Hofstede: A Cross-Cultural Team Analysis

1440 Words6 Pages

"If you conduct practically any type of business in a major global city, you will come face to face with people from a multiplicity of cultures. At no time in our history could you hear so many different languages spoken simply by walking down a big city street" (Leighton, C., 2012, p. 26). As a consequence, the importance of IHRM is growing in our globalizing and internationalizing world of today. The number of multinational enterprises (MNEs) is increasing, and so is the diversity within the company. Considering that professionals from all over the world have to communicate and work together in these MNEs. Therefore, we need cross-cultural management, to create cross-cultural teams that are capable of working together, despite
…show more content…
Subsequently, it analyses Hofstede's dimensions in countries from the European Union and collates the differences. Finally, it describes if Hofstede's dimensions can be used to create an optimal cross-cultural team? By looking at; What is a cross-cultural team? And how to create an optimal team?


Hofstede's cultural dimension theory has been used many times by researchers and can be seen as the theoretical foundation in cross-cultural studies (Fernandez, D. R., D. S. Carlson, L. P. Stepina, and J. D. Nicholson, 1997; Blodgett., Bakir., & Rose., 2008), taking into account that "Hofstede's cultural framework has been applied in a wide variety of contexts, across most (if not all) of the behavioural science disciplines" (B., et al., 2008, p. 762).

Hofstede's theory constitutes from national cultures, he defines culture as "the collective programming of the mind that distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from others" (Hofstede G. et al., 2010, p. 6). Although, some researchers think this definition is slightly vague in terms of what the actual components of culture are (e.g., Kirkman, B. L., Lowe, K. B., & Gibson, C. B. (2016),
…show more content…
1997), there is also a great deal of critique on the theory.

On the one hand, proponents of the theory claim that the dimensions theory is a major source of reference about value differences around the world (Orr, L. M., & Hauser, W. J (2008), p. 1). Various researchers state it is by far the most comprehensive, dominant, influential and widely recognized framework on which much cross-cultural research has been based (Orr, et al. 2008; H, W, M, 2013).

On the other hand, "several studies raise concerns about the empirical validity of Hofstede's framework" (Kagitcibasi, 1994; Soondergaard, 1994; Bakir et al., 2000; Blodgett, et al., 2008,
p. 762). Therefore, several researchers stated that there should come a replication / re-examination of the study (Orr, L. M., & Hauser, W. J. 2008; Thien, L. M., Thurasamy, R., & Razak, N. A., 2014). In the interest of determining the content, reliability and validity of Hofstede's cultural dimensions. Because "Hofstede's work has been misconstrued and misinterpreted in many subsequent studies, they have taken and utilized Hofstede's work with surprisingly little questioning of his results" (Orr, L. M., & Hauser, W. J., 2008, p.1-2). Blodgett, Bakir & Rose (2008) even propose that none of the four cultural dimensions appears to be sufficiently
Open Document