LITMIR.BIZ

Скачать книгу

of his data collection for nowadays more than 90 countries has an outstanding effect on academics and practitioners dealing with cultural issues worldwide. As his model was the first to allow not only the classification of countries based on different criteria but also a sound comparison of them, it highly contributed to the inclusion of intercultural issues in the research of strategy, leadership, organisation, marketing and finance. It was also instrumental in the implementation of business systems for international companies, for example in the definition of compensation practices, training design, leadership styles and management control systems.

2.5.3

Critical Acclaim of Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner’s Dilemmas

      After their early publications, one of their main critics was Hofstede himself in 1996 who argued, that Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner essentially measure Hofstede’s dimensions Individualism and Power Distance by using dilemmas that were interrelated. He also accused Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner of tuning their messages to what they think their customers like to hear, being more interested in commerce than in scholarship.⁵⁴ The first edition of their dimensions was mainly tailored to the needs of professionals and consequently lacked detailed information about their methodological approach. This was the main area of criticism from other scientists. In a very measured response in 1997, Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner defended their approach and provided detailed information about their research methodology.⁵⁵

      Notwithstanding, the dilemma approach of Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner is subject to intense criticism based on the typical problems reviewed in 2.5.1.⁵⁶

      To 2.: The findings of Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner are visibly subject to incorrect equivalencies. One very obvious example is mentioned by Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner themselves concerning the percentages for not painting the house in their dilemma “specific versus diffuse”. They mention that the figures provided for Japan are probably based on a cultural misunderstanding of concept, as Japanese people generally do not paint houses, preferring wooden houses anyway.⁵⁷

      To 3.: The selected respondents where all participating in Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner’s management trainings that should sensitise for cultural issues. Some argue that these people were in the preparation of visiting a foreign country and hence already unusually self-conscious to intercultural issues. This would not be representative for inhabitants of a country in general.

      To 4.: It remains unclear how Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner arrived at the identified 7 dimensions. As they rely heavily on former research from other scientists, they chose some of the dimensions at random from mainly a literature analysis. Also, the operationalisation of the dilemmas is criticised. It is not seen as proven, that the chosen statements really measure what they should measure. Some of the dimensions are even measured by different constructs, which could be seen as constituting different sub-dimensions that are not clearly defined. Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner provide differing dimensions and findings in different publications – some of them only with slightly changed denominations, some with differing contents. As a result, a claim to absolute right concerning the 7 dimensions is not accepted.

      Despite the criticism, the dilemma approach of Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner is widely used in international management trainings and research. Their basic claim, that the behaviour in and of companies is affected by culture, is an important counterpoint to the predominant US-based notion of universally valid management approaches. The generally understandable language and the abundance of practical examples allow an easy use for practitioners. The database offers detailed information on countries that are not explicitly covered in Hofstede’s research, especially concerning Eastern Europe. They vehemently promote an increased awareness of cultural diversity within countries based on ethnic differences, for example within the US. This is complemented by the consequent consideration of differing cultures of companies (in mergers, for example), business sectors, professions and genders. Their detailed reconciliation process constitutes one of the few practical step-by-step approaches for prevalent leadership challenges in international organisations.

      Apart from that, the success of the framework could partly be ascribed to Fons Trompenaars outstanding achievements as consultant and speaker.⁵⁸

2.5.4

Critical Acclaim of the GLOBE Study

      The designers of the GLOBE study considered many of the above mentioned points of criticism in their research approach:⁵⁹

      1 The definitions were discussed extensively with an international research team. The questionnaire was scrupulously tested by translation and retranslation as well as content analysis of documents, thus minimising definition problems.

      2 In order to achieve certain equivalencies, all respondents were middlemanagers. This should ensure a certain comparability of the results for different cultures. The testing of terms also helped to prevent differences of understanding of the concepts used.

      3 The respondents came from more than 900 different companies and 3 different business sectors of more than 60 different cultures, thus avoiding the influence of a distinctive company or business culture.

      4 The concept includes a clear distinction of two cultural levels: the value level (how it should be) and the behaviour level (how it is), mirroring the state-of-the-art differentiation of percepta-level and concepta-level that are not always in harmony. As the approach was defined by 170 researchers from different nations and regions and from different professional backgrounds, the GLOBE study represents an outstanding multicultural effort. The dominance of an ethnocentric pattern can therefore be eliminated completely. The applied research and analysis methodology was highly sophisticated and thoroughly challenged.

      Despite these efforts, several points of criticism still remain. Some critics stress for example the possible distortions due to the sole use of middle managers as respondents. The equalisation of countries and cultures is still a point for heated discussions, although GLOBE made some allowance for relevant sub-cultures as for example the separation of South Africa in a black sample and a white sample.

      Hofstede criticised the multitude of inter-correlated dimensions that could have been condensed to fewer meta-dimensions. As nearly all dimensions show positive correlations of national welfare, these dimensions are influenced by the national welfare itself and do not have to be explained by cultural peculiarities.⁶⁰ The GLOBE authors argue with exactly the opposite train of thought: the correlation shows that cultural peculiarities influence the national welfare; therefore the correlations of the differing dimensions are of special interest for researchers.

      The objection of the maximisation of the number of countries studied instead of detailed analyses of single countries was met with the publication of the second GLOBE volume concerning the in-depth analysis of 25 countries by Chhokar, Brodbeck and House in 2008.

      Due to the open publication of the compiled data and the number of researchers and research institutes involved, GLOBE could be expected to induce additional cultural research over the next decade. As its findings constitute a unique basis for country and (intercultural) leadership development their further inclusion into management theory and practice can be predicted.

2.6	Citations & Notes

      ¹ Hall, E.T. (1976). He uses instead the terms “hidden dimensions of unconscious culture” or “cultural/collective unconscious”.

      ² Bennett, MJ. (1993)

      ³ Adapted from Bennett, M. J. (1998)

      ⁴ All of the following information in this chapter is taken from: Hofstede, G.H., Hofstede, G.J., & Minkov, M. (2010). A more detailed and scientific description of the Hofstede framework could be found in Hofstede, G.H. (2006).

      ⁵ Based on Hofstede, G.H., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010), p. 6

      ⁶ Hofstede, G.H.,

Скачать книгу