Imagine your country is number one.
Number one in economic growth.
That’s what Japan was experiencing between the end of WWII and the Cold War.
While the country was still behind the United States, it became the world’s second-largest economy after its defeat in WWII.
Termed the “Japanese Miracle,” Tom Peters and Robert H. Waterman were so interested in this economic boom that they wrote a book about it.
Culture and cultural studies were finally becoming a focal point to more than only those who studied social sciences. Big corporate CEOs were starting to see cross-cultural research as a tool for success in business.
In walks Hofstede.
As we discussed last week, Hofstede had discovered differences in culture while analyzing the outcomes of a company-wide survey for IBM.
In doing so, he offered the first scientifically-founded analysis of cultural differences in the workplace.
In 1980, he also published a book, Culture’s Consequences. By the turn of the century, Hofstede’s work had been cited more than 2000 times, with no empirical work as influential in the fields of psychology or culture.
According to Hofstede’s research, nations differed in four cultural dimensions.
The dimensions denoted sets of values, scaled from one extreme to the other. After surveying the populous of various cultures, each nation was valued between these two poles.
One dimension involved “Uncertainty Avoidance” – to what degree a culture’s members are comfortable/uncomfortable in unknown, surprising, or situations that differed from their cultural norm.
This dimension suggests which cultures maintain tradition and fear change and which are open to risk-taking and innovation.
The dimension of Uncertainty Avoidance was discovered when Hofstede looked at the survey’s responses to questions about work-related stress.
An example of a work-related question in the survey:
How often do you feel nervous or tense at work?
Answers ranged from “I never feel this way” to “I always feel this way.”
Another correlating question asked whether one should break company rules if doing so was in the best interest of the company.
Further, employees were asked if they had long-term plans to stay with the company.
The survey found that some cultures appreciated change, and these were the same cultures that were less affected by stress.
Those cultures that avoided change and were more affected by stress were often also more bound by rituals, laws, bureaucracy, and tradition.
For example, Latin American cultures are layered in procedures and rules and are considered “uncertainty avoiding” cultures.
Next week, we’ll talk about more of the dimensions discovered by Hofstede.