Center for Comparative Management Studies

Dimensions of Country Clusters

Researchers have used a wide variety of factors, or dimensions, to construct “clusters” of countries thought to have similar societal culture characteristics.  Among the dimensions of country cultures that have been identified, and which are discussed in this report, are geography, language, religion, work values, the level of economic development, the level of technological development, characteristics of societal culture using dimensions posited by Hofstede and others and economic culture (i.e., institutional framework for business activities including firm ownership patterns).

Effects of Globalization on Cultural Differences

It is common to hear of “globalization” as an engine for bringing diverse cultures in remote parts of the world together and the suggestion has often been that globalization will ultimately minimize cross-cultural differences.  While advances in technology have certainly transformed global business activities it remains an unsettled question as to whether or not increasing globalization of business activities will lead to a reduction in meaningful cultural differences.  This report focuses on some comments that researchers have made on the effect of globalization on cultural differences.

Cultural Influences on African Management Practices

Africa is obviously not one country or society and it is easy to find substantial variations with respect to cultural elements as one travels around a vast continent with over 50 countries and a multitude of colonial backgrounds, economic systems and physical environments.  In fact, Edoho has commented that Africa probably has a greater degree of ethnic, cultural, and linguistic pluralism than any other continent.  For example, a country, or sub-region thereof, may develop very different organizations and cultural characteristics based on its unique combination of exposures to cultural elements from local traditions, Islam, and Western civilizations.  Also, the particular culture and language that a region may have absorbed from its colonial occupiers (e.g., English, French or Portugese) almost certain creates differences in attitudes and organizations, particularly the regulatory framework.  Finally, religion is an important aspect of life throughout the African continent.  All this being understood, however, researchers have argued that there are similarities among African countries with respect to cultural values, beliefs and rituals at the societal level and this report provides a summary description of some of the common characteristics of societal culture in Africa in the context of providing advice on how to “manage” African business culture.

Definitions of Societal Culture

In order for cross-cultural studies to be understandable and meaningful it is necessary to develop an accepted view of the concept of "societal culture", including a workable definition of the term.  This Working Paper describes some of the attempts that have been made by social scientists to define "culture".

Survey Finds Substantial Variety in European Leadership Behaviors

While the European Union has struggled to harmonize its legal, regulatory and political framework, the Member States continue to be perceived as very different environments to conduct business due, in large part, to long-standing cultural characteristics that remain in place even as European institutions are created and nurtured.

The Management Research Group (“MRG”), a private consultancy focusing on individual and organizational development, compared the leadership behaviors of almost 4,000 persons in various management positions with firms in eight European countries—Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, Sweden and the United Kingdom—using a questionnaire that measured 22 different leadership practices relating to what it referred to as six essential functions of the leadership role: creating and developing a vision or direction for the organization; developing a followership that supports the vision or direction identified for the organization; implementing the vision or direction in organizational terms; following through to make sure that things happen according to plan; achieving results (i.e., the ability of leaders to set high standards of performance for themselves and their organizations; and team playing (i.e., the ability to work within a team environment).  Based on the results of the survey, MRG concluded that there were very few similarities in leadership behavior among European managers and, in fact, they noted common ground on just three of the 22 leadership practices that were measured: expertise (i.e., as a group, managers from all of the surveyed countries tended to place the same degree of emphasis—moderate—on the level of technical expertise and orientation toward detail and in-depth analysis), competitiveness (i.e., managers from all countries tended to seek and prefer “win-win solutions” as opposed to engaging in forceful, competitive behaviors) and setting standards of excellence. 

MRG also highlighted distinctions between behaviors of managers in regions typically clustered together such as the Scandinavian countries and reported several areas where the leadership styles of Swedish managers contrasted sharply with their peers in Denmark.  For example, while Swedish managers rated themselves as the most innovative, team-oriented and pragmatic and less reliant on using guidelines, procedures and systematic methods for monitoring progress, Danish managers reported being more strategic, analytical and demanding, less team oriented and more likely to rely on formal planning and performance measurement processes.  Not surprisingly, given the results of other studies, differences also emerged between German and French managers.  One illustration was that while German managers accessed new ideas and perspectives by reference to past practices, seeking to minimize risk by building on knowledge gained through experience, French managers are much less likely to reflect on the past.  German managers are much more technically-oriented and analytical than the French and while Germans prefer long-range planning after detailed study the French are more likely to take a short-term view.  French managers are outgoing and continuously engaged with their followers while German managers are more understated and subdued. 

MRG summed its findings by quoting Jean Monnet, the founder of the European Community: “If I were again facing the challenge to integrate Europe, I would probably start with culture.”

Cultural Differentiation Based on Employee Work Values

During the 1960s and 1970s a good deal of research was done on identifying and measuring differences between national cultures based on patterns of employee attitudes toward work.  This report summarizes some of the most important studies and demonstrates how societies might differ with respect to their attitudes regarding work goal importance; need deficiency, fulfillment and job satisfaction; managerial and organizational variables; and work role and interpersonal orientation.

Ways in Which Culture Can Influence Leadership Styles and Behaviors

The relationship between culture and leadership styles and behaviors has been extensively studied and debated and the evidence appears to confirm that culture does have a small, but significant, impact on the use and effectiveness of leadership styles although a number of other factors (e.g., personality characteristics of the leader and followers, needs and expectations of the parties, age, gender, skills and expertise, type of organization and structure and type of work unit) also influence the relationship between leaders and their followers.  When considering how culture relates to the way in which they interact with their subordinates, managers should consider the following comprehensive list and explanation of ways in which culture can influence leadership styles and behaviors developed by Zagoršek:

• Culture plays an important role in shaping the approved leadership prototype—the image of the ideal leader—of a particular society.
• Culture has a significant—many say fundamental--influence on the personality traits and work values of leaders and their subordinates in a particular society.
• The cultural values and norms of a society determine the attitudes of leaders and their actual pattern of leadership behaviors including the ways in which leaders and their subordinates relate to one another.
• Just as cultural values and norms impact the attitudes and behaviors of leaders, they also influence how subordinates perceive and ultimately accept or reject the behaviors and practices of their leaders.
• Consistent with the points discussed above, culture is an important determinant of the effectiveness of particular leadership styles and behaviors and leader behaviors that are inconsistent with societal norms and values and/or with the implicit leadership theories of subordinates in the society are likely to be ineffective and ultimately lower the morale of the subordinates and harm the productivity and performance of the organizational unit that the ineffective leader oversees.
• Culture is important in providing leaders with guidance regarding the outcomes and results that they should try to achieve through their decisions, actions and behaviors.
• Culture impacts how leaders are selected and accepted as “legitimate” within societies (e.g., in egalitarian, individualistic, low power distance societies the leader usually has to “earn his title” while in collectivistic and high power distance countries the leadership role is usually ascribed to an individual by the nature of his or her status (acquired by birth, kinship, gender, age, education, or connections).
• Differences among societies have been identified with respect to the bases of power and influence tactics that leaders rely upon in order to be effective.
• The nature of the relationship between leaders and their subordinates is also impacted by cultural factors.  In some societies, for example, the relationship is akin to a parent and child and the subordinate is dependent on the leader and the leader is expected to attend to and satisfy the needs of his or her subordinate.  In more egalitarian societies, however, there are far fewer distinctions between leaders and subordinates and the leader is often simply “first among equals”.
• Culture provides context for the styles and behaviors of leaders and thus provides a way to identify whether a particular action will be consider appropriate or inappropriate within a society.  For example, in South East Asia attendance by a leader at a subordinate’s family celebration will be considered “supportive” as will a leader’s discussion of the personal problems of one subordinate with other subordinates in Japan; however, such behaviors by a leader in US would likely be considered annoying or offensive by the subordinate whose personal space has been intruded upon by the leader. 

Another Cultural Dimension--Profits versus Social Responsibility?

National societies—countries—have been measured and categorized using a number of different dimensions.  Recently, the results of a survey published by Edelman Trust Barometer 2011 provided interesting insight into the attitudes of members of the “informed public” (broadly defined to include university graduates who were in the top quartile of wage earners in their particular age groups and countries) in 23 countries around the world regarding the tradeoff between profits and social responsibility confronting companies.  Respondents were asked whether they “strong agreed” or “somewhat agreed” with a famous statement made by Milton Friedman: “the social responsibility of business is to increase its profits”.  The Economist reported highlights of the results of the survey including the following:

• Seven of the 23 countries had 60% or more of their respondents indicating some minimal level of agreement with the statement, thereby strong rejecting the popular push for corporate social responsibility (“CSR”).  These countries included, in order, the United Arab Emirates (84% approval of the statement), Japan, India, South Korea, Singapore and Sweden.
• The US placed 9th among the 23 countries with 56% approval of the statement, coming in just behind Mexico and ahead of Poland.  The United Kingdom was in the bottom third of the group with 43% approval of the statement, an interest result given that companies in that country subject to its 2006 Companies Act are required by law to render reports on their CSR records.
• Among the top 10 countries on the list were four members of the dynamic emerging markets group—India, Indonesia, Mexico and Poland; however, respondents from China and Brazil were among the most enthusiastic proponents of CSR ranking 19th and 20th, respectively.

Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck's Culture Value Orientations

Florence Kluckhohn and Fred Strodtbeck were cultural anthropologists who believed that there were a limited number of problems that are common to all societies as well as a limited number of solutions to those problems and that the problems and corresponding solutions could be represented by “value orientations” which could be used to describe the dominant value system of a society and draw distinctions between societies.  They identified five value orientations based on the relationship of individuals and groups with nature, relationships among individuals within the society, orientation regarding preferred form of human activities, relationship with time (i.e., “time orientation”, a common theme among other researchers in this area) and evaluation of human nature.  These value orientations, which are generally represented on a three-point continuum, are described in the attached report, which is the latest in our series of materials on the major models of cultural dimensions.

Schwartz's Dimensions of Societal Cultures

Our first post for the new year continues our exploration of some of most well-known models of cultural dimensions by providing a report on the theories of Israeli psychologist Shalom Schwartz.  Schwartz suggested three main problems that societies are universally challenged to address and resolve and corresponding cultural dimensions that he said could be used to describe alternative methods for resolving those problems that distinguish societies from one another: to what extent are individuals autonomous or dependent upon (integrated into) the groups to which they belong (conservatism versus autonomy); to what extent equality is valued and expected and personal responsbility is guaranteed in order to preserve the social order (hierarchy versus egalitarianism); and to what extent do members of the society seek to change their relationship with nature and the social world in order to advance personal or group interests (mastery versus harmony).