Critical Thinking Essay: Hofstede's Model and Cultural Differences

This essay critically analyzes Hofstede's model, focusing on its implications for understanding cultural differences in business scenarios. It explores how individuals from different countries adapt to new business and social environments, examining factors like individualism/collectivism, high/low context communication, power distance, and uncertainty avoidance. The essay references key articles to provide insights into the impact of these cultural dimensions on workplace dynamics, particularly within the hospitality sector. It highlights the importance of understanding these differences for effective management and cross-cultural communication, while also acknowledging the limitations of the model and the need for further research. The essay underscores the role of managers and employees in adapting to cultural differences for the betterment of the organization, providing a comprehensive overview of the model's relevance in today's globalized business environment.

Running head: CRITICAL THINKING
Critical Thinking
Name of Student
Name of University
Author Note

1
CRITICAL THINKING
The essay focuses on the implications of Hofstede’s model for understanding its
effectiveness in business scenarios. The focus is on the ways by which the cultures of people
belonging to different countries adjust when they relocate in a different business or social
environment. The essay analyses these differences and the impact it causes on the work life
of the individuals. The focus of the essay is the implications of four factors mentioned by
Hofstede. These factors include individual/collectivism factor, high and low context
communication, power distance and uncertainty avoidance. Analysis of these factors can help
in the identification of the cultures in different business context.
Bellamy, A.S., (2016). Hofstede's model: cultural differences in hospitality sector and
experiences of a migrant. Journal of Tourism and Hospitality, 5(5), 34-40.
The journal provides an understanding of the cultural differences that exist in the
hospitality sector. Hofstede’s model provides a clear understanding of the cultural differences
that exist in an organisation. This can be used to identify the behaviours of employees in a
hospitality sector and ensure that the model is represented in this sector. The viewpoints that
are derived from the article indicate the cultural implications that exist in the hospitality
sector. For this purpose, the journal article has researched hospitality sectors across New
Zealand. Employees working in these sectors are taken surveyed in order to understand the
rate at which cultural implications exist in the hospitality sector of the country. However, the
weakness of the article is that it does not provide comprehensive results about the
implications of cultural differences. Moreover, recommendations for improving this
difference are also not provided in the article. Nevertheless, the article is useful for the
research because it deals with the cultural model suggested by Hofstede. It provides valid
reason about the need to study the cultural differences and identify ways to implement it in a
hospitality context.

2
CRITICAL THINKING
Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online
readings in psychology and culture, 2(1), 8.
The article focuses on the cultural dimensions identified by Hofstede. The article
gives a brief overview of the cultural dimension model developed by Hofstede and the
implications it has on the modern business world. The ways by which cultures were
conceptualised and analysed based from one country to another is well defined in the article.
The article defines the fact that cultural dimensions depend upon the level of aggression that
exists in a person or in an ethnic group. These cultural dimensions can be related to
organisational culture in order to psychology and the behaviour of the people at the
workplace. The differences of value exist in the workplace that can be seen at the individual
level. The article fails to provide any sample size that has been interviewed in order to
identify the implications of cultural differences. However, the article also provides a clear
view of the value of culture and the position of the countries in terms of cultural identification
that may affect the workplace. The article also states that the cultural differences that exist in
the organisation cannot be clearly defined in the organisation. This is mainly because of the
fact that people in the organisation generally remain indiscreet about controversial aspects.
Gorodnichenko, Y., & Roland, G. (2012). Understanding the individualism-collectivism
cleavage and its effects: Lessons from cultural psychology. In Institutions and
comparative economic development, 5(1), 213-236.
Individualism and collectivism are one of the factors that determine Hofstede cultural
model. It defines the effectiveness of working in a group and working as individuals. The
article defines the effect it has on the long-run goals of an organisation. The article
establishes the fact that the concept of individualism and collectivism is the only factor that
helps an organisation to achieve its goals despite differences in cultural behaviour. This is

3
CRITICAL THINKING
mainly because of the fact that working for increasing the productivity of an organisation
either individually or as a group increases the value of the organisation. One of the major
differences that the article points out is the fact that individualism encourages innovation as it
provides extra monetary benefit to the person. However, collectivism encourages
coordination between the members so that a work can be done without stress on a particular
person. In either way, this particular difference in culture and its adaptation can benefit an
organisation. Thus, individualism has a positive effect on innovation that leads to attaining
long run goals of an organisation. The differences between the two cultures are significant in
understanding the differences that exist in the different levels of development.
Triandis, H. C. (2014). Individualism‐collectivism and personality. Journal of
personality, 69(6), 907-924.
The article states that individualism and collectivism are the most important form of
understanding culture in a workplace. The article focuses on analysing the differences and the
consequences it may have in an organisational scenario. The main difference is the fact that
collectivism culture is more inter-dependent than individualism. Such an aspect can be
utilised in an organisational setting that depends upon mass production. Individualism
focuses on attaining personal goals that help in the growth of an organisation. This difference
defines the working of these two cultures in an organisation. One of the major aspects that the
article provides is a clear understanding of the differences in culture by taking the example of
countries. This is an important factor for the research as the article helps to understand the
implications of individualism and collectivism in the hospitality sectors. The countries that
embrace individualism and collectivism are identified separately. This provides proper
knowledge of the differences that exist in the countries and the application of this in an
organisation. Apart from this, the two factors are subdivided into four sub-factors that define

4
CRITICAL THINKING
the logic behind the existence of dimensions in the workplace. Future aspects of the study are
provided that highlights the significance of this culture in a workplace.
Iorgulescu, M. C. (2014). The Impact of Management and Organizational Culture on
Creativity in the Hotel Industry. Amfiteatru Economic, 16(8), 1205.
The article sheds light on the management of culture that is required in a hospitality
sector. The cultural differences that exist in the hospitality sector due to the existence of
people from all over the world are analysed. The challenges regarding the cultural dimensions
are analysed and ways to mitigate the challenges are stated. For the purpose of the study, the
article focuses on hotels operated under the managerial contract and the units operated under
agreements on a franchise basis. The weakness though is the absence of specific hotel. The
study is based on the general implication of the concept of management and cultural
differences in the world.
Oyserman, D. (2016). High power, low power, and equality: Culture beyond
individualism and collectivism. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(4), 352-356.
The article focuses on the difference in power distance in various organisations. The
power distance is another aspect of cultural difference in an organisational context. Power
distance signifies the level at which employers and employees communicate with one
another. The distance signifies the work culture of an organisation and the ways by which it
can use the power distance for its benefit. The article does not provide a segregation of the
countries that are involved in high and low power culture. The article states that the
horizontal and vertical differences that exist in an organisation do not have a significant
impact on the working of an organisation. The article establishes a relation between
individualism and collectivism with that of the power distance that exists. In order to justify
the engagement of power, employees working in different hospitality sectors across New

5
CRITICAL THINKING
Zealand are analysed. The differences in countries that embrace this culture are provided in
the article that helps to understand the ways by which power distance in an organisation
works. The article states that the root cause of power distance is the existence of
individualism and collectivism. This is because culture possessing a low power distance tends
to be friendlier with the co-workers. Hence, the gap between the people reduces and
collectivism culture is formed as a process.
Baker, D. S., & Carson, K. D. (2011). The two faces of uncertainty avoidance:
Attachment and adaptation. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 12(2), 128.
Uncertainty is another factor that determines Hofstede’s cultural dimension. The
article focuses on the aspects of uncertainty that engulfs the mind of the people while
exploring new dimensions at the work place. The article identifies the causes of uncertainty
and the methods required for reducing it in the workplace. As per the article, attachment and
adaptation are two ways by which one can reduce the sense of uncertainty at the work place.
The article researches on people residing in various countries in order to determine the level
of uncertainty avoidance in the countries and the organisations. The article determines the
fact that individuals with low uncertainty level need to find the attachment in order to
maintain a stable life in the workplace. However, the opposite can be said about the people
with high uncertainty level. The researched countries highlight the level of uncertainty level
that exists and the ways by which one can take a risk in order to determine the level of
uncertainty in various organisations.
Hence, it can be concluded that Hofstede’s cultural dimension provides an essential
analysis of the various cultures around the world. This is an essential managerial element is
based on the understanding people can adapt during international negotiations. The analysis
of the four factors provides an important aspect for differentiating culture in various

6
CRITICAL THINKING
countries. The implications of this can help in understanding the different cultural elements
that separate the business culture in different countries. Cultural difference can bring about
problems in the workplace. It is the responsibility of the managers and the employees to work
together by adjusting to the differences for the betterment of the organisation.

7
CRITICAL THINKING
Bibliography
Baker, D. S., & Carson, K. D. (2011). The two faces of uncertainty avoidance: Attachment
and adaptation. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 12(2), 128.
Bellamy, A.S., (2016). Hofstede's model: cultural differences in hospitality sector and
experiences of a migrant. Journal of Tourism and Hospitality, 5(5), 34-40.
Gorodnichenko, Y., & Roland, G. (2012). Understanding the individualism-collectivism
cleavage and its effects: Lessons from cultural psychology. In Institutions and
comparative economic development, 5(1), 213-236.
Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online
readings in psychology and culture, 2(1), 8
Iorgulescu, M. C. (2014). The Impact of Management and Organizational Culture on
Creativity in the Hotel Industry. Amfiteatru Economic, 16(8), 1205.
Oyserman, D. (2016). High power, low power, and equality: Culture beyond individualism
and collectivism. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(4), 352-356.
Triandis, H. C. (2014). Individualism‐collectivism and personality. Journal of
personality, 69(6), 907-924.