The Search for Universals

1
The Search for Universals

• Beyond Individualism/Collectivism
• New Cultural Dimensions of Values

2
Hofstede Dimensions (1983)

• Power distance
• The extent to which members of a society accept
  as legitimate that power in institutions and
  organizations is distributed equally
• Power distance
• The degree to which the members of a society
  feel uncomfortable with uncertainty and
  ambiguity, which leads them to support beliefs
  promising certainty and to maintain institutions
  protecting conformity

3
Hofstede Dimensions (cont.)

• Masculinity/Femininity A preference for
  achievement, heroism, assertiveness, and material
  success as opposed to a preference for
  relationshs, modesty, caring for the weak, and
  the quality of life.
• Individualism/Collecitivism A preference for a
  loosely knit social frame-work in society in
  which individuals are supposed to take care of
  themselves and their immediate families only as
  opposed to a freference for a tightly knit social
  framework in which individuals can expect their
  relatives, clan or other in-group to look after
  them, in exchange for unquestioning loyalty.

4
Critique of Hofstedes dimensions (Shwartz, 1994)

• Atypical sample (specific set of 40 modern
  nations)
• Does not consider unique aspects of particular
  cultures
• Does not represent more recent cultural change
  (1967-73)
• Did not verify equivalence of meanings

5
Alternative dimensions (Shwarz, 1994)

• Based on cross-culturally validated values found
  to be highly equivalent in meaning.
• Taken from heterogeneous samples
• Data from later historical period (1992)
• Data from different set of nations more
  representative of the heterogeneity of cultures
• Included nations where the value systems were
  influenced by state socialism.
• Turned out to be quite independent of Hofstede
  dimensions (little in common).

6
New Dimensions (Shwarz, 1994)

• Conservatism These values emphasize
  maintenance of the status quo, propriety, and
  avoidance of actions or inclinations of
  individuals that might distrub the traditional
  order.(parallel to collectivism)
• Intellectual Autonomy Emphasis on intellectual
  self-direction (parallel to individualism)
• Affective Autonomy Affective emphasis on
  stimulation and hedonism (parallel to
  individualism)

7
New dimensions (cont.)

• Hierarchy Emphasis of the legitimacy of
  hierarchical role and resource allocation.
• Mastery Emphasis on the mastery of the social
  environment through self-assertion (locus of
  control).
• Positively correlated with affective and not
  intellectual autonomy
• Egalitarian commitment Emphasis on voluntary
  commitment to promoting the welfare of other
  people (e.g., social justice, responsible, loyal
  
• Negatively correlated with Hierarchy, Mastery,
  and Conservatism.
• Positively correlated with Affective and
  Intellectual Autonomy
• HaromanyEmphasize harmony with nature
• Negative ated with Mastery and positively
  correlated with Egalitarian Commitment

8
Summary of nation scores

• Does not support the view that United States is a
  highly individualist nation (average autonomy).
• U.S. was relatively high in Mastery
• Entrepreneurial are in which mastering and
  controlling the environment are central goals.
• Does not support the view that China as highly
  collectivist society
• Scored about as highly on autonomy dimensions as
  the U.S.
• Scored highly on Hierarchy and Mastery and low on
  Egalitarian Commitment

9
Summary of nation scores (cont)

• Western European nations scored highest on
  Autonomy pole
• Therefore, these were the most individualist
  nations
• Also high on Egalitarian Commitment
• Singapore was highest on Conservatism and scored
  low in Mastery and Autonomy.
• Therefore, Singapore would be considered the most
  collectivist nation

10
Conclusions

• When individualism/collectivism were refined into
  finer-tuned categories, what constituted
  individualist and collectivist cultures were less
  clear-cut.
• When personal goals (Mastery Hierarchy) and
  collectivist goals (Egalitarian Commitment
  Harmony) were defined and operationalized more
  narrowly and precisely, there was more room for
  sharing of goals between collectivist cultures
  (China) and individualist culture (e.g.,
  Mastery)