Hofstede's Cultural Framework

Geert Hofstede, a Dutch social psychologist, developed a widely used platform that established the dimensions of culture. Read this chapter to better understand these dimensions and see how they can be applied to different countries and cultures.

Cultural Dimension 2: Individualism and Collectivism

The second cultural dimension we consider here is individualism/collectivism. Individualism refers to the degree to which a society focuses on the relationship of the individual to the group. Collectivism refers to the degree to which a society focuses on the relationship of the group as a whole.

In societies with high individualism (or low collectivism) scores, individuals are valued for their achievements and are rewarded and recognized for such achievements. In contrast, people who live in societies with low individualism (high collectivism) are seen as being part of a wider group, known as the in-group. The in-group includes the family, team, or social class, and how individuals relate to such wider groups is seen as important to their success. In other words, people's success is gauged by how others in their groups view and support them.

(Table 3) shows the levels of individualism in the same selected 15 nations. We again see similar patterns whereby more Anglo cultures such as the U.S., Canada, and the U.K. have relatively high levels of individualism. In contrast, Asian, Latin American, and many emerging countries tend to have cultures that are either on the medium or low range of the individualism dimension. (Table 3) shows some of the implications of individualism for management. The effects of most management practices are determined by whether they are done at a group or individual level. For example, in countries with low individualism, one will find that employees are hired and promoted mostly on the basis of association with a larger group, such as a university or high school. In such societies, emphasis is placed on loyalty, seniority, and age. To operate smoothly in such societies, companies need to appreciate the importance of the larger social group. Additionally, as (Table 3) also shows, care should be taken in terms of how rewards are distributed. Rewarding individual team members in low individualism societies can result in tensions because the individual team member may become stigmatized. In such cases, rewards done on a group level may work best.

Table 3: Implications of Individualism
Type of Work Activity Low Individualism/High Collectivism High Individualism/Low Collectivism
Relationship with companies
  • Employees act in the interest of in-group (members of the family or same university)
  • Employee commitment to company relatively low
  • Employee-employer relationships is almost like a family link
  • Employees act in their own interests
  • Employee commitment to organizations high
  • Employee-employer relationship based on the market

Human resource, management

  • Hiring and promotion takes in-group into consideration
  • Better to reward based on equality (give everyone the same reward) rather than equity (base reward on work effort) Relatives of employees preferred in hiring
  • Training best when focused at group level
  • Hiring and promotions based on rules
  • Family relationships unimportant in hiring
  • Better to reward based on equity
  • Training done best individually

Other issues

  • Belief in collective decisions
  • Treating friends better than others is normal
  • Support of teamwork
  • Less mobility across occupations
  • Personal relationships very critical in business
  • Belief in individual decision making
  • Treating friends better than others at the workplace is considered unethical
  • More mobility across occupations within company
  • Tasks and company prevail over personal relationships in business