Hofstede Culture Dimension | Essay

qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvb
nmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxc
vbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklz
xcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghj
klzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdf
ghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopas
dfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiop
asdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui
opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwerty
uiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwe
rtyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq
wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbn
mqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcv
bnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzx
cvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjkl
zxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfgh
jklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdf
Management

Contents
Introduction................................................................................................................................4
Hofstede theory on cultural dimension......................................................................................4
Influence of the national culture on the five bases of power of French & Raven’s...................5
Argument based on the efficiency level of power use in change programs of Australia and
Singapore....................................................................................................................................6
Conclusion..................................................................................................................................7
References..................................................................................................................................8

Introduction
In the essay, discussion has been carried on the organisation change management. Essay
starts by doing the comparison between Australia and Singapore based on Hofstede culture
dimension. This cultural dimension gives the framework for cross cultural communication.
This theory directly provides the culture influence of the society on member’s value and
represents how value if directly relating with the behaviour (Ferdman, Bernardo, 2018, 157-
167). In addition to this, paper also discusses how national culture tends to influence the five
power bases. As per French and Raven, power has distinct forms. These forms have been
described as the power base including referent, legitimate, reward, coercive as well as expert.
In the report, further argument has been done on the effectiveness of power usage in change
programs at the time any organisation change in Australia and Singapore.
Hofstede theory on cultural dimension
As per Schein, (2017) comparison done on the Hofstede cultural dimension between
Australia and Singapore is based on the six dimensions includes individualism, power
distance, masculinity, individualism, uncertainty avoidance, indulgence and long-term
orientation.
Power distance: it is said to be the extent in which less powerful people of the organisation
expect that there is no equal distribution of power in organisation. in this dimension,
Singapore has scored 74 where Singapore organisations tend to experience the power
centralisation where managers relying on the rules and bosses implemented. Employees also
have expectation to receive the orders from their manager for their task performance. Due to
this, Singapore has high power distance index. As compare to Singapore, Australia score is
low. Australian organisations have established the hierarchy. Mangers also rely on the
individual employees as well team for expertise. This helps in building trust among the
employees that their efforts are also valued in the organisation. At the same time, supervisors
always remain accessible for their employees. Managers as well as employees expect to
consult by sharing the information. In this way, communication in Australia seen to be
informal, direct as well as participative.
Individualism: it refers to the interdependence that is maintained among the members.
Singapore tends to score around 20 in this dimension by identifying as the collectivistic

society. In Singapore, person is not seen as the individual but treated as the organisational
member. In this, communication remain indirectly and the group harmony is maintained by
avoiding the entire conflicts. In this way, politeness is preceded on honest feedbacks. In
addition to this, managers are required to be maintaining respectability and calmness. As
compare to Singapore, Australia scores around 90 and seen as the individualist culture. There
are high expectation from the employees to show their initiatives (Anderson and Donald,
2016).
Masculinity: this dimension deals with the issue that tends to motivate people by effectively
by defining the masculinity. In this regard, Singapore has scored around 48 and more inclined
on the feminine side. In the business enterprise, being modest and humble is significant
criterion. As compare to Singapore, Australia scores around 61 by representing the
masculinity society. People behaviour is directly based on the share value for bringing the
best among employees. Australians are also proud of their achievements and success that
helps in offering promotion. At the same time, conflicts are also solved at the individual level
(Beugelsdijk and Welzel 2018, 1469-1505).
Uncertainty avoidance: it is said to be the extent by which members of any particular culture
feels threatened by creating unknown situation and beliefs. In this dimension, Singapore has
scored around 8 because the people of Singapore abide by different rules due to high power
distance index. As compare to Singapore, Australia scores close to 51 (Karin et al.2014, 55-
77).
Long-term orientation: as per this dimension: it is quite significant for the society to maintain
some of the links with past at the time of dealing with challenge for past as well as future. In
this dimension, Singapore has scored around 72 which directly depicts the cultural qualities
of Singapore in order to support the investment including thrift, slow results as well as
sustained efforts. As compare to Singapore, Australia has scored around 21 in this dimension.
This shows the normative culture in which people put strong concern with absolute truth
(Omar, 2017, 92-115).
Influence of the national culture on the five bases of power of French & Raven’s
Legitimate: it refers to the power due to someone organisational position or role. Therefore,
the legitimacy of boss at the time of assigning office, teacher at the time of grades assigning,
and police officer at the time of arresting citizen are some of the example of legitimate