(PDF) A comparison of Hofstede Cultural Dimension
Added on 2021-04-21
12 Pages3069 Words192 Views
Leadership ManagementProfessional Development
|
|
|
Running head: COMPARISON OF TWO COUNTRIES USING HOFSTEDECOMPARISON OF TWO COUNTRIES USING HOFSTEDE Name of the Student Name of the University Author Note
COMPARISON OF TWO COUNTRIES USING HOFSTEDE1Introduction Power can be defined as the ability of a person to influence others in the organization.This mainly refers to the capacity of the person to affect the ways by which his subordinatesbehave in an organization. This is mainly related to an exchange relationship that deals withthe transactions that occur between the agents and the targets. The agent is referred to aperson who uses this power and the target is the person who is on the receiving end of thepower (Bakir et al 2016). Change implementation can be influenced by the power of the managers that they areable to exert on the subordinates. The managers in this case can also be termed as changeagents and they mainly facilitate the strategic transformation of an organization. The mostimportant quality of a change agent is power. The leaders or the managers need to show theirpower and use it in the right manner to implement the change in the organizationssuccessfully. The power that is used by the managers needs to be of the right type so that theemployees comply with the instructions that are given to them (Beugelsdijk et al. 2015).The perspectives of power can be defined as the different contrasting andincompatible concepts related to power. The three dimensions of power are mainly,subjective and objective power, power as influence, power as ability and power-to andpower-over. The perspectives of power are considered to be useful for the organization.The essay will be based on the analysis of the different types of power that can beused by the managers of the organization to implement any strategy or bring a change in theprocesses. The Hofstede model will be used to compare the cultures that are followed in theorganizations in Australia and Singapore.
COMPARISON OF TWO COUNTRIES USING HOFSTEDE2Analysis of Hofstede Model As discussed by, Brouthers et al. (2016), the Hofstede’s cultural dimensionframework is mainly related to cross-cultural communication and this theory has beendeveloped by Geert Hofstede. This describes the ways by which the culture followed in aparticular society can affect the values of the members. The relation of these values to thebehaviour of the members of that society is derived from the factor analysis process. Theoriginal framework developed by Hofstede depicted four major dimensions which could helpin the analysis of the cultural values which includes, individualism-collectivism, powerdistance, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity-femininity. This theory is mainly used in theresearch related international management, cross-cultural psychology and cross-culturalcommunication. The Hofstede analysis is mainly used for the purpose of identifying thedifferences between the national cultures of the countries. The differences between thecultures and the values of different countries can be analysed by using the Hofstede model(Clinton 2017). The index of the six dimensions of Hofstede model determines thedifferences in the cultures that are followed in the countries. The six major components of the Hofstede model are,1st dimension – Power Distance – Power distance is mainly related to the inequalityof power between the supervisors and the subordinates.2nd dimension – Uncertainty avoidance – This dimension is related to the extent upto which the members of a particular society are able to cope with the uncertainty that canoccur in the future.3rd dimension – Individualism vs. Collectivism – This dimension is related to thelevel up to which the individuals in the society are interested in the formation of groups.
COMPARISON OF TWO COUNTRIES USING HOFSTEDE34th dimension – Masculinity vs. Femininity – This dimension is related to thedistribution of the emotional roles between the different genders.5th dimension – Long-term vs. short term orientation – This dimension is based onthe orientation of the individuals towards a particular long-term or short-term goal.6th dimension – Indulgence vs. restraint – This dimension in mainly based on thehappiness level of a particular society (Marieke 2015).Sources of power The five different sources power are as follows,Coercive Power – Coercive power is mainly derived from the ability of the person toinfluence others with the help of threats, sanctions or punishments. This power is thereforerelated to the ability of the person to fire, punish or reprimand the other employees orsubordinates of the organizations. This helps in controlling the behaviour of the employees inthe company.Reward Power – This power is related to the ability of the person to affect theallocation of the incentives of the organization. These incentives consist of increments ofsalary, promotions and performance appraisals. Reward power can be used to motivate theemployees so that they improve their performance (Lauren, Mathieu and Kukenberger 2016).Legitimate Power – Legitimate power is derived from a person who holds a positionin the hierarchy of an organization. This type of power can also be termed as positionalpower. The positional power of legitimate power can be exercised efficiently only if theperson has earned the power in a legitimate manner.
End of preview
Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.
Related Documents
Business Across Culturelg...
|16
|4392
|42
Hofstede’s Cultural Dimesnion and Five Bases of Powerlg...
|9
|2950
|83
Cross Cultural Management: Understanding Cultural Differences in Canada and South Africalg...
|13
|3432
|423
Managing Across Cultures: Analysis of Hofstede's Modellg...
|9
|2036
|90
Cross-Cultural Management in Businesslg...
|20
|4585
|36
Marketing across Cultures: A Comparison of Cross-Cultural Analysis Techniques and Analysis of China and UKlg...
|8
|2008
|329