Overview

The exploration of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions during the interview provided a comprehensive understanding of the company’s organizational culture. The good balance of individualism versus Collectivism, lower power distance, and efforts to address aspects of masculinity versus femininity showcased the company’s nuanced approach to cultural dynamics.

The interview outcome revealed valuable insights applicable to organizational success. The company’s proactive stance in addressing gender imbalances demonstrated the benefits of fostering diversity and inclusion, focusing globally with decentralized decisions. The adoptions of English as the common language as the common language highlighted the importance of bringing communication together, reducing power distance, and ensuring equal opportunities for all employees. The structured approach to employee welfare, including a comprehensive reporting mechanism and a code of conduct, highlighted the importance of clear regulations and procedures for a healthy work environment.

Examining possible solutions, the company’s commitment to gender diversity was evident in its transformation, moving towards a gender inclusive environment. The shift from a male dominated board to a balanced composition reflected an individualistic approach challenging gender stereotypes. The organization’s decentralized structure, emphasizing freedom within a framework, aligned with a lower power distance, emphasizing autonomy and individual decision making.

The company’s global adaptability was facilitated by empowering local teams, acknowledging the importance of fairness in decision-making. The organization’s thorough procedure for handling employee issues demonstrated a preference for well-defined regulations and procedures, emphasizing the avoidance of uncertainty.

In essence, the company’s cultural dynamics, as explained in the interview, portrayed a commitment to inclusivity, adaptability, and continuous improvement, offering valuable lessons for organizations aspiring to build employee-focused and inclusive workplaces in a dynamic global landscape.

Hofstede Dimensions

The theory of the 5 dimensions of Hofstede is a theoretical model developed by the Dutch sociologist Geert Hofstede. This model is intended to understand and measure cultural difference between countries. The five dimensions are:

1. Power Distance: This dimension measures the extent to which the distribution of power in a society is considered normal. Countries with a high-power distance have a large gap between those in power and ordinary people, while countries with a low power distance promote more equality and participation (Sridharan 2024).

2. Individualism vs. Collectivism: This dimension measures the extent to which individuals prioritize their own interests over those of the group. Individualistic societies value personal freedom and autonomy, while collectivist societies emphasize social cohesion and harmony (Sridharan 2024).

3. Masculinity vs. Femininity: This dimension measures the extent to which a society values traditionally masculine or feminine values. Masculine societies emphasize achievement, success, and competition, while feminine societies value quality of life, care for others, and cooperation (Sridharan 2024).

4. Uncertainty Avoidance: This dimension measures the extent to which people feel threatened by uncertain situations and try to avoid them. Societies with high uncertainty avoidance have a strong need for rules, structure, and predictability, while societies with low uncertainty avoidance are more open to change and risks (Sridharan 2024).

5. Long-Term vs. Short-Term Orientation: This dimension measures the extent to which a society is focused on preserving traditional norms and values versus striving for future rewards. Countries with a long-term orientation value thrift, persistence, and respecting social obligations, while countries with a short-term orientation place more emphasis on achieving quick results and enjoying life in the present (Sridharan 2024).

Understanding these dimensions can help explain cultural differences and navigate intercultural situations. However, it is important to remember that these dimensions are generalizations and individuals within a society can still have unique values and beliefs.

During the interview, it shed light on several aspects of the company’s organizational culture, revealing a nuanced approach that aligns with various dimensions of Hofstede’s cultural framework. One dimension that stands out prominently is Individualism versus Collectivism.

The discussion highlighted the company’s commitment to valuing both individual contributions and team collaboration, with a role-dependent emphasis on either individual or collective goals. For instance, sales roles were described as having individual targets and variable pay tied to individual performance, underscoring an individualistic orientation. Conversely, finance and HR roles were portrayed as focusing more on group objectives, showcasing a collective ethos within those functions.

Moreover, the organization’s inclination towards a decentralized structure and the philosophy of “freedom within a framework” exemplify characteristics associated with lower Power Distance. This approach empowers local country teams to make decisions tailored to their respective markets, suggesting a preference for more egalitarian power dynamics.

Additionally, the interview touched upon initiatives aimed at improving gender diversity and increasing the representation of women in senior management. This effort aligns with the dimension of Masculinity versus Femininity, as it reflects a conscious move towards balancing traditionally masculine values of achievement with feminine values emphasizing relationships and quality of life.

In essence, the organization’s cultural dynamics, as elucidated in the interview, highlight a delicate interplay of Individualism versus Collectivism, lower Power Distance, and a conscious effort to address aspects of Masculinity versus Femininity within its operational framework.

Outcome

The company’s interview outcome provides valuable insights applicable to organizational success. The proactive approach in addressing gender imbalances within leadership demonstrates the benefits of fostering diversity and inclusion deliberately. Embracing cultural shifts for global adaptability, as seen in decentralized decision-making, highlights the importance of inclusivity for effective decision-making in a diverse workforce.

The adoption of a common language, English, showcases the significance of unifying communication in a global organization, reducing power distance, and providing equal opportunities for all employees. The company’s structured approach to employee welfare, including a comprehensive reporting mechanism and code of conduct, emphasizes the importance of clear regulations and procedures for promoting a healthy work environment.

Ultimately, the company’s commitment to ongoing improvement underscores the necessity for organizations to adapt continuously and learn from challenges, ensuring sustained success in a dynamic global landscape. In summary, the interview outcome offers key lessons for organizations aspiring to build inclusive, adaptable, and employee-centric workplaces.

Positive solutions

The company interviewed operates across all continents except Africa, emphasizing diversity and inclusion as core values. This section explores a notable example of a company implementing best practices and creating positive solutions through the application of ethnographic procedures. Focusing on issues like gender diversity, global adaptability, and employee welfare, we examine how the organization strategically addressed challenges and fostered cultural shifts. This example highlights how the company effectively applies ethnographic methods to handle challenges and attain favorable results, demonstrating a comprehensive method for addressing problems and cultural changes.

To start off, the initial challenge faced by the organization was the historical lack of diversity on the board and in senior management positions. Five years ago, the board comprised only males, highlighting a need for a more inclusive approach. As a positive solution, the organization has undergone significant changes. The board, once solely comprised of males, will soon have six members, with three men and three women. Notably, the upcoming CEO will be a woman and they now give preference to women if there is equal work quality, reflecting a commitment to swift and substantial shifts towards gender diversity. The recent shift in board composition to achieve gender balance, with three men and three women, and a female CEO, clearly shows an individualistic approach to challenge long-standing gender stereotypes and encourage diversity in top positions. From a cultural perspective, the transformation can be viewed through the lens of Hofstede’s dimensions. Going from having only men on the board to having a mix shows a move away from a culture that’s likely quite masculine. Instead, it’s becoming more feminist and gender-inclusive environment. This change shows a shift in how the organization operates, moving away from old ideas about gender roles and moving towards a more team-oriented approach that appreciates having different kinds of people in top roles (Tidwell, n.d.-a). 

Furthermore, the company does not experience challenges in adapting its services and strategies to different global markets as the organization recognizes the importance of fairness in decision-making, acknowledging that impartial processes result in better results. A notable characteristic of the company is the considerable amount of freedom provided within its structure. Teams globally are empowered, allowing them to decide on the most suitable frameworks for their respective markets. By empowering global teams, the company recognizes that these teams, being near their specific markets, hold valuable knowledge to make choices that suit their individual situations. This highlights the organization’s decentralized approach to decision-making. Teams have freedom; however, they must follow guidelines to align with the organization’s ground rules, striking a balance between autonomy and adherence to the overall framework. The Hofstede dimension that could be relevant in this context is “Individualism vs. Collectivism.”. The organization places a premium on autonomy and acknowledges the significance of decentralized decision-making, reflecting a culture that leans towards individualism. Within a more individualistic cultural framework, there is heightened emphasis on personal freedom, autonomy, and individual decision-making (Wale, 2023).

Additionally, to avoid miscommunication there is a corporate language stablished, namely English. Employees are required to communicate within the company with an English business level, to avoid all kinds of conflicts. Because it is a worldwide company, there is a balance between native English speakers and non-native English speakers.

Non-native speakers are given the same opportunities as the native ones to communicate with each other. The adoption of English as the official language in the workplace signifies a commitment to maintaining a low power distance. This decision is rooted in the goal of providing equal communication opportunities to all employees, regardless of their mother tongue. The objective is to reduce hierarchical disparities in communication and foster a more egalitarian atmosphere within the organization (De Bruin, 2020).

Lastly, the lack of awareness or understanding among employees about the available reporting mechanisms could have been a problem. The company places a high value on the welfare of its staff by implementing a thorough procedure to deal with discomfort and safety issues. This process addresses various concerns, such as business relationships, internal workplace dynamics, bullying, and both formal and physical harassment. They use a code of conduct, a written document outlining expected employee behavior. If someone within the company fails to adhere to the code of conduct, the company provides three options for employees to address concerns. Firstly, they can choose to communicate with their manager if they feel comfortable. If not, or if the manager is the issue, they can contact a compliance person within the company. If they do not feel secure within the company, they can utilize a speak-up channel, where an external entity unaffiliated with the company connects with the employee. The company’s adoption of a thorough and organized approach to handle employee issues, incorporating a set of rules and various reporting channels, demonstrates a strong inclination towards avoiding uncertainty. This suggests a preference for well-defined regulations and procedures to reduce confusion and unpredictability within the company (Agodzo, 2015).

Authors

Saskia Janse (LinkedIn)
Student: Business studies Hogeschool van Amsterdam
Block 2, Semester 1, 2024

Mariane Dourado Saraiva Pessoa
Student: International Business Hogeschool van Amsterdam
Block 2, Semester 1, 2024

Giovana Braghetto Otero
Student: International Business Hogeschool van Amsterdam
Block 2, Semester 1, 2024

Ryan Joelfan
Student: Business studies Hogeschool van Amsterdam
Block 2, Semester 1, 2024

References

• Agodzo, D. (2015). Six Approaches to understanding National Cultures: Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions. ResearchGate.https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.5041.8009
• Sridharan, M. (2024). Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions. Think Insights. https://thinkinsights.net/leadership/hofstede-cultural-dimensions/#:~:text=Power%20distance%2C%20uncertainty%20avoidance%2C%20individualism,and%20indulgence%20to%20this%20list
• Tidwell, C. (n.d.-a). Hofstede LongTerm / Short Term Traits. https://www.andrews.edu/~tidwell/HofstedeLongTerm.html
• Tidwell, C. (n.d.-b). Hofstede Masculinity / Femininity Traits. https://www.andrews.edu/~tidwell/bsad560/HofstedeMasculinity.html
• Wale, H. (2023). Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions Theory. Corporate Finance Institute. https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/management/hofstedes-cultural-dimensions-theory/#:~:text=Individualism%20vs.%20Collectivism&text=In%20individualistic%20societies%2C%20the%20emphasis,well%2Dbeing%20of%20the%20group.
• Weaver, G. (n.d.). INTERCULTURAL RELATIONS Communication, Identity, and Conflict. Pearson.