Business Across Culture

Running head: BUSINESS ACROSS CULTURE
Business across culture
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

BUSINESS ACROSS CULTURE
Table of Contents
Introduction:...............................................................................................................................2
Discussion:.................................................................................................................................2
Critical assessment of Hofstede model of national culture:.......................................................2
Explaining the criticism of the model:.......................................................................................5
Identification of an example of cross border business development:........................................6
Assessment of national culture in influencing the behavior and actions of organization:.........7
Explaining the issues faced by Bright Food Group based on Hofstede dimension:..................8
Assessment of national culture inventory:.................................................................................9
Conclusion:..............................................................................................................................11
References list:.........................................................................................................................12

BUSINESS ACROSS CULTURE
Introduction:
The report is prepared to demonstrate the understanding of the dimension of the
Hofstede model of national culture. In this regard, a detailed explanation has been conducted
that includes the development of the model and the criticism faced by the model. Explanation
of the model has been done by illustrating few cross country comparison that has helped in
gaining an in depth detail of the model. In addition to this, the report also elucidates the
development of cross border business and evaluating the impact of the national cultural
differences on such business. Such development of business is evaluated in terms of two
dimensions that are national culture and organizational culture inventory. National culture
where the business has been expanded is explained in term of the cultural challenges faced
and its outcome and how the model assisted in determining the failure or success of such
business (Almklov et al. 2018). Furthermore, the culture inventory of organization is
explained in terms of their role in determining the failure and success of the business.
Discussion:
Critical assessment of Hofstede model of national culture:
A framework that revolves around the cross cultural communication is constituted in
the cultural dimension theory of Hofstede. The impact of culture that is ingrained in the
society on the member values of the society is collectively portrayed by the dimensions of the
model. In addition to this, the relationship between the behavior and values are described
using the structure that is based on the factor analysis. The dimension of culture forms an
important facet as far as international expansion or business is concerned. Managers are able
to successfully sail and understand across the international business market by gaining the

BUSINESS ACROSS CULTURE
knowledge about the different feature of business that is views in the different culture of
business (Schnackenberg and Tomlinson 2016).
The Hofstede model was the outcome of the factor analysis that was done on the
employee’s value system at IBM between the years 1967 and 1973 at the global level. The
model proposed four dimensions originally and fifth dimension and sixth dimension was
devised by Hofstede. Explanation of the dimensions of the model is done by illustrating the
country comparison between Chin and United Kingdom (Boateng et al. 2017). The six
cultural dimensions of Hofstede model are explained below.
Power distance- The consequence of inequality of power relations in the society is
depicted by this dimension which varies depending upon the educational, social and
occupational level. The implication of the power inequality is that the powerless side
becomes the subordinate the side that is more powerful (Block and Walter 2017). UK has
lower ranking in the power distance index with a score of 35 which is indicative of the fact
that inequalities and ranking social estate between the people are low. On other hand, China
has higher ranking of this particular index at 80 which implies that the country accepts
inequality among people. ‘There is a polarization of superior subordinate relationship and the
formal authority influences the individual.
Uncertainty avoidance- This dimension depicts the attitude of society when they are
faced with an unclear, unstructured and unpredictable situation and focuses on the tolerance
of ambiguity and uncertainty within a society. Both the countries that is UK AND china
scored low on this particular dimension at the value of 35 and 30. The Chinese and British
people do not care about what brings to them and the affecting results do not influence them.
However, the absolute true and fair view and more conformity are respected by the British
people more than Chinese (Qiu and Homer 2018).