Geert Hofstede was born on the 2nd of October 1928. He is a Dutch social psychologist, former IBM employee, and Professor Emeritus of Organizational Anthropology and International Management at Maastricht University in the Netherlands. He is well-known for his pioneering research on cross-cultural groups and organizations.
Geert Hofstede has done cultural research on several countries through the use of a 6-D model. I read his research findings on the United Kingdom and Finland and have summarised the comparisons and differences found by Hofstede within this blog.
United Kingdom vs. Finland
Explores the British and Finnish culture.
The Power Distance
This dimension deals with the fact that all individuals in societies are not equal – it expresses the attitude of the culture towards these inequalities amongst us. Power Distance is defined as the extent to which the less powerful members of institutions and organisations within a country expect and accept that power is distributed unequally.
According to Hofstede the Power Distance of both countries have been proven to be similar. As both countries score low in this dimension.
Britain shows a society that believes that inequalities amongst people should be minimized. Interestingly, research shows the Power Distance index lower amongst the higher class in Britain than amongst the working classes. The Power Distance Index score at first seems in-congruent with the well established and historical British class system and its exposes one of the inherent tensions in the British culture, between the importance of birth rank on the one hand and a deep-seated belief that where you are born should not limit how far you can travel in life. A sense of fair play drives a belief that people should be treated in some way as equals.
Similarly, Finland scores low on this dimension, which means that the following characterises the Finnish style:
- Being independent
- Hierarchy for convenience only
- Equal rights
- Superiors accessible
- Coaching leader
- Management facilitates and empowers
Power is decentralized and managers count on the experience of their team members. Employees expect to be consulted. Control is disliked and attitude towards managers are informal and on first name basis. Communication is direct and participative.
Individualism
The fundamental issue addressed by this dimension is the degree of interdependence a society maintains among its members. It has to do with whether people´s self-image is defined in terms of “I” or “We”. In Individualist societies people are supposed to look after themselves and their direct family only. In Collectivist societies people belong to ‘in groups’ that take care of them in exchange for loyalty.
At a score of 89 the UK is amongst the highest of the Individualist scores, beaten only by some of the commonwealth countries it spawned i.e. Australia and the USA. The British are a highly Individualist and private people. Children are taught from an early age to think for themselves and to find out what their unique purpose in life is and how they uniquely can contribute to society. The route to happiness is through personal fulfilment. As the affluence of Britain has increased throughout the last decade, with wealth also ‘spreading North’, a much discussed phenomenon is the rise of what has been seen as rampant consumerism and a strengthening of the ‘ME’ culture.
In comparison to Finland’s Individualism score, which is lower at 63. This means there is a high preference for a loosely knit social framework in which individuals are expected to take care of themselves and their immediate families only. In Individualist societies offence causes guilt and a loss of self-esteem, the employer/employee relationship is a contract based on mutual advantage, hiring and promotion decisions are supposed to be based on merit only, management is the management of individuals.
Therefore, although the scores show a large gap according to Hofstede both countries show individuals who think more about themselves as an individual, i.e. Me, instead of as a group, i.e. We.
Masculinity
A high score (Masculine) on this dimension indicates that the society will be driven by competition, achievement and success, with success being defined by the winner/best in field – a value system that starts in school and continues throughout organisational life.
A low score (Feminine) on the dimension means that the dominant values in society are caring for others and quality of life. A Feminine society is one where quality of life is the sign of success and standing out from the crowd is not admirable. The fundamental issue here is what motivates people, wanting to be the best (Masculine) or liking what you do (Feminine).
At 66, Britain is a Masculine society – highly success oriented and driven. A key point of confusion for the foreigner lies in the apparent contradiction, between the British culture of modesty and understatement. Which, is at odds with the underlying success driven value system in the culture. Critical to understanding the British is being able to ‘’read between the lines’’. What is said is not always what is meant. In comparison to Feminine cultures such as the Scandinavian countries, people in the UK live in order to work and have a clear performance ambition.
In significant contrast, Finland scores 26 on this dimension and is thus considered a Feminine society. In Feminine countries the focus is on “working in order to live”, managers strive for consensus, people value equality, solidarity and quality in their working lives. Conflicts are resolved by compromise and negotiation. Incentives such as free time and flexibility are favoured. Focus is on well-being, status is not shown. An effective manager is a supportive one, and decision-making is achieved through involvement.
Therefore, according to Hofstede the United Kingdom and Finland are very different in terms of the masculinity dimension.
Uncertainty Avoidance
The dimension Uncertainty Avoidance has to do with the way that a society deals with the fact that the future can never be known: should we try to control the future or just let it happen? This ambiguity brings with it anxiety and different cultures have learnt to deal with this anxiety in different ways. The extent to which the members of a culture feel threatened by ambiguous or unknown situations and have created beliefs and institutions that try to avoid these is reflected in the score on Uncertainty Avoidance.
At 35 the UK has a low score on Uncertainty Avoidance. Which, means that as a nation they are quite happy to wake up not knowing what the day brings, and they are happy to ‘make it up as they go along’ changing plans as new information comes to light. As a low Uncertainty Avoidance Index country the British are comfortable in ambiguous situations, the term ‘muddling through’ is a very British way of expressing this. There are generally not too many rules in British society, but those that are there are adhered to. The most famous of which of course the British love of queuing which has also to do with the values of fair play.
Looking at the UK through this dimension In work terms, results in planning that is not detail oriented but the end goal will be clear. The detail of how we get there will be light and the actual process fluid and flexible to emerging and changing environment. Planning horizons will also be shorter. Most importantly, the combination of a highly Individualist and curious nation is a high level of creativity and strong need for innovation. This emerges throughout the society in both its humour, heavy consumerism for new and innovative products and the fast highly creative industries it thrives in – advertising, marketing, financial engineering.
Finland scores a higher score of 59 on this dimension and thus has a high preference for avoiding uncertainty. Countries exhibiting high Uncertainty Avoidance maintain rigid codes of belief and behaviour and are intolerant of unorthodox behaviour and ideas. In these cultures there is an emotional need for rules, even if the rules never seem to work. Time is money, people have an inner urge to be busy and work hard, precision and punctuality are the norm, innovation may be resisted and security is an important element in individual motivation.
Therefore, according to Hofstede and his research and theory, this is a further dimension that the UK and Finland differ on.
Long Term Orientation
This dimension describes how every society has to maintain some links with its own past while dealing with the challenges of the present and future, and societies prioritize these two existential goals differently. Normative societies. which score low on this dimension, for example, prefer to maintain time-honoured traditions and norms while viewing societal change with suspicion. Those with a culture which scores high, on the other hand, take a more pragmatic approach: they encourage thrift and efforts in modern education as a way to prepare for the future.
With an intermediate score of 51 in this dimension, a dominant preference in British culture cannot be determined.
However, with a low score of 38, Finnish culture can be classified as normative. People in such societies have a strong concern with establishing the absolute Truth; they are normative in their thinking. They exhibit great respect for traditions, a relatively small propensity to save for the future, and a focus on achieving quick results.
Which, again according to Hofstede displays a further dimension of clear difference between the United Kingdom and Finland.
Indulgence
One challenge that confronts humanity, now and in the past, is the degree to which small children are socialized. Without socialization we do not become “human”. This dimension is defined as the extent to which people try to control their desires and impulses, based on the way they were raised. Relatively weak control is called “Indulgence” and relatively strong control is called “Restraint”. Cultures can, therefore, be described as Indulgent or Restrained.
Both the United Kingdom and Finland have high scores in this dimension, so a further similarity between the two country’s. A high score of 69 indicates that the British culture is one that is classified as Indulgent. Similarly, Finland with the relatively high score of 57 indicates it is an Indulgent country as well. People in societies classified by a high score in Indulgence generally exhibit a willingness to realise their impulses and desires, with regard to enjoying life and having fun. They possess a positive attitude and have a tendency towards optimism. In addition, they place a higher degree of importance on leisure time, act as they please and spend money as they wish.
19/04/2017.
Jessica's Journal. 