Introduction
Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions theory is an outline established by Dutch management scholar Geert Hofstede to help students understand how different countries vary in culture. The dimensions are globally used to assist in good communication and politeness across communities with different beliefs in companies and mediation groups (Ferri 10). The range at which states share or differ in basic dimensions is determined by the common language used and the geographic situation of the countries. The main aim of creating the theory was to help learners identify how different states vary in culture.
Background of the Scholar
Geert Hofstede was a social scientist and a Dutch social psychologist born in October 1928 in Harlem, Netherlands. Hofstede is well known for his revolutionary research on national cross-cultural groups and organizational cultures (Zhang et al. 34). Hofstede is the founder of cultural dimension theory, which is significant in giving helpful information about differences among countries and how they can be managed. The primary purpose of creating the theory was to help learners understand how different states vary in culture.
Defining the Theory
Hofstede’s cultural dimension theory is a structure for multicultural communication created by Geert Hofstede to show the effects of people’s culture on how morals relate to conduct. Hofstede argues that the cultural dimensions he identified, as culture and values, are imaginary constructions used in functional areas (Ferri 10). Hofstede’s cultural dimensions assist users in differentiating countries but not the people; hence, they do not describe a person’s character.
Uses of the Theory
The theory is essential in globalization and helps geographers map how people in a unified world interact, move, and share ideas and products (Nellie 21). The theory is used in organizations to help managers recognize issues that arise from cultural disputes. The leaders can use the six models to develop techniques such as communication policies aimed at reducing misunderstandings. The cultural dimensions help explain why some behaviors are rare to find in some communities than others. The model is relevant in the business market because it helps free itself from cultural chauvinism.
Social Reality of the Theory
The social reality that the theory tries to understand clearly is how much a person’s feelings and behavior are dictated by the culture that individual lives in. A person’s conduct and emotional state go hand in hand with cultural practices (Nellie 23). The theory clearly explains whether a particular culture values a group or an individual and how people in that culture greet one another.
Uses of the Theory in the Last Decade
Looking at the last decade, countries have always differed in cultural values and beliefs. With the study of the six cultural dimensions, learners easily understand how cultures differ in states (Zhang et al. 33). Through the use of the six dimensions, leaders have been eliminating conflicts by educating people on how to put differences in culture aside. The theory helped managers recognize and stop organizational issues that arise from cultural differences.
Reasons for Choosing This Theory
The reason for choosing this theory is to understand more about the cultures of different states. The most attractive part of the study is how countries practice different cultures, drawing the interest of the learner to read and understand more (Ting et al. 16). When different countries differ in values and beliefs, there is increased productivity in organizations and businesses because every person will come up with diverse ideas on how to carry out activities. Cultural dimension theory expands the learner’s mind and starts viewing cultures of different states from another perspective.
Research Studies Using the Theory
Cultural dimension theory has been used in Anthropology research studies to learn about the past and present of people aiming at understanding a person’s cultural and biological conditions. A student can easily understand the culture of a different community and how people have confidence in their beliefs and communicate with one another (Zhang et al. 34). For example, in social anthropology, culture acts as a slogan for behavior, feelings, and actions that depend on the capability for transferring knowledge to a future generation.
Another study using the theory is survey research, which shows how many countries share the same culture, if they exist, and why others differ. States with common cultures lie in the same group and can learn different cultural practices from each other (Nellie 23). For example, individualism versus communism explains how every state carries out cultural practices, whether by a group or personally. Experimental research also uses the theory to determine whether a particular state is ready to share or join a different culture. For example, the research can study whether, at any point, America can share culture with France, how, and why.
Conclusion
In conclusion, cultural dimension theory is observed in different areas, such as businesses and organizations, to improve communication and reduce conflicts. Hofstede founded the theory intending to ensure learners understand more about how different countries vary in cultural values and beliefs. The six dimensions help learners to determine how culture helps improve effectiveness and productivity in businesses and organizations leading to maximized profits. The theory helps build people’s trust, reducing the fear that a specific community can attack another for cultural differences.
Works Cited
Ferri, Giuliana. “Intercultural Communication-Current Challenges and Future Directions.” Intercultural Communication, 2018, pp. 1–16. Web.
Nellie, James W. Intercultural Communication: A Contextual Approach. 8th ed., Sage Publications, 2020.
Ting-Toomey, Stella, and Tenzin Dorjee. Communicating Across Cultures. 2nd ed., Guilford Publications, 2018.
Zhang, Xiaotian, and Mingming Zhou. “Interventions to Promote Learners’ Intercultural Competence: A Meta-Analysis.” International Journal of Intercultural Relations, vol. 71, 2019, pp. 31–47. Web.