Overview

A group of four students decided to interview a Marketing Communications manager of one of the biggest companies in the world specializing in security. Two students are from Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences, another two – from Auckland, New Zealand. The company mentioned previously operates in more than 85 countries and has thousands of employees. Thus, it has a huge multinational focus. It is headquartered in London, England. This is why the primary culture of the company is English. (Weaver, 2013)

The Marketing Communications Manager is located in the Netherlands and is responsible for a Dutch market. Later, the comparison between The Netherlands and England will be done regarding Hofstede dimensions. (Hofstede, 2002)

The manager states that the Dutch division of the company consists of around 50% of people with a non-western background. As she explains further, the problem lies in the fact that although cultural diversity is quite high across the company, it falls enormously within management positions. The manager agrees on the view that the presence of a multicultural workforce in a companyis very important nowadays and underpins the fact that the company needs to be more open to people with multicultural backgrounds. As the manager says herself – you select what you recognize. It means that people subconsciously hire employees which are closer to them culturally wise, thus eliminating some space for diversity. Nevertheless, management teams are aware of this issue and keep tackling it. As Weaver states, the society becomes more diverse, it is obviously essential to have employees and managers who reflect that diversity in the workplace. These differences are not an obstacle but instead an opportunity. (Weaver, 2013)

The main language in the company is Dutch. As the manager explains, there are almost no cases concerning language miscommunication in the Dutch division of the company. However, the British branch does use several strategies to ensure that there are no miscommunication issues. For instance, it organizes every year several competitions where employees with various cultural backgrounds present their cultures/languages. The issue is no longer how to get rid of differences, but rather how to manage diversity to increase creativity and productivity. (Weaver, 2013) To ensure this it is crucial to understand that every culture has its own language and it is a manifestation – verbal or otherwise – of the perceptions, attitudes, values and beliefs that a person holds. (Iceberg model, Weaver)

When talking about prohibitive or inhibitive, the company imposes some rules concerning sensitive topics. For example, topics about the COVID pandemic or political/social movements are both prohibitive and inhibitive. The Communication department strongly advises employees to keep themselves from making strong statements about it.

Outcome

Power distance index (PDI) / Hierarchy Acceptance

Power Distance is defined as the extent to which the less powerful members of institutions and organisations within a company expect and accept that power is distributed unequally. (Hofstede, 2002)

Britain has a score of 35 and The Netherlands – 38. This is why we can assume that both English and Dutch divisions have the same strategies and vision on how the company regards inequality among its employees. As the manager says, in the Dutch division everybody is equal and everyone’s voice is heard. In the company everyone can express their opinion and take the lead at any time. To ensure this, there are even online platforms where you can submit your ideas/suggestions.

Individualism vs. collectivism (IDV) / Identity

The fundamental issue addressed by this dimension is the degree of interdependence a company maintains among its members. It has to do with whether people’s self-image is defined in terms of “I” or “We”. In an individualist company employee are responsible for his or her own behavior. Both England and The Netherlands have very high scores for this dimension (89 and 80 respectively). Thus, for this dimension, we can also assume that both Dutch and English divisions have the same vision on this subject. (Hofstede, 2002)

Nevertheless, there are still some signs of a collectivistic way of thinking, according to the manager. She provides an example of the team effort when facing some challenges. When there is a problem employees try to work in small teams in order to find the best solution. That proves that although The Netherlands is a highly individualist country, the Dutch are not free from group identity.

Uncertainty Avoidance

The dimension of Uncertainty Avoidance has to do with the way that a company deals with the fact that the future can never be known: should we try to control the future or just let it happen.

In the United Kingdom the uncertainty avoidance is low (35) compared to the Netherlands. A low score on the uncertainty avoidance index indicates that the employees are more comfortable with ambiguity, more entrepreneurial, more likely to take risks, and less dependent on structure rules. (Hofstede, 2002)

But the Netherlands scores 53 which means less comfortable with uncertainty and attempts through rules, regulations, laws, controls, and behavioural norms to reduce or manage uncertainty and ambiguity. (Hofstede, 2002)

The manager comes up with one example which shows that the company has a high uncertainty avoidance index. A company wants to change a logo, and, unfortunately, such a decision needs to go through a lot of regulations and processes which take place in another international office.

Masculinity vs. femininity (MAS) / Achievement

As we can see there is a huge difference between the UK and The Netherlands. At 66, Britain is a Masculine society – highly success-oriented and driven. Meanwhile, The Netherlands scored only 14 which means that it is a very feminine country. A Feminine company would be very relationship-oriented. Workplace flexibility and work-life balance are more important both in the organizational environment and culture. (Hofstede, 2002)

You can clearly notice that a Dutch division of the company has a great emphasis on relationships among employees. The manager underpins several times that the company tries not to push people when implementing new strategies/rules as it would ruin the harmony within the company. In turn, they try to improve cultural awareness in soft ways without any force.

Long-term Orientation

As Hofstede states, long-term orientation means how every society has to maintain some links with its own past while dealing with the challenges of the present and future, and societies prioritise these two existential goals differently.

Netherlands scores 67 & United Kingdom scores 51. That means that it has a pragmatic nature, compared to England, whose preference cannot be determined due to the intermediate score of 51 (Hofstede, 2002).

As the manager states, the company has a long-term vision especially concerning strategies about cultural awareness as the management team is aware that it is something that should be improved.

Possible solutions

The best practice for the company is to treat everyone as equal, everybody’s voice needs to be heard. Moreover, it is crucial to give a fair evaluation and to address any problems while empowering people.

The company should teach its employees not only about cultural awareness but also about cultural competency. It means that employees not only understand one’s own culture but also have the ability to communicate with people from various cultural backgrounds and the ability to analyze and interpret what happens when there is a conflict between people of different cultures. (Weaver, 2013)

The company is already making some steps in this direction. For example, it provides a platform where people are able to offer their suggestions, ideas, and solutions. It also provides an online hub with a tool kit so an employee can access it and have the option to educate themselves as there is a lot of information about various countries where the company operates. Also, there is a calendar for cultural events which is free for all employees. What the company can also do is to introduce games and courses to improve cultural awareness, thus employees can be more interested in joining the online hub. The company should give more opportunities for employees to talk about their culture, so staff will have more knowledge.

The manager stated that she condemns the cultural bias and encourages people from different backgrounds to apply for different kinds of jobs. She also discusses within a company that the company is in need of more diversity.

Also, another solution is to try to bring people of the same culture together to address some issues. The manager gave the example of the man who convinced people from the same background to get the vaccine. The same can be applied to cultural education. For some employees, it might be easier to overcome mistrust and fear if a person who tries to educate them has the same cultural background.

Student Authors

Stijn Kogenhop (LinkedIn)
Student Faculty of Business and Economics, Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences, The Netherlands
Block 2, Semester 1, 2021

Mariia Balakhonova (LinkedIn)
Amsterdam School of International Business, 4th year International Business, The Netherlands
Block 2, Semester 1,  2021

Pathmatharsiny Varadarajahn (LinkedIn)
Student at AUT New Zealand

Huthami Behayaa
Student at Aut Institute of Technology, 2021, Auckland, New Zealand

The interviewee stated that the British communication style was too high-context which made it difficult when receiving performance feedback. The interviewee felt that the ambiguous language hindered performance improvement due to that lack of explicit feedback and planning. In addition, certain workplace norms such as the expectation to work unpaid overtime, limited decision making at the lower end of the company hierarchy, and office etiquette such as the expectation to turn on one’s video camera during calls have roots in an American work culture which may conflict with non-American work values. Productivity and thoroughly completed work are at the core values of this company however the company’s structural focus of productivity may be eliciting complacency which may diminish innovations and ambitions from workers that could improve productivity.

Hofstede Dimensions

Uncertainty Avoidance

This dimension entails the way in which the society of a culture deals with the future. It includes questions such as if the future should be controlled or if everything should just try to leave everything the way it is and not control what happens in the future. The ambiguity shows how a culture copes with fear and anxiety in different ways. Therefore, one can state that uncertainty measures the extent to which members of a culture feel threatened to ambiguous or unknown situations and create beliefs and institutions to avoid those. 

According to figure 1, Bulgaria (85) clearly has the highest score. This indicates that they strongly try to avoid uncertainty. Therefore, working hard with precision and being punctual. Furthermore, security is highly motivating members of the culture. UK (35) with the lowest score clearly shows the serenity of the culture concerning uncertainty, not having a problem within changing their path in case new information arises. This indicates a comfortableness with uncertain situations. This results in non-detailed planning and non-clear goal setting in the working environment. Netherlands (53) and U.S. (46) are more of the “middle players”. Whereas the Netherlands have a slight tendency to avoid uncertainty whereas the U.S. tends to be more comfortable with ambiguous situations.

Long-term vs. Short-term orientation

This dimension measures the extent to which a culture maintains links to the past while dealing with challenges in present and future. Either a society is long-term or short-term oriented. The culture with low scores i.e., prefers time-based traditions and norms during cultural change – long-term orientation. The culture with a high score i.e., is more pragmatic and encourages change and views change as a way to prepare for the future – short-term orientation.

As we can see in figure 1, the U.S. scores lowest (26) and is therefore rather short-term oriented, whereas Bulgaria (69) and Netherlands (67) score pretty high which indicates that they are rather long-term oriented and therefore have a more pragmatic view on the situations and therefore believe that truth depends on situation, context and time. American culture on the other hand is not pragmatic but rather practical. For example, new information is analysed and checked for its truthfulness. This is also shown in the short-term measurement of performance in American companies. It encourages individuals to strive for fast positive results. Though, the U.K. (51) has no clear tendency to either short-term or long-term orientation, therefore one can state that it is easier to align to either one of the two aforementioned spectrums.

In the interview, the interviewee told us about monthly meetings, where he discusses his achievements during the month, which represents a short-term view on the employees’ success, therefore again, we have a rather American management style.

Outcome

The relationship between power distance, individualism and masculinity

The interviewee explained that he is highly influenced by the Dutch culture after studying and working in the Netherlands for five years. Yet, he is working for an American company and his main colleagues are British.

Both the Netherlands and England score relatively low on the dimension of power distance (38 and 35 respectively) according to Hofstede’s Country Comparison tool.  Overall, this is noticeable within the interviewee’s direct team, as the communication is relatively informal and the British supervisor tries to implement an egalitarian leadership style (Meyer, 2016). On the other hand, when important decisions need to be made, it becomes clear that the company makes use of a top-down decision-making system and has a tall organizational structure. Possible changes need to be discussed with the manager of the interviewee, then with the manager of the manager, and so on. This is a result of the high level of individualism (91) and masculinity (62) that can be found in American society. Even though the United States scores fairly low on power distance (40), American organizations establish hierarchy for convenience and managers expect to be consulted on a regular basis. Moreover, the average American aims for the highest possible position and attaches value to status. Installing top-down decision-making systems is one of many ways to ensure that certain positions have more power than others. Contrarily, the company’s code of conduct also consists of feminine traits. The company states that sexism, racism or any other actions that strengthen inequality is prohibited behavior and for example shows this through including topics such as the significance of celebrating Pride Day in its weekly newsletter.

According to the interviewee, transparency and proactivity are two core values of the company (bottom of the iceberg model) which could be caused by the individualistic mindset of the supervisors who expect their team members to carry out their tasks independently and share information frequently (Weaver, 2014). This could also explain why the interviewee provided the example of switching off the camera during an online meeting as inhibitive behavior within the company, because it can be seen as a breach of trust.

A traditional organization with a top-down decision-making system makes sure that employees have less responsibility, as the degree of freedom they have in the decision process is limited. This can reduce the workload of the employees which can decrease their job stress levels (MacDonald, 2003). However, this degree of freedom in the decision-making process is also defined as autonomy value. Autonomy is an intrinsic motivational factor which increases skill sharing, creativity, innovation and organizational dedication (Belias, 2015). With a top-down decision-making system the autonomy level is relatively low, as it offers less flexibility in work procedures. The low autonomy level is not in line with the proactivity value the company claims to include in its business culture. The main reason for this is that proactivity is not triggered when employees are not allowed to participate in decision making. Because of this, it seems that proactivity is a minimal behavioural trait on the surface and is rather a false sense of having control / independence within one’s job, while docility is the actual core value. This contradiction causes role unclarity, which is a role stressor, as there can be confusion about what is exactly expected from employees. For example, the supervisor of the interviewee and his team members encourages them to develop innovative ideas. Yet, such an idea is almost never realized, even when the supervisor has acknowledged the relevance and beneficial aspects of it. This situation makes employees doubt what their responsibilities are and can negatively affect their intrinsic motivation and their level of productivity.’

Furthermore, autonomy can be influenced by how well messages are communicated between employees and supervisors. The interviewee’s supervisor organizes one on one meetings on a monthly basis to discuss the peer’s performance and provide feedback. These personal meetings are often informal and reflect the low power distance between the two parties.  On the other hand, the interviewee mentioned that the feedback is often vague and not constructive enough. The Netherlands has an explicit low-context culture, meaning that the ideal communication is precise and simple. When it comes to the British, they are more high-context and tend to speak between the lines. On top of that, while the Dutch are used to receiving direct negative feedback, the British provide negative feedback subtly and usually within positive feedback. Therefore, the chance exists that the supervisor’s feedback is misinterpreted by an employee who has a different cultural background and is not aware of the non-verbal signals or behaviour. This situation may result in misunderstandings and dissatisfaction among both parties, as the employee will not clearly comprehend what is expected from them and the supervisor will not see the desired changes that she asked for.

Possible solutions

The first small “problem” that could be solved is the formal and informal way of dressing and communication. The company could write guidelines about meetings with a dress code and topics to avoid when in cross-cultural situations. The guidelines should not be a way of telling how to dress but advice employees how to respectfully dress for business meetings. To improve even more the company could set up guidelines with cultural preferences for international business meetings with people of different cultures. Top-down management is proven to be inefficient most of the time (Kooten, 2019). Especially in businesses that drive on creativity and employee motivation or input. Ashby’s law of requisite variety states that decision makers or systems should have as much variety as the people that it manages. Without it the organization cannot function efficiently. So top-down management does not listen to employees within the business enough to make it successful and will guarantee miscommunication and a falling of the system. Ways to improve this is by deleting layers between the top and the bottom of the company. This would work with the situational leadership styles of Hersey and Blanchard, that will make sure that the span wide of managers is not exceed. Managers will give employees more room for input and creativity. A clear example where this happened is the reorganization of Vattenfall (Kooten, 2019).

Student Authors

Emmi Fens (LinkedIn)
Student – University of Amsterdam Applied Sciences
Block 2, Semester 1, 2021

Daan Muilwijk (LinkedIn)
Student – University of Amsterdam Applied Sciences
Block 2, Semester 1, 2021

Skylar Watt
Student – Auckland University of Technology
Block 2, Semester 1, 2021

Emilia Matthis (LinkedIn)
Student – Kozminski University
Block 2, Semester 5, 2021

The company’s CEO, who is also of Montenegrin heritage, started this company with the goal of assisting people who migrated to the Netherlands that had low chances at good working opportunities due to cultural and educational barriers. The CEO identified with these problems since he had experienced them himself when he moved to the Netherlands in 1987. After 18 years, the company grew out to be a successful establishment that aided thousands of people in building their careers and delivered quality labor to multiple companies. Since the majority of the clients are international, the importance of a mutual cultural understanding is of utmost importance, in order to create a comfortable, safe and respectful working environment for both parties. 

However, the need for this cultural awareness was not always evident. The consultant has experienced multiple occasions in which there were discussions with the German clients due to the lack of mutual understanding, which derived from the differences in norms and values as there was a clear difference in outward expressions (Weaver, 2013). These cultural differences were expressed in both verbal and non-verbal communication, which lead to unnecessary friction and tension between the two parties. Both parties’ lack of interpreting each other correctly often led to misunderstandings that hindered the partnerships.

The increase in friction between international parties stressed the lack of intercultural awareness and understanding. The consultant realized that he lacked understanding of his clients culturally and its negative impacts. The problems the consultant experienced were communicated to the head of the company and the executive decision was made to tackle this problem. He mentioned that the downfall was that both parties kept taking non-verbal and verbal communication patterns personally. With the lack of awareness of each other’s cultures, this had negative impacts.

The company has constructed several rules in order to prevent the emergence of prohibitive and inhibitive behavior, which is why the company has strong policies against certain issues such as, racism, discrimination and sexism on the work floor. The just called rules are examples of prohibitive and inhibitive behavior.

Outcome

Power distance

With a Montenegrin power distance score of 88, and a German power distance score of 35, the two countries are quite far apart from each other. Power distance illustrates the low acceptance of equality and therefore a less presence of inequality within society (Hofstede, 2002). Montenegro on the other hand is comfortable with the idea of inequality within society, which translates on the workspace as well. In Montenegrin culture, a hierarchical order in which everybody has a certain place is not questioned and generally accepted without any further justification (Hofstede, 2002). Germany has low-context communication, meaning they are very direct, as opposed to Montenegrin high-context which holds a sort of ambiguity that can be clarified through context.

During meetings, the consultant perceived the German clients to be somewhat rude in their communication as he mentioned that it seemed that they had no ‘filter’. He was used to a more subtle way of communicating and often took the verbal and non-verbal communication from the German end personally. Occasionally, this resulted in meetings getting overheated with the need of resuming at a later point when both parties were cooled off. When the meetings resumed later on, the consultant and his German client found out that it was just a misunderstanding due to improper interpretation of communication.

Early on in the business-relationship between the two, the consultant mentioned that he felt a certain unease in the meetings. The (company) culture he was used to was not reciprocated by his German clients and as a form of respect (due to the high power-distance), talking back was unheard of for him (prohibitive). As his experience with them broadened and he got to learn about German culture, he adjusted his attitude and communication in the meetings. He can now finally communicate with them more freely and with mutual comfort.

Individualism

On the dimension of individualism, the companies are very unalike again. With a score of 67, German culture believes in refraining from becoming emotionally dependent of groups, organizations or other collectives (Hofstede, 2002). Instead, they are usually focused on taking care of themselves. Opposed to the Montenegrin score of 24, which indicates a collective culture. They lay emphasis on the whole group such as, an organization or family and usually build relationships with kindness and rituals (Hofstede, 2002). On the work floor, this translates in an understanding and warm atmosphere, in which employees are comfortable in expressing even (personal) problems and generally take care of each other as well (professionally). In German professional culture, mentioning personal problems during work is prohibitive and therefore, it is important that both parties understand their differences in individualism to forecast what to expect from each other.

Masculinity

On the dimension of masculinity, the issues experienced by the company and their partners during negotiations are vastly diverse.  Since the company is based in the Netherlands and with a score of 14 in Masculinity, contrasted to a score of 66 for Germany and 48 for Montenegro, an understanding develops toward the hostility being experienced during the meetings. Further the German culture is “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 organizational life.” (Hofstede Insights, n.d.).  This reflection of the German culture is very similar to that of the Montenegrin culture, therefore the need for interpreters and/or translation services for meetings is needed to avoid misunderstandings to avoid up flairs of emotions.

Uncertainty Avoidance

The scores for uncertainty avoidance provide insight into the degree of certainty about the future.  With a 90 score for Montenegro, and 65 for Germany, this is an indication that in the case study’s experience of intercultural dialogue, both parties require certainty in order for a partnership to be developed or established.  This is a reflection of the culture where any uncertainty is avoided at all cost for these countries.  Also, these cultures would source the necessary tools and mechanisms to predict the future or influence it, so as to avoid unpleasantries, which the consultant noticed in each other’s way of communicating. Both parties were continuously thinking of problems that might occur ahead in time and how to possibly tackle them. Leaving things for the unknown is really a prohibited practice in both cultures, which is some of the reasons why the two parties did work well together.

Long term orientation

This dimension describes how societies maintain links with “ past while dealing with the challenges of the present and future” (Hofstede Insights 2021). Additionally Hofstede Insights (2021) defines that societies prioritize these present and future goals differently. Montenegro scores high 75 on long-term orientation as well as Germany 83. Here both societies have a pragmatic orientation towards the future and are eager to put effort into planning and preparing the future. This common orientation refers to the willingness to still continue consulting meetings, despite the unease of cultural differences and in-comprehensiveness, to plan and achieve the planned outcome. Despite the differences, both societies want to perform for future results, showing “perseverance in achieving results” (Hofstede Insights 2021). It also relates to the above described uncertainty avoidance dimension.

Possible solutions and best practices

In international contexts, cultural differences play a major role. They are reflected in any kind of reaction, understanding of respect, timing, way of communicating and behavior. In our interview, the example of business meetings for consultants and their clients has been explained. It was possible to see main differences in communication patterns which resulted in major in-comprehensions and frictions. These meetings have evolved towards more open discussions with attention being placed on intercultural backgrounds, which was the company’s best practice. Therefore, the company has established rules and procedures and also prepared the consultants to the cultural aspects of their clients before attending the meetings. In the end it resulted in more attentive consultants that were less worried about offending their partners and scared to create an atmosphere of unease, negatively influencing the service offering and business environment. Overall, clients have also been addressed surveys to see if their satisfaction increased since these measures have been instaurated, resulting in a positive response. In conclusion, making companies present in international settings and their employees attentive to cultural differences and instauring measures, will create favorable environments, enhance business settings and increase customer satisfaction.

Student Authors

Lucie Lehmann
Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
Semester 2, Block 2, 2021

Nukutau Pokura
Auckland University of Technology
Semester 2, Block 2, 2021

Kenza Alaoui Mdaghri
Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences
Semester 2, Block 2, 2021

A Dutch global concept development team member working for an International HR service provider headquartered in the Netherlands, and operating in over 30 countries was our interview subject. The concept development team travels the world on- and offline in order to meet with their global colleagues. With the insights of those meetings with all different operating companies, this team initiates new business concepts or develops existing business concepts. Consequently, the business concept team member has had the opportunity to work with and adjust to many different cultures on a daily basis. Therefore, he has experienced many different cultures and has adjusted to those cultures. Adjusting to someone else’s culture instead of expecting people to change to you feels like an inhibitive behavior for the concept development team member.

He explains that he finds it most difficult to adjust to cultural differences that he has never experienced before. We can assume that the biggest visible differences, which often are the outward expressions (tip of the Iceberg) are most difficult to adjust to, however the concept development team member finds it more difficult to realize cultural differences that are a bit deeper, which you only realize within the moment. The visible cultural aspects from tip of the iceberg model are seen as obvious cultural differences, however the team member of the concept development team explained that the deeper level of culture, which he’s not always aware of up front, is the most difficult to deal with for him. The iceberg model also demonstrates that the cultural difference in behavior at the top of the iceberg is more visible and consequently you’re more aware of it and adjust to it more easily than invisible aspects of culture such as people’s thoughts and values (Weaver, 2002, p.10).

At this HR company many prohibitive and inhibitive behaviors are involved which differ tremendously per country or better to say culture. In the Netherlands direct communication is a social norm, while other colleagues across cultures at the company prefer a less direct approach. It is inhibitive for them to be as direct as the Dutch. The Dutch communication style thus differs to those of other countries such as e.g. Canada. The interviewed business concept team member stated that the way of communication accordingly led to misunderstandings with these colleagues in the past. In order to further prevent any unnecessary miscommunication as a result, this company creates awareness around the topic of diversity and cultural differences. These differences, which are rooted in cultural diversity, will be elucidated more detailed in the following text taking the 6D-Hofstede model into consideration.

Outcome

Power distance index (PDI) / Hierarchy Acceptance

Since the company is really large, there are always managers to whom employees report. Therefore there always is some sort of power distance. However the business concept team member explains that he doesn’t really feel the power distance. If he wants to express an idea or a concern with someone who’s high within the hierarchy, he would feel like he could simply send an email and arrange a meeting just like that. He explains that it is part of the company culture to be your own entrepreneur and that the younger employees are also empowered to think on an executive board level together with the executive board during challenge panels. The Dutch culture is also part of this approach, in the Netherlands the power distance is relatively low (38) and people are often quite direct and honest, this makes the perfect combination to really express any concerns and ideas towards anyone, even the executive board (Hofstede, 2002).

Individualism vs. Collectivism (IDV) / Identity

Our interviewee recalled an interaction with an American colleague in which he was asked how he was, and responded honestly as he would to people in his home country. His American colleague was shocked, and reacted as if to cancel the meeting for our interviewee in order to relieve some of his stress, where our interviewee realized he had made a faux pas, as the meeting was important and necessary to him, but he had inadvertently made his colleague feel like his time was being wasted. In the interaction between the business concept team member and their American counterpart, high individualism may have been a factor at play for both parties’ reactions. Both American and Dutch cultures rank highly on the individuality scale, which indicates a strong value for one’s own time, personal work production, and freedom. By being frank with their American coworker, the business concept team member may have unwittingly made their coworker feel that their time was less valuable than the other tasks the business concept team member had to perform. As both people come from highly individualist cultures, finding an equilibrium where each person was valuing both their own, and the others’ time may have been difficult, but as Hofstede et al (2002) note, it is important to remember than people have their own personalities, and are acting according to the rules of socializing they are used to in their cultures. Weaver’s iceberg analogy (2001) is also pertinent, as the business concept team member noted he was able to reflect on his intercultural skills and reactions as a result of the interaction which revealed greater cultural differences than he had realized or expected. As the company deals with employees across a number of countries and with varying nationalities, maintaining an open perspective of colleagues will be an important part of the company culture.

Uncertainty avoidance index (UAI)

Dutch culture has a middling uncertainty avoidance factor according to the diagrams provided above. Hofstede et al (2002) hypothesize that uncertainty avoidance stems from a fear of the unknown, so an international company with many employees from different intercultural backgrounds may create much anxiety as each person is different from the others in their background and beliefs. As our interviewed company is a multinational one, it is likely that there are procedures in place for employees to follow regardless of location or background in order to reduce uncertainty. These procedures may not necessarily be sensible to some employees, and may have required some adjustments to be made to understand, but having a universal rule set to follow will have made all the difference. Uncertainty may be avoided in personal communications between coworkers if all employees are more familiar with each others’ cultural backgrounds. 

Our interview also revealed that the company likes to experiment with new ventures, but in order to mitigate negative consequences from taking risks, these are usually small. Should the initial venture prove successful or profitable, the company then implements a broader scale rollout of the idea across various offices. This central approach is likely a way to appeal to employees of all cultures as there is no explicit danger that would disturb those with high uncertainty avoidance, and continuous small risks provide stimulation and interesting scenarios for those who have low uncertainty avoidance. 

Masculinity vs. femininity (MAS) / Achievement

Regarding masculinity and femininity we realize a vehement difference between the American and Dutch culture (Hofstede, 2002), which also becomes obvious when analyzing the 6-D model of Hofstede. Whereas Dutch culture appears to be highly feminine showing a low score of 14, the American culture reaches a Hofstede score of 62 and thus differs strongly concerning subjects such as achievements within society (Hofstede, 2002). Following the business concept team member, this also has a great impact on how employees react to failures and whether they tend to sugarcoat mistakes by focusing on the learned outcome. 

The American culture, which is highly masculine, struggles to admit to failure as visible achievement is highly desirable and favored in a masculine culture. Failure is considered inhibitive to an individual’s and a company’s success, and expressing this outwardly is frowned upon by society. On the other hand, other cultures such as Germany tend to talk about failures more directly. The business concept team member also mentioned, that although the Dutch culture is highly feminine, an open culture of failure is often not practically lived by employees because of the high power distance. It is also stated, that due to the fact that achievements matter highly both in the US and Dutch culture, a pressure of innovation is often an outcome of the aim to create these visible achievements.

Long-term orientation vs. short-term orientation (LTO):

The business concept team member states that within their company people tend to be highly short-term oriented. However, a high Hofstede score of 67 regarding long-term orientation opposes this statement (Hofstede, 2002). This might be due to constraints by the operational oriented department tasks. In contrast to that, the business concept team member states that a more long-term oriented view is taken by his colleagues working in other departments and that this perspective might be desirable for his work and thus is a future goal of his work. Accordingly, the member of the business concept team is rationally more long-term oriented through the strategic approach of his work, which comes naturally with the development of business concepts that are often conceptualized several years in advance. On the other hand, other departments, such as those which deal with HR clients, who ask for quick support in recruiting and personnel activities, have a short-term orientation. This is due to the fact that these clients seek fast solutions and often urgently look for required staff. Overall this business is related to lots of these types of operational and unpredictable works and thus appears to be rather short-term oriented in general.

Possible solutions

Several of the inter-cultural issues can be addressed by having regular group interactions with the HR team so they are able to work together as a group to meet and better get to know each other. This would please the collectivists among the group to be able to know their team better, and also encourage the individualists to interact with their international team members with different cultures at the forefront of the exchange. 

It is also important to understand the other cultures’ ways of communication, so that feedback regarding failures is not misinterpreted, and even though colleagues tend to sugarcoat negative decisions, concrete improvement should be drawn from these actions. As stated before, a more long-term oriented perspective might improve processes and shift daily work from operational tasks to a more strategic one. Employees cannot rely on solely the things directly communicated, as many different cultures use indirect communication and thus workshops and open discussions about communicative differences and challenges can improve productivity of multicultural working teams. Adressing issues openly and discussing different styles of communication is thus one of many strategies at our interviewed company to tackle this inter-cutural challenge.

Another aspect to be kept in mind is that often company culture differs from national culture and thus possible solutions should always be aligned to the working culture rather than relying only on national data. This becomes even clearer when considering that national culture and working culture are intertwined and constantly influence each other. Thus, one can state that through daily multicultural work it is difficult to sometimes attribute certain ways of working to the company being Dutch. Overall it does help to sensibilize employees for cultural differences. Being aware of these differences and also being able to adjust to them is a great advantage for overcoming cultural hurdles and is actively lived in the interviewed company. 

Authors

Lara Geerlings (LinkedIn)
Student: International Business Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences
Block 4 Semester 1, 2021

Loana Markowski (LinkedIn)
Student: International Business binational DHBW Mannheim/Kozminski University Warsaw
Semester 1, 2021

Rachel Roberts
Aukland University of Technology (no longer a student, voluntary joining honours)