Organizational Change Management: A Comparison between Singapore and Australia

This article discusses the Hofstede cultural dimension theory and French and Raven's five bases of power in the context of organizational change management. It compares the cultural differences between Singapore and Australia and suggests the most effective power bases for managing change in each culture.

Student’s Last Name 1
ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE MANAGEMENT
Student Name
Subject
Date

Student’s Last Name 2
Introduction
Organizational change is a vital part of the business’ today. The management, operations,
communication, etc. are very crucial for the success of any organization. The recent
developments have facilitated the business as well as cultural exchanges. The trade barriers as
well as the cultural barriers are fading rapidly. Thus, organizations, leader, managers, and
employees should be able to work with a diverse group of people. The globalization and
liberalization along with technological advancement has made it a need to accept and manage
this change effectively. People have different cultural backgrounds and they belong to different
countries. Sometimes the culture becomes a barrier in the individual growth and development. In
cases where people are tightly connected to their cultures, they fail to adapt change and
resistance hinders the development in thought process. In order to overcome this, several tools
and mechanism have been developed. The Hofstede’s Cultural Dimension is one of them and it
helps identifying the similarities and differences in various countries. In addition, the has a
major role to play in the organizational management and the research presented by French and
Raven helps in making the best use of personnel by developing their bases.
Comparison between Singapore and Australia
The Hofstede cultural dimension theory was propounded by Geert Hofstede. This theory
is generally used to identify the differences that exist between cultures of different countries and

Student’s Last Name 3
also to get a better understanding of the business processes in these cultures. The theory divided
cultures into six categories, namely- power distance, individualism/collectivism, uncertainty
avoidance, feminity/masculinity, long term/short term orientation, and restraint/indulgence1.
The power distance index refers to the degree to which inequality and power are
tolerated. The viewpoint of the lower level of the society is considered here2. It is about handling
inequality in a society. Singapore is a multi-cultural region that has a mix of Chinese, Indian,
Malay, and expatriates. Inequality is a common issue all around the world. It mainly has a
Chinese background and Sinagpore score 74 on the power distance index. It has centralized
power where hierarchy is valued. The managers depend on their bosses and employees rely on
orders from superiors. The flow of communication is rather indirect. However, in Austarlia, the
power distance dimension is comparatively lower, i.e. 34. The information sharing is good and
frequent and managers are able to communicate with superiors easily.
The individualism/collectivism dimension deals with the interdependence of the members
maintained by the society. In individualist societies, people are bothered by their immediate
families, whereas in collectivist societies ‘groups’ are seen to depend on each other and loyalty is
a strong factor. Singapore is a collectivist society with a score of 20.1 It indicates that ‘We’ is
valued and the focus is not just on ‘I’. The conflict avoidance strategy is used and morality is of
much value. As for Australia, the society believes in individualism. In this particular dimension
the score is 90. The society is not closely knit and people focus on themselves and their families.2
1 Hofstede Insights, "Country Comparison - Hofstede Insights", Hofstede Insights, 2019,
https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/australia,singapore/.
2 Administrator, "Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions EXPLAINED With EXAMPLES | B2U", B2U
- Business-To-You.Com, 2017, https://www.business-to-you.com/hofstedes-cultural-dimensions/.

Student’s Last Name 4
The third dimension is uncertainty avoidance wherein society deals with the future and
ithe uncertainty, i.e. whether it should be accepted or changed. There is a certain level of threat
that stresses people and the way people try to deal or avoid them according to their culture is
seen in this dimension. Singapore scores 8 on this dimension, whereas Australia scores 51. It
means that because of higher levels of PDI, the people of this region follow the rules. 3
Source- www.cleverism.com
The other dimension masculinity/feminity refers to the motivation of people, i.e. desire to
become the best-masculinity or following one’s heart-feminity. The high masculinity score is an
indicator of competition, achievement, etc., whereas the high feminity ratio shows values and
3 Anastasia, Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions, image, 2015,
https://i2.wp.com/cdn.cleverism.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/WORKING-CAPITAL-
CYCLE2-e1439887164191.png?fit=740%2C411&ssl=1

Student’s Last Name 5
quality of life are more important. In this dimension, Singapore scores 48 that shows that the
country is quite balanced on both fronts and is driven by both the factors, but slightly more
towards the feminine side. Australia with a score of 61 is considered as a masculine society.4 It is
driven by passion, competition, a sense of achievement and similar attributes. The race to
become the best is the main idea in the region.
In terms of long-term and short-term orientation, the dimension describes the way in
which countries keep association with the past in order to solve the present and future issues.
There are two approaches in this- normative and pragmatic. In normative approach the societies
score low in this area and maintains the past traditions while being quite reluctant to change
while pragmatic approach is entirely opposite. The high-score indicates that the societies adapt to
change and development to deal with future challenges. Singapore is one of the five dragons and
it scores 72 on this dimension. It has shown cultural qualities along with perseverance and
efforts. Virtue is the focus of the people. In Australia, the approach is normative and thus the
score is 21. Traditions are of utmost value and the future is small in from of the long-followed
ancient culture. The focus of the society is on attaining immediate results and do not wait for the
long-term. 4
The last dimension of Hofstede’s theory is indulgence/restraint. Socialization is a vital of
people’s lives. It is a great issue that continues to be a problem even today. This particular
dimension deals with the people’s control over their impulses based on the nurture. If a person
has weak control, he is said to be indulgent and vice-versa. Thus, different countries have
4 Hofstede Insights, "Country Comparison - Hofstede Insights", Hofstede Insights, 2019,
https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/australia,singapore/.

Student’s Last Name 6
different cultures and Singaporean culture seems to be somewhere in between with a score of 46.
On the contrary, Australia has a high score of 71 which clearly indicates people in this region are
indulgent and give in to their desires and impulses. It also shows that there is positivity in the
outlook towards life and work. Moreover, leisure time is considered to be an important part of
the society.
Source- www.hofstede-insights.com
In 1959, French and Raven gave five bases of power. In this theory, the power has an
important role to play as it shows how one person can pressurize another with the help of
different powers. The five powers presented by French and Raven are: coercive power- the
power to persuade, reward power- persuading by giving something of value, legitimate power-
credibility or authority of a person, charismatic power- the influencing persona can be a powerful

Student’s Last Name 7
factor, and expert power- skills, knowledge, education and expertise.5 These powers are most
widely accepted across the world in terms of leadership and organizational change management.
When it comes to organizational change, organizations and leaders face a lot of
difficulties. Managing people and preparing them is a great task. The French-raven five base
power model is a widely used concept. The mangers mostly use legitimate power to persuade the
subordinated to cooperate in the change process. Sometimes, there is a mix of coercive and
legitimate power. Employee resistance to change can hinder the growth and development of the
organization and revenues. Therefore, it is important to manage the process of change
effectively.6
The culture of Singapore is based on Confucian teachings and ideologies.7 The power is
distributed unequally and the leader has a very influencing position. Moreover, the managers and
employees rely on top bosses to carry ahead. The legitimate power works in the national culture
of Singapore as the flow of communication and information is restricted. Furthermore, the
society acts as a group and works to avoid conflict. Showing reluctant behavior would stir up
5 Deborah L. Best and Brady S. Everett, "The Most Recent Years: The Journal Of Cross-Cultural
Psychology, 2004—2009", Journal Of Cross-Cultural Psychology 41, no. 3 (2010): 329-335.
6 Ayanna Cummings, The Effects Of Social Power Bases Within Varying Organzational
Cultures, ebook (New York: University of New York, 2017),
https://academicworks.cuny.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3351&context=gc_etds.
7 Michael Demmler, Ricardo Ortiz Ayala and Alejandra Urbiola Solís, "Comparing Corporate
Cultural Profiles Using The Cultural Dimensions Of Hofstede", Journal Of Business And
Management Sciences 6, no. 2 (2018): 28-35.

Student’s Last Name 8
issues with the management and people tend to ignore such scenarios. Therefore, the unwillingly
accept the authority and change. The focus is on keeping up with the latest trends, keeping the
culture intact. In such nations, the process of change management is not too difficult and with
slight power of the leader desired goals can be achieved. The people follow the regulations and
have a fair control over their impulses. This makes it easier to accept the demanded change with
minimal use of power or coercion is required.
The Australian society is more participative in its organizational structure. The flow of
communication is good and the information is shared on a regular basis. Such societies make the
change management process easier and difficult at the same time because of the less power
distance. The culture is individualistic and people do not identify themselves as a part of the
group or society. The concern is oneself and immediate family only. They strive to be better,
competitive, and become successful is accepted and passed-on. In addition, the process of change
is difficult because the people are opinionated.8 They do not worry about being judged and thus
show their reluctancy openly. The focus is on achieving quick results and maintaining the past
culture. Thus, change is taken as something negative. In such societies, the French-Raven model
of base powers can be used. If the leader is competitive, his personality can be an inspiration and
thus the process of change can be achieved through his charisma. Moreover, the expert power
can also be used to manage the process.
The French-Raven model is a good way to solve the issues relating to the organizational
change management. If the organizational change is to be taken place in Singapore, the most
8 Joanna Hernik and Agnieszka Bieniecka, "Diversity Management As A Base Of A Business
Model", Journal Of Corporate Responsibility And Leadership 4, no. 4 (2017): 35.

Student’s Last Name 9
efficient way will be legitimate power or coercive power because the people believe in rules and
hierarchy.9 They will follow the order because of their need to follow the order which is a part of
their culture. The expert power or charismatic power will not be much effective in this society.
The people are not much competitive and the persona or skills, knowledge and experience will
not influence anyone to a significant extent.10 In Australia, legitimate or coercive power will not
affect people because of the participative organizational culture. In this type of society and
culture, people are more driven and focus on efforts to be better and competitive. So, the
charismatic power or expert power will work best in this society. In addition, reward power can
sometimes be very persuasive.11
Conclusion
The French-Raven model is very effective in the case of managing changing across organizations
and cultures. Different organizations in different countries have different cultures, in order to
manage change, this model will affect the way this change is managed. Various powers will
work in various cultures because people are driven by different motives and aspects. Hofstede
cultural dimensions help in recognizing the similarities and differences that exist across countries
9 Geert Hofstede, "Dimensionalizing Cultures: The Hofstede Model In Context", Online
Readings In Psychology And Culture 2, no. 1 (2011).
10 Gregory Arief D. Liem et al., "Content And Structure Of Values In Middle Adolescence:
Evidence From Singapore, The Philippines, Indonesia, And Australia", Journal Of Cross-
Cultural Psychology 42, no. 1 (2010): 146-154.
11 Antonio Pierro et al., "Bases Of Social Power, Leadership Styles, And Organizational
Commitment", International Journal Of Psychology 48, no. 6 (2013): 1122-1134.

Student’s Last Name 10
and cultures. Managing change is a difficult process and therefore, implementing it correctly is
crucial for the success and growth.
References
Administrator. "Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions EXPLAINED With EXAMPLES | B2U". B2U -
Business-To-You.Com, 2017. https://www.business-to-you.com/hofstedes-cultural-
dimensions/.

Student’s Last Name 11
Anastasia. Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions. Image, 2015.
https://i2.wp.com/cdn.cleverism.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/WORKING-CAPITAL-
CYCLE2-e1439887164191.png?fit=740%2C411&ssl=1.
Best, Deborah L., and Brady S. Everett. "The Most Recent Years: The Journal Of Cross-Cultural
Psychology, 2004—2009". Journal Of Cross-Cultural Psychology 41, no. 3 (2010): 32335.
Cummings, Ayanna. The Effects Of Social Power Bases Within Varying Organzational Cultures.
Ebook. New York: University of New York, 2017.
https://academicworks.cuny.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3351&context=gc_etds.
Demmler, Michael, Ricardo Ortiz Ayala, and Alejandra Urbiola Solís. "Comparing Corporate
Cultural Profiles Using The Cultural Dimensions Of Hofstede". Journal Of Business And
Management Sciences 6, no. 2 (2018): 28-35.
Hernik, Joanna, and Agnieszka Bieniecka. "Diversity Management As A Base Of A Business
Model". Journal Of Corporate Responsibility And Leadership 4, no. 4 (2017): 35.
Hofstede Insights. "Country Comparison - Hofstede Insights". Hofstede Insights, 2019.
https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/australia,singapore/.
Hofstede, Geert. "Dimensionalizing Cultures: The Hofstede Model In Context". Online Readings
In Psychology And Culture 2, no. 1 (2011).
Liem, Gregory Arief D., Andrew J. Martin, Elizabeth Nair, Allan B. I. Bernardo, and Paulus
Hidajat Prasetya. "Content And Structure Of Values In Middle Adolescence: Evidence From
Singapore, The Philippines, Indonesia, And Australia". Journal Of Cross-Cultural
Psychology 42, no. 1 (2010): 146-154.
Pierro, Antonio, Bertram H. Raven, Clara Amato, and Jocelyn J. Bélanger. "Bases Of Social
Power, Leadership Styles, And Organizational Commitment". International Journal Of
Psychology 48, no. 6 (2013): 1122-1134.

i