3.2 Dimensions and Theoretical Frameworks of Cultures

This section introduces cultural frameworks developed by Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck, Geert Hoftedeand Hall, which are classic and well received. It introduces latest findings of culture study in global context as well.

3.2.1 Cultural Frameworks: Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck

Dimensions are referred to the“components that cannot be easily subdivided into additional components while a framework is paradigm consisting of different dimensions used as a reference to analyze an issue （Bollen, 1989）. The commonly accepted frameworks of cultures include works of Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck, Geert Hoftede and Hall.

Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck develop a framework of six dimensions to describe the values orientation of a culture as presented in Table 3.1. The values orientations represent how different societies cope with various issues or problems. A culture may favor one or more of the variations or approaches associated with a particular values orientation.

Relation to Nature

Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck consider a culture to cope with its relation to nature through subjugation to it, harmony with it, or mastery of it. Eskimo culture of Canada has a subjugation orientation. They accept nature as it is rather than try to change it. A culture that is in harmony with nature, such as the Chinese, attempts to orient behavior to coexist with nature such as the idea of Fengshui,“wind water”. The Chinese have developed a set of basic Fengshui principles which indicates that when the Fengshui is good, business should prosper. Mastery cultures, such as North America and Western Europe, attempt to change aspects of the environment through technology when necessary or desirable. Some cultures, such as Canadian society demonstrate an almost equal preference for harmony and mastery in relation to nature （Maznevski & DiStefano, 1997）.

Time Orientation

The time orientation dimension is a society's focus on the past, present, or future. A past orientation emphasizes tradition and using time-honored approaches. Italians respect and value craftsmanship based on years of traditional practice, and an Italian organization treasures time-tested ways of making a product. A present-oriented culture generally focuses on the short-term. In the United States businesses evaluate employee performance yearly, managers look at financial results quarterly, and people are highly conscious of time. A future-oriented society emphasizes the long term. Some large Japanese corporations hire employees for life and consider profitability of a venture only after several years of operation. Similarly, the Japanese often do things to benefit future generations.

Basic Human Nature

Basic human nature assesses a culture's belief in people as good, evil, or neutral. A society seeing good in people is basically a trusting one. In Japan executives often trust each other enough to make only verbal agreements for major business deals. In a culture that believes that people are basically evil, there is a lack of trust. In making a business deal, a New Yorker, who often exhibits skepticism, is careful to guard against being cheated. He/she might have an attorney examine the terms of a contract and insist that every detail be in writing. A society with a mixed or neutral orientation believes that people are basically good, however, in some situations they do behave in an evil manner. Therefore, it is important to be cautious to protect oneself. Many parts of Canada display this ambivalence.

Activity Orientation

A culture's activity orientation is doing, being, or controlling. In a doing culture, emphasis is on action, achievement, and working. Americans are hard working and want recognition for their accomplishments. Motivation is through increases in salary, promotions, and other forms of recognition. A being country emphasizes enjoying life and working for the moment. People work to live rather than live to work. In Mexico, businesspeople socialize and enjoy each other's company before discussing their business. Finally, a controlling culture emphasizes rationality and logic. People restrain their desires to try to achieve a balance between mind and body. For instance, the French approach to decision making emphasizes pragmatism, logic and rationality.

Relationships among People

Relationships among people can be individualistic, group, or hierarchical. People in individualistic societies define themselves through personal characteristics and achievements. In the United States employees receive rewards for their own accomplishments. Individuals have their own work goals, and managers often encourage competition. In a group-oriented society, a positive relationship to the collective is important. People relate to and take responsibility for members of the family or community. Emphasis is on harmony, unity, and loyalty. Japanese usually base organizational decisions on consensus, working from the lower levels and moving upward. Hierarchical societies also value group relationships, but emphasize the relative ranking of groups within an organization or society as a whole, making them more class conscious than group societies. In India, as a result of the caste system, birth largely determines position in society, and people from certain groups are more likely to have higher prestige or lower prestige jobs.

Space Orientation

The space orientation dimension indicates how people relate to the ownership of space. There are three types of space orientation, i.e., public, private, and mixed. In a public society, space belongs to all. Japanese companies arrange office space in an open plan. The desks of both employees and their supervisors are in the same large room with no partitions. In a society that values privacy such as the United States, employees consider it important to have their own space. Because privacy is highly valued, higher status members of an organization often have larger, more private space. Finally, in a mixed society, views on space fall somewhere in the middle combining the public spaces with private spaces. In Hong Kong, lower level employees may share a common work area while managers have private offices （Francesco & Gold, 2003）.

3.2.2 Cultural Frameworks: Trompenaar and Hampden-Turner

Similarly, FonsTrompenaars, a Dutch economist and consultant, also developed a framework to examine cultural differences together with Hampden-Turner （1997）. They describe national cultural differences using seven dimensions. Five dimensions are about how people relate to others, including universalism versus particularism, individualism versus collectivism, neutral versus affective, specific versus diffuse, and achievement versus ascription. The sixth dimension is time orientation: past, present, or future and sequential or synchronous. The final dimension is relationship to nature: internal- or external-oriented. Just as with the Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck work, Trompenaars' dimensions represent how societies develop approaches to handling problems and difficult situations （Francesco &Gold, 2003）. Although Trompenaar and Hampden-Turner （1997） referred to societal rather than national cultures, the underlying conceptualization of culture within their framework remains very similar to that inherent in the work of Hofstede. Both frameworks conceptualized culture as being homogenous and stable within geo-ethic boundaries （Patel, 2014）

Universalism versus Particularism

Universalistic societies believe that laws are written for everyone and must be respected by everyone at all times. In particularistic societies, the nature of a particular relationship takes precedence over the details of the situation. Some researchers have claimed that this dimension is a potential source of conflict in cross-border partnerships since mutual trust can be difficult ot establish between partners form universalistic and particularistic cultures.

Individualism versus Communitarianism

This dimension is the same as Hofsted's individualism versus collectivism dimension and refers to the degree of an individual's orientation towards themselves rather than towards common goals and objectives.

Affective versus Neutral

This dimension explains the degree to which a society allows its members to express their emotions. In neutral culture, people control and subdue their feelings effectively, whereas, in affective cultures, people express their feelings openly.

Specific versus Diffuse

This dimension explains whether people engage others in specific areas of their life and personality or diffusely in multiple areas of their life and personality at the same time.

Achievement versus Ascription

In an achievement- oriented society, status in attributed to people based on their achievement; it reflects“doing”. On the other hand, in an ascription-oriented society, status is ascribed based on age, class, education, gender etc., and it reflects“being”.

Sequential versus Synchronic Perception of Time

In a sequential culture, time is considered as a series of passing events. In contrast, according to the synchronic approach, the past, present and the future are interrelated.

Internal versus External Locus of Control

This dimension address societal orientations towards nature. If society dictates that individuals can and should control nature by imposing their will upon it, then this reveals an internal locus of control. On the other hand, if society supports that individuals are part of nature and should follow its laws, directions and forces, then this indicates an external locus of control.

3.2.3 Cultural Frameworks: Geert Hofstede

The most frequently cited framework of culture is that of Geert Hofstede, a Dutch researcher, who extracted four dimensions of values to explain the differences among cultures: individualism-collectivism, power distance, uncertainty avoidance, and masculinity-femininity. Later, a dimension reflecting Chinese cultural values called Confucian work dynamism was put forward by other scholars, and was eventually labeled long-term and short-term orientation by Hofstede.

Power Distance

Power distance can be defined as the extent to which the less powerful members of institutions and organizations within a country expect and accept that power is distributed unequally. The main sources of power are family and friends, charisma, and the ability to use force. Physical and intellectual capacities, power, wealth, and status may or may not go together. So there is inequality in any society. Inequality within a society is visible in the existence of different social classes:upper, middle and lower. A small power distance society is less comfortable with power differences such as social class distinction or organizational ranking. Rank differences are ignored in certain situations. It is positive for someone in a high-level position to treat those in lower-level positions as equals. In small power distance country, there is more participation in decision making and disregard of hierarchical level to some extent.

However, in a large power distance culture, differences among people with different ranks are accepted, and an individual's societal or organizational position influences how he/she acts and how others treat him/her. A person in a high-level position treats those at lower levels with dignity, but the differences in rank are always clear. Delegating decision making implies incompetence because the rank of a manager's position requires him to make decisions himself. In a large power distance country managers tend to use an autocratic or paternalistic style. Most decisions are made at the top, and organizations have many layers of management. Might prevails over right. A strong statement may rarely be presented in words, yet it is reflected in the behavior of those in power and of ordinary people. There is an unspoken consensus that there should be an order of inequality in this world in which everybody has his or her place. Such an order satisfies people's need for dependence and it gives a sense of security both to those in power and to those lower down.

In China around 500 B.C., Confucius maintained that the stability of society was based on unequal relationships between people. He distinguished the Wulun, the five basic relationships: ruler-subject, father-son, older brother-younger brother, husband-wife, and senior friend-junior friend. Countries of Chinese majority such as Singapore, South Korea and Japan accept and appreciate inequality, but feel that the use of power should be moderated by a sense of obligation （Hofstede &Garratt, 1994）

Individualism and Collectivism

Individualism pertains to societies in which the ties between individuals are loose. Everyone is expected to look after himself or herself and his or her immediate family rather than others. Collectivism as its opposite pertains to societies in which people are integrated into strong, cohesive in-groups, which throughout people's lifetimes continue to protect them in exchange for unquestioning loyalty.

In individualistic society, the individual is important, and each person's rights are valued. Organization systems attempt to honor individual preference and choice, and an employee's evaluation and reward are based on individually agreed-upon objectives. Even when they belong to a team, employees are recognized for individual achievements.

Collectivist cultures value the overall good of the group. The expectation is that people subordinate their individual interests and needs for the benefit of the group. Because being part of the group is so important, it is often very clear how people in the group should behave. In Collectivist countries such as Mexico, people look after each other in exchange for loyalty, emphasize belonging, and make group decisions.

The dimension to be identified with individualism versus collectivism is most strongly associated with the relative importance attached to the following“work goal”items. Individualism emphasizes a job which leaves employee sufficient time for personal or family life, considerable freedom to adopt their own approach to the job. They want to have challenging work to do, a work from which they can achieve a personal sense of accomplishment. In opposition, collectivist employees emphasize training opportunities to improve their skills or learn new skills, good physical working conditions, and fully using their skills and abilities on the job.

The Chinese, collectivist, participants perform best when operating with a group goal anonymously. They perform worst when operating individually and with their name marked on the items produced. The American, individualist, participants perform best when operating individually and with their name marked, and extremely low when operating as a group and anonymously （Earley, 1989）.

In sum, collectivist is characterized by: Collective interests prevail over individual interests; Private life is invaded by group; Opinions are predetermined by group membership; Laws and rights differ by group; Low per capita GNP;Dominant role of the state in the economic system; Economy based on collective interests; Political power exercised by interest groups; Press controlled by the state; Imported economic theories largely irrelevant because unable to deal with collective and particularistic interests; Ideologies of equality prevail over ideologies of individual freedom; Harmony and consensus in society are ultimate goals.

In opposition, individualist is characterized by: Individual interests prevail over collective interests; Everyone has a right to privacy; Everyone is expected to have a private opinion; Laws and rights are supposed to be the same for all; High per capita GNP; Restrained role of the state in the economic system; Economy based on individual interests; Political power exercised by voters; Press freedom;Native economic theories based on pursuit of individual self-interests; Ideologies of individual freedom prevail over ideologies of equality; Self-actualization by every individual is an ultimate goal （Hofstede & Garratt,1994）。

Masculinity and femininity

Masculinity pertains to societies in which social gender roles are clearly distinct.Men are supposed to be assertive, tough, and focused on material success whereas women are supposed to be more modest, tender, and concerned with the quality of life. Femininity pertains to societies in which social gender roles overlap. Both men and women are supposed to be modes, tender, and concerned with the quality of life. In a masculine society, the“tough”values—including success, money, assertiveness, and competition—are dominant. There are often significant differences between men's and women's roles. The label“masculine”is used because these tough values are almost universally associated with men's roles. Countries such as Germany and Austria ranked highly masculine because their cultures value earnings, recognition, advancement, and challenge. This type of society encourages independent decision making. In contrast, feminine cultures place importance on“tender”values such as personal relationships, care for others, the quality of life, and service. Gender roles are less distinct and often equal. This dimension is termed“feminine”because these traits are usually part of the female role. People in feminine Finland value cooperation, a friendly atmosphere, employment security, and group decision making.

Feminine characterized by: Welfare society ideal; The needy should be helped;Permissive society; Small and slow are beautiful; Preservation of the environment should have highest priority; Government spends relatively large proportion of budget on development assistance to poor countries; Government spends relatively small proportion of budget on armaments; International conflicts should be resolved by negotiation and compromise; A relatively large number of women in elected political positions; Dominant religions stress the complementarity of the sexes; Women's liberation means that men and women should take equal shares both at home and at work.

Masculine is characterized by: Performance society ideal; The strong should be supported; Corrective society; Big and fast are beautiful; Maintenance of economic growth should have highest priority; Government spends relatively small proportion of budget on development assistance to poor countries; Government spends relatively large proportion of budget on armaments; International conflicts should be resolved by a show of strength or by fighting; A relatively small number of women in elected political positions; Dominant religions stress the male prerogative; Women's liberation means that women will be admitted to positions hitherto only occupied by men （Hofstede & Garratt, 1994）.

Uncertainty Avoidance

Uncertainty avoidance can therefore be defined as the extent to which the members of a culture feel threatened by uncertain or unknown situation. This feeling is, among other things, expressed through nervous stress and in a need for predictability: a need for written and unwritten rules. Uncertainty avoidance, which ranges from strong to weak, indicates the preferred amount of structure. Strong uncertainty avoidance countries prefer more structure, resulting in explicit rules of behavior, either written or unwritten. These nations have strict laws with heavy penalties for offenders, a high need for security, and great respect for experts. Concern about doing things correctly is great, and people are not likely to start a new venture without very thorough research. For example, in a strong uncertainty avoidance country such as Greece, managers are risk-averse and likely to work for the same company for a long time. In contrast, weak uncertainty avoidance cultures favor unstructured situations. The culture is more flexible and people more easily going; a wider range of behaviors is acceptable. In Hong Kong, where uncertainty avoidance is weak, individuals have strong feelings of personal competency, and entrepreneurial behavior is common.

Weak uncertainty avoidance is characterized by: Few and general laws and rules; If rules cannot be respected, they should be changed; Citizen competence versus authorities; Citizen protest acceptable; Citizens positive towards institutions;Civil servants positive towards political process; Tolerance, moderation; Positive attitudes towards young people; Regionalism, internationalism, attempts at integration of minorities; Belief in generalists and common sense; Many nurses, few doctors; One group's truth should not be imposed on others; Human rights:nobody should be persecuted for their beliefs; In philosophy and science, tendency towards relativism and empiricism; Scientific opponents can be personal friends.

Strong uncertainty avoidance are characterized by: Many and precise laws and rules; If rules cannot be respected, we are sinners and should repent ; Citizen incompetence versus authorities; Citizen protest should be repressed; Citizens negative towards institutions; Civil servants negative towards political process;Conservatism, extremism, law and order; Negative attitudes towards young people;Nationalism, xenophobia, repression of minorities; Belief in experts and specialization; Many doctors, few nurses; There is only one Truth and we have it;Religious, political, and ideological fundamentalism and intolerance; In philosophy and science, tendency towards grand theories; Scientific opponents cannot be personal friends （Hofstede & Garratt, 1994）.

Confucian Work Dynamism

Confucian work dynamism is also called long-term orientation and short-term orientation. Cultures high on Confucian work dynamism or long-term oriented, have greater concern with the future and value thrift and persistence. Such societies consider how their current actions could influence future generations. In a long-term oriented country such as Japan, companies take a longer-term view of investments. It is not necessary to show profits year by year, but rather, progress toward a longer-term goal is most important. In countries low in Confucian work dynamism, or short-term oriented, values are toward the past and present. There is respect for tradition and fulfilling social obligations is a concern, but the here and now is most important. In the short-term oriented United States, for example, companies focus on quarterly and yearly profit results，and managers evaluate employee performance on a year-to-year basis. Table 3.2 presents the scores of ten countries for long-term and short-term orientation with their four Hofstede dimension scores.

Even though culture is different, one culture has no absolute criteria for judging the activities of another culture as“low”or“noble”, the view of which is called culture relativism. It does call for suspending judgment when dealing with groups or societies different from one's own. One should think twice before applying the norms of one person, group or society to another. Information about the nature of the cultural differences between societies, their roots, and their consequences should precede judgment and action.

3.2.4 Cultural Frameworks: Hall

US anthropologist Edward T. Hall uses the concept of context to explain differences in communication styles, and distinguishes cultures on the basis of their way of communicating along a dimension from ‘high-context' to ‘low context' （Hall, 1976）. Context is the information that surrounds an event. It is inextricably bound up with the meaning of that event （Hall & Hall, 1995）.A high-context communication is one in which little has to be said or written because most of the information is either in the physical environment or within the person, while very little is in the coded, explicit part of the message. This type of communication is frequent in collectivist cultures. A low-context communication is one in which the mass of information is vested in the explicit code, which is typical for individualist cultures. Lots of things which in collectivist cultures are self-evident must be said explicitly in individualist cultures. American business contracts are much longer than Japanese business contracts.

In a high-context culture, such as China, Egypt, France, Italy, Japan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Syria, family, friends, coworkers, and clients have close personal relationships and large information networks. Because of this, people in high-context cultures know a lot about others within their networks. They do not require extensive background information. People in low-context cultures such as Australia, Canada, Denmark, England, Finland, Germany, Norway, Switzerland, United States separate their lives into different aspects such as work and personal lives. Therefore, when interacting with others, they need to receive more detailed information.

In a high-context culture, people do not rely on language alone for communication. Tone of voice, timing, facial expression, and behaving in ways considered acceptable in the society are major means of expression. A low-context culture depends on the use of words to convey meaning. Expressing complete, accurate meaning through appropriate word choice is important. The key difference between the two types of cultures is the amount of information supplied in communicating （Francesco & Gold, 2003）.

3.2.5 Cultural Frameworks: Cultural Dimension by GLOBE Scholars

The latest cultural framework conceptualized culture at level of geo-ethic entity has been developed by GLOBE （Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness） study （Patel, 2014）. GLOBE study explores the effectiveness of leadership behaviors between societies and develops a cultural framework of nine societal cultural dimensions as follows:

Uncertainty Avoidance

The extent to which members of an organization or society try to avoid uncertainty by relying on societal norms, rituals and bureaucratic practices. It is similar to Hofstede's uncertainty avoidance versus risk-taking dimension.

Power Distance

The degree to which members of an organization or society agree with a power differential between people, i.e. people at higher levels of an organization or the government hold more power. It is similar to Hofstede's power distance dimension.

Collectivism I (Institutional Collectivism)

The degree to which organizations and societies reward collective distribution of resources and collective action.

Collectivism II (In-Group Collectivism)

The degree to which individuals express pride, loyalty and cohesiveness in their organizations or families. Collectivism I and II are similar to Hofstede's dimension of individualism versus collectivism

Gender Equalitarianism

The extent to which a society minimizes differences and promotes equality between genders. This dimension is similar to Hofstede's dimension of masculinity versus femininity.

Assertiveness

The degree to which individuals in organizations or societies are assertive, confrontational and aggressive in social relationships.

Future Orientation

The degree to which individuals in organizations or societies plan and invest in the future and the extent to which they are comfortable with delayed gratification. It is similar to Hofstede's Confucian dynamism.

Performance Orientation

The extent to which an organization or society rewards members for performance improvement and excellence. This dimension is influenced by McClelland's （1985）“needs for achievement”.

Humane Orientation

The degree to which individuals in organizations or societies encourage their members to be fair, altruistic, friendly, generous, caring and kind to others. This dimension is influenced by Kluchkhohn and Strondtbeck's （1961） dimension“human nature as bad, Putnam's （1993） work on civic society and McClelland's （1985） concept of the affiliate motive.