031X19898767.

Introduction

This report will review how a different approach can be used to carry out a cross-cultural analysis and develop an understanding of social and cultural differences. Amidst the working world marketers have adapted methods to compare and contract consumer market and buyer behavior across cultures and countries. The methods noted within the report are Hall and Hall (1987) Hofstede (1984,1994) Trompenaars (1993).

The paper aims to discuss about the classic CCA techniques mentioned by Hofstede, Hall and Hall, and Wills et al. The selected perspective for this study is to conduct a comparative analysis of the classical and modern operational theories and models of CCA. The comparisons help to understand the strength and weaknesses of cross-cultural models to infuse improvisation for organisational development. Along with this, the study will provide crucial recommendations to resolve the identified weaknesses within the models.

Critical Evaluation

Hofstede’s (1980) model of cultural dimensions is a significant example to note as it was the first step of effective cross-cultural management. The host countries fail to acknowledge the existing concept of cross-cultural analysis for business organizations. Advanced digital technologies help the business organisation to form effective communications with the consumers (Nam, H. and Kannan, P. K. 2020)

Gerard Hendrik Hofstede is a Dutch social psychologist, who is well known for his pioneering research on cross-cultural groups and organizations. His research was focused on employees of IBM. Hofstede mentioned six different dimensions about the national cross-culturalism. Hofstede created this framework to understand the differences in culture across countries and a method to conduct business across different cultures. (Hofstede Insights, 2020)

Hofstede six categories that define culture are –

Power Distance Index

It refers to the inequal distribution of the power among the powerful and powerless group of communities prevalent among the society. Hofstede believed in people accepting a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place and does not need justification. In countries with low Power Distance, people tend to equalise the distribution of power and demand justification for inequalities of power. Countries like China and Egypt are at a high-Power Distance index.

Collectivism vs. Individualism

Individualism refers to the one particular member is looking after the self or the family members only. In this regard, the sense of community participation is ignored. Collectivism is often seen as a family framework in society in which individuals can expect their relatives or friends to look after them. Countries like the USA tend to be very familiar with individualism as they prefer everyone to care for themselves.

Uncertainty Avoidance Index

Uncertainty avoidance index (UAI) refers to the measure of the society’s tolerance for uncertainty and ambiguity. This index refers to the comfortable state where the members of the society can manage the unstructured or any chaotic situation.

Femininity vs. Masculinity

Hofstede mentioned different cultures play different roles in constructing the community culture; masculinity forms the stubbornness and rigidity of the community on the other hand, femininity perceived as the granary of emotion and cooperation. countries like Japan are considered to be a very masculine country, however countries such as Sweden is considered highly feminine.

Short-Term vs. Long-Term Orientation

The Uncertainty Avoidance is how the public react to a society’s feeling for uncertainty. Countries with a high Uncertainty Avoidance maintain beliefs and behaviour and are intolerant of unorthodox behaviour and ideas. These countries often need many rules to constrain uncertainty.

Countries with a low Uncertainty Avoidance tend have a more relaxed attitude in which practice counts more than principles, tolerance for uncertainty is accepted and the need for rules to constrain uncertainty is marginal.

Restraint vs. Indulgence

The Indulgence dimension is new to the model. This dimension is the extent to which people try to control their desires and impulses, based on the way they were raised. Fairly weak control is called Indulgence and relatively strong control is called Restraint. Cultures can be described as Indulgent or Restrained. Indulgence stands for a society that allows relatively free gratification of basic and natural human drives related to enjoying life and having fun. Restraint is a society that suppresses gratification of needs and regulates it by means of strict social norms.

Figure 1: Hofstede’s model of Cultural difference

Source: (Hofstede Insights. 2019)

Edward T. Hall theory

Edward T. Hall was known for creating the contexting model in cultural communication (1976). The theory differentiate the high-context and low-contexts of effective communication. Hall created the framework of culture-based communication styles, interpreting how people in different countries decode messages based on their cultural expectations and needs. High context culture tends to have a more holistic way of thinking whereas lower context tends to be linear on the way of thinking. Hall believed that cultures could be lined up from extremely LC) to extremely HC cultures.

Trompenaars’ model of national culture

Trompenaars’ model is a framework for cross-cultural communication applied to general business and management. This model was the upgraded version of Hofstede’s model. However, there are certain difference between both of the classical and modern CCA models. His research work comprised of more than 1500 respondents. Some were participants in the author’s cross-cultural training programs; others were employees in 30 companies in 50 different countries. There are five orientations covering the ways people deal with each other time and environment. (Trompenaars, 1985)

Universalism	People place a high importance on laws, rules, values, and obligations. They try to deal fairly with people based on these rules, but rules come before relationships	Help people understand how their work ties into their values and beliefs.Provide clear instructions, processes, and procedures.Keep promises and be consistent.Give people time to make decisions.Use an objective process to make decisions yourself, and explain your decisions if others are involved.
Particularism	People believe that each circumstance, and each relationship, dictates the rules that they live by. Their response to a situation may change, based on what’s happening in the moment, and who’s involved.	Give people autonomy to make their own decisions.Respect others’ needs when you make decisions.Be flexible in how you make decisions.Take time to build relationships and get to know people so that you can better understand their needs.Highlight important rules and policies that need to be followed.
Individualism	Individualism refers to people regarding themselves as individuals, while communitarianism refers to people regarding themselves as part of a group. Trompenaar’s research suggested cultures may change more quickly that we realize. Trompenaars research showed Mexico and the former communist countries of Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union have high levels of individualism. Mexico’s involvement in NAFTA the global economy could explain the shift from a communitarian culture. This contrasts with Hofstede’s earlier research, which found these countries to be collectivist, and shows the dynamic and complex nature of culture. Countries with high communitarianism include Germany, China, France, Japan, and Singapore.

Comparison of the Key perspectives

The model innovated by Hofstede is substantial when it is applied to analyze the country’s culture. His cultural dimensions of CCA is criticized as it includes outdated techniques of survey. It can be addressed as wrong tool to measure the culture. Along with this, this perspective is only limited for the IBM which is out of date in the recent periods of time. On the other hand, Hofstede claimed that the theory of Trompenaars is contradictory with his database. Along with this, he claimed that the dimensions mentioned by Trompenaars is correlated with his own model. Turner &Trompenaars (1997) decided to change their approach by contrasting a list of assumptions relating to Hofstede’s work and their own. Hofstede’s approach is about the analysis of the variables of national culture, which is different to Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner as they are more focused on the process of cultural creation. Trompenaars model fails to recognize the personal characteristics on behavior. The model shows the difference in cultures but does not provide an explanation on how to work with cultures.

However, from the personal opinion it can be said that the five dimensions mentioned by Hofstede is more reliable than Trompenaars. It can help the managers to organize the operational functionality and setting the behavior at the same point of view. The model tends to negate any one particular set of principles by the universe. It helps to acknowledge the wider and broader scope of the social and cultural environment with infusion of modern technology to incorporate cross-culturalism within the organisation.

Relevance and Conclusion

To conclude, it can be said that, Hofstede’s model provides guidelines on the analysis of national culture, however, it lacks depth in some areas when comparing it to other researchers such as Hall and Trompenaars. The later one criticizes each other’s model such as the procedure of the research. However, Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner provided a tool which explains national culture and how it can be measured- when looking at the study it suggests that cultural differences matter and that reconciling cultural differences can lead to competitive advantage in companies taking part in globalization. Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner’s model gives employees who deal with cross- cultural relations a tool/context to better understand value sets and behaviors. This creates a basic guideline and certainty to businesses looking to measure it. Overall, the models have been proven to work in helping people understand cross culture as they have helped to develop today’s world by setting the guidelines, however, though they have paved the way previously setting guidelines it is a question of whether these techniques are still relevant to a 21^st century society as the world is ever changing and many countries have adapted to the developing world, these methods would be most beneficial in countries which are not as well aligned with the modern world.

References

Amazon.com. (2019). [online] Available at: https://www.amazon.com/Management-across-Cultures-Developing-Competencies/dp/1316604039 [Accessed 15 Nov. 2019].

Eringa, K., Caudron, L., Rieck, K., Xie, F. and Gerhardt, T. (2015). How relevant are Hofstede’s dimensions for inter-cultural studies? A replication of Hofstede’s research among current international business students. Research in Hospitality Management, 5(2), pp.187-198.

Gale business insights handbook of cultural transformation. (2013). Choice Reviews Online, 51(04), pp.51-2176-51-2176.

Geert Hofstede. (2019). Geert Hofstede site CV work life theory 6 dimensions of culture Gert Jan. [online] Available at: https://geerthofstede.com/landing-page/ [Accessed 15 Nov. 2019].

Google Books. (2019). Cross-Cultural Analysis. [online] Available at: https://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=CU2BXnffuFoC&oi=fnd&pg=PR12&dq=cross+cultural+analysis+hofstede&ots=-5mDYobc3n&sig=1ZmEdfS9XqbeUsxKoez1TvSBTRo#v=onepage&q=cross%20cultural%20analysis%20hofstede&f=false [Accessed 15 Nov. 2019].

Hofstede Insights. (2019). Compare countries – Hofstede Insights. [online] Available at: https://www.hofstede-insights.com/product/compare-countries/ [Accessed 15 Nov. 2019].

Hofstede Insights. (2020). About Geert Hofstede – Hofstede Insights. [online] Available at: https://www.hofstede-insights.com/about-us/about-geert-hofstede/ [Accessed 28 Feb. 2020].

Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations Across Nations.  Second Edition, Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications.

Mulder, P. (2019). Trompenaars Cultural Dimensions, an analysis of 7 dimensions | ToolsHero. [online] toolshero. Available at: https://www.toolshero.com/communication-skills/trompenaars-cultural-dimensions/ [Accessed 15 Nov. 2019].

Shah, Abhay. “Uncertainty avoidance index and its cultural/country implications relating to consumer behavior.” Journal of International Business Research, vol. 11, no. 1, 2012, p. 119+. Gale General OneFile, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A289620980/ITOF?u=derby&sid=ITOF&xid=60739cc2. Accessed 22 Nov. 2019.

Www-sciencedirect-com.ezproxy.derby.ac.uk. (2019). www-sciencedirect-com.ezproxy.derby.ac.uk. [online] Available at: https://www-sciencedirect-com.ezproxy.derby.ac.uk/science/article/pii/S0148296306001974?via%3Dihub [Accessed 15 Nov. 2019].