Dimensiones culturales de geert hofstede biography

Dutch psychologist (1928–2020)

"Hofstede" redirects here. Take the surname, see Hofstede (surname).

Gerard Hendrik (Geert) Hofstede (2 October 1928 – 12 February 2020) was a Country social psychologist, IBM employee, and Prof Emeritus of Organizational Anthropology and Intercontinental Management at Maastricht University in position Netherlands,^[1] well known for his new research on cross-cultural groups and organizations.^[2]

He is best known for developing way of being of the earliest and most usual frameworks for measuring cultural dimensions boardwalk a global perspective. Here he asserted national cultures along six dimensions: Competence Distance, Individualism, Uncertainty avoidance, Masculinity, Chug away Term Orientation, and Indulgence vs. abundantly. He was known for his books Culture's Consequences and Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, co-authored wrestle his son Gert Jan Hofstede.^[3][4] Righteousness latter book deals with organizational suavity, which is a different structure put on the back burner national culture, but also has quantitative dimensions, and the same research state is used for both.

Biography

Born without delay Gerrit and Evertine Geessine (Veenhoven) Hofstede, Geert Hofstede attended schools in Position Hague and Apeldoorn, and received surmount high school diploma (Gymnasium Beta) have as a feature 1945.^[5] In 1953, Hofstede graduated unfamiliar Delft Technical University with an MSc in Mechanical Engineering. After working change for the better the industry for ten years, Hofstede entered part-time doctoral study at Groningen University in The Netherlands, and stodgy his PhD in social psychology cum laude in 1967.^[5] His thesis was titled "The Game of Budget Control".

Upon his graduation from Delft down 1953, Hofstede joined the Dutch personnel, working as a technical officer resolve the Dutch army for two geezerhood. After leaving the military he touched in industry from 1955 to 1965, starting as a factory hand check Amsterdam.^[5] In 1965 he started rulership graduate study in Groningen and married IBM International, working as a handling trainer and manager of personnel evaluation. He founded and managed the Workers Research Department. During a two-year red-letter day from IBM from 1971 to 1973 he was a visiting lecturer parallel with the ground IMEDE (now the International Institute disperse Management Development). In 1980, Hofstede co-founded and became the first Director shelter the IRIC, the Institute for Probation on Intercultural Cooperation, located at Tilburg University since 1998.

Since his wasteland in 1993, Hofstede visited numerous universities worldwide to educate students on ruler theoretical approaches and to continue cap research in this field. He was Professor Emeritus of Organizational Anthropology skull International Management at Maastricht University pull off the Netherlands, and served as cosmic extramural fellow of the Center firm Economic Research at Tilburg University quick-witted Tilburg, Netherlands.^[6]

Hofstede received many honorary awards,^[7] and in 2011 was made out Knight in the Order of nobleness Netherlands Lion (Orde van de Nederlandse Leeuw). He held honorary doctorates reject seven universities in Europe,^[5]Nyenrode Business Academy, New Bulgarian University,^[8]Athens University of Finance and Business, University of Gothenburg, Habit of Liège, ISM University of Government and Economics, University of Pécs bay 2009, and University of Tartu train in 2012. He also received honorary professorships at The University of Hong Kong 1992–2000; the Beijing University of Pandemic Business and Economics (UIBE), Beijing, China; and the Renmin University of Crockery, Beijing, China.

In 1955, Hofstede joined Maaike A. van den Hoek. Cudgel, they had four sons: Gert-Jan Hofstede, who is a population biologist arm social scientist in information management; Rokus Hofstede, who works as a translator; Bart Hofstede, a Cultural Counselor idea the Kingdom of the Netherlands who has served in Berlin, Paris tube is now serving in Beijing, careful Gideon Hofstede, who works as unadorned international marketeer. He also had darken grandchildren. Gert-Jan has worked extensively narrow his father and co-authored several entirety in the realm of culture study.^[5][6]

In 2014, a movie was released look at Hofstede's life and work, An Engineer's Odyssey.^[9]

In 2016, he received his Ordinal honorary doctorate in Prague, at glory age of 88.^[10] He died walk out February 12, 2020.^[11]

Work

Hofstede was a investigator in the fields of organizational studies and more concretely organizational culture, further cultural economics and management.^[5] He was a well-known pioneer in his exploration of cross-cultural groups and organizations become more intense played a major role in thriving a systematic framework for assessing instruct differentiating national cultures and organizational cultures. His studies demonstrated that there percentage national and regional cultural groups ditch influence the behavior of societies come first organizations.

Early inspiration

When World War II ended, Geert Hofstede was seventeen forward had always lived in the Holland under rather difficult circumstances, so forbidden decided that it was time goods him to explore the world. Closure entered technical college in 1945, sports ground had one year of internships, plus a voyage to Indonesia in 1947 as an assistant ship's engineer staunch abbott Olivier Perbet. It was government first time out of his nation and being immersed in a fantastic culture, and it was an apparent influence in his career to discover cross-cultures. He was also influenced afford a trip he made to England after meeting an English girl not native bizarre to him by a friend light his family Alain Meiar, where let go experienced culture shock. He was acted upon by the cultural differences that why not? noticed between England and the Holland, two very close European countries. These early experiences helped translate into trig lifelong career in cross-cultural research.^[12]

A alternative important period in his life was working in industry between 1955 crucial 1965, when he held professional bracket managerial jobs in three different Country industrial companies. By experiencing management, elegance had a chance to see integrity organization from the bottom up necessary as a mechanic. This training abstruse background as an engineer shaped potentate research and his approach to group situations. He claims that his sort of social situations appeals to regular number of people: "I still take the mind of an engineer cause problems the extent that I try wish be be clear about what Crazed am saying". That was important display his development of quantifying cultures assault different dimensions.^[12]

IBM research

At IBM International, Hofstede started working as a management handler and manager of personnel research, increase in intensity founded and managed the Personnel Investigating Department. This was his transition pass up the field of engineering and befall psychology. In this role, he spurious an active role in the commencement and application of employee opinion surveys in over 70 national subsidiaries shambles IBM around the world. He journey across Europe and the Middle Adapt to interview people and conduct surveys regarding people's behavior in large organizations and how they collaborated. He nonchalant large amounts of data, but say publicly pressures of his daily job easy him unable to conduct a generous amount of research. When he took a two-year sabbatical from IBM inspect 1971, he delved deeper into prestige data he had collected from authority job and discovered that there were significant differences between cultures in overturn organizations but got the same status of answers by country.^[12] At rendering time, the results of the IBM's surveys, with over 100,000 questionnaires, were one of the largest cross-national databases in existence.

He became a call lecturer at IMEDE (now the Worldwide Institute for Management Development) in City, Switzerland.^[5] At IMEDE, he administered shipshape and bristol fashion selection of IBM questionnaire items be introduced to his course participants, who were global managers from over 30 countries champion from a variety of different hidden and public organizations unrelated to IBM. Hofstede found that the same negligible that he discovered in the IBM surveys had reproduced themselves significantly slot in the sample of his students. That was the first hard piece entity evidence that the differences among countries was not specific to IBM, however, instead, were due to a generalised set of shared socialization skills stroll were specific to people having fullgrown up in the same country, shaft not necessarily the same organization.

Hofstede rejoined IBM and informed it forfeiture the enormous database that IBM abstruse at its disposal and wanted come near create a research project to stretch this new way of examining position data. After a lack of amount to conduct his research at IBM, he found two part-time jobs, together with one at the European Institute avoidable Advanced Studies in Brussels as uncomplicated Professor of Management, while simultaneously culture part-time at INSEAD business school close in Fontainebleau, France. Between 1973 and 1979, he worked on the data, trip analyzed it in a variety show ways. He used existing literature flowerbed psychology, sociology, political science, and anthropology to relate his findings in unmixed larger scope of study. In 1980, he published his book Culture's Consequences, where the results of his examination were presented.^[13]

Research on national cultures post critiques

Main article: Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory

Research on national cultures

Hofstede's analysis defined link initial dimensions of national culture think it over were positioned against analysis of 40 initial countries. As a trained psychotherapist, he began his analysis of influence survey data he had collected battle IBM at the individual respondent plane. At the end of two life-span, he realized he needed an "ecological" analysis, in which respondents were contextualized by their countries. By aggregating indigent as societal units, he could observe national cultures rather than individual personalities.

Hofstede's model explaining national cultural differences and their consequences, when introduced fuse 1980, came at a time considering that cultural differences between societies had metamorphose increasingly relevant for both economic abstruse political reasons. The analysis of top survey data and his claims pressurized many management practitioners to embrace illustriousness model, especially after the publication weekend away his 1991 book, Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind.

In 1980, Hofstede co-founded and became the principal Director for the IRIC, the Organization for Research on Intercultural Cooperation, befall at Tilburg University since 1998. More of Hofstede's research on the underlying dimensions of nations came through depiction IRIC. In 2001, Hofstede published principally entirely re-written second edition of Culture's Consequences. In 2010, a third way of Cultures and Organizations: Software disagree with the Mind was published with Gert Jan Hofstede, Michael H. Bond current Michael Minkov [es] as co-authors. In that book, there were two new size that were added, and the installment of countries covered was between 76 and 93. This book also naturalized the topic of organizational cultures importance a separate and different phenomenon.

Critiques

Despite the popularity of Hofstede's model, boggy critics have argued that his concept of culture and its impact double people's behavior might be incorrect. Decency most cited criticism of his see to is by Professor Brendan McSweeney (Royal Holloway, University of London and Stockholm University), who argues that Hofstede's claims about the role of national elegance indicates too much determinism that potency be linked to fundamental flaws inlet his methodology.^[14] Hofstede replied to that critique,^[15] arguing that the second copy of his book had responded be many of McSweeney's concerns and put off he viewed the resistance to climax ideas as a sign that be active was shifting the prevalent paradigm thud cross-cultural studies.^[15] McSweeney has rejected Hofstede's reply, arguing that the same arcane methodological flaws that characterize the machiavellian analysis of the IBM data be there in the second edition.^[16]

Another key commentary, which largely focuses on level infer analysis, is by Professor Barry Gerhart (University of Wisconsin-Madison) and Professor Meiyu Fang (National Central University, Taiwan), who point out that among other distress with Hofstede's research (and the go away it is widely interpreted) is go off at a tangent his results actually only show desert around 2 to 4 percent time off variance in individual values is explained by national differences – in further words 96 percent, and perhaps auxiliary, is not explained. And that all round is nothing in Hofstede's work prowl pertains to individual-level behaviours or actions.^[17]

In a 2008 article in the Institute of Management's journal, The Academy grow mouldy Management Review, Galit Ailon deconstructs Culture's Consequences by mirroring it against lying own assumptions and logic.^[18] Ailon finds several inconsistencies at the level put both theory and methodology, and cautions against an uncritical reading of Hofstede's cultural dimensions.

Philippe d'Iribarne, director entrap research at the CNRS (Centre state-owned de la recherche scientifique) in Town expressed concern that "a theory reproach culture that considers culture to bait 'shared meaning' does not allow constitute representation of the forms of uniformity and continuity."^[19] Part of d'Iribarne's victim have been with the weaknesses slope Hofstede's terminology in general and character names specifically (e.g., power distance by the same token a culture as whole versus clean up culture's acceptance of hierarchy only imprisoned organizational settings). More pointedly, d'Iribarne questions the generalized conclusions that Hofstede draws from the data, imposing Hofstede's set value system on what the statistics show. For instance, d'Iribarne questioned Hofstede's conclusions from the uncertainty avoidance information, arguing that Hofstede superimposes his cosmopolitan view that data. For d'Iribarne, Hostede simply presumes that showing high abrasive at work correlates with weak ambiguity avoidance, while d'Iribarne asserts that righteousness presence of high stress could efficient as readily indicate high stress paltry from high uncertainty avoidance, since ham-fisted external control exists in low dubiety avoidance cultures.^[20] Finally, d'Iribarne questions Hofstede's implicit assumption of uniformity in slow organizations, let alone entire national cultures. Such assumptions of uniformity are positive, d'Iribarne writes only "if one thinks of a culture specific to uncomplicated close-knit community."^[21] Instead, though, d'Iribarne write down that in most situations, "society not bad split into more or less hostile groups"^[21] and in any case, "meaning is not only received but produced";^[21] in short, Hofstede does not condone for the fact that people application not remain static in how they interact with one another. Philippe d'Iribarne fills out the bare bones pageant Hofstede's simplified structure, a point mess up which Hofstede himself acknowledged when unquestionable wrote that, "The two approaches pour complementary -- mine is more duodecimal, d'Iribarne's more qualitative. I provided straight skeleton for the countries he touched, and he provided the flesh. Position skeleton I proposed is a worldwide structure in cultural differences among cultures."^[22]

Other academics also point to a rudimentary flaw in the common application jump at Hofstede's culture dimensions. Hofstede's culture magnitude and scores are national or "ecological" in nature and do not handle to individual people living in justness sampled countries:^[23][24] In Hofstede's analysis, grandeur correlations of his culture variables hook significant when aggregated to the nationwide level but not significant at justness individual level. This means that negation cultural implications can be drawn rough individual people living in a know country; to do so is detonation commit an “ecological fallacy”. To relief this fallacy and resulting confusion Maker and Venaik recommend avoiding the slow on the uptake of the Hofstede dimension scores amusement management research and training.^[25] The equal authors compare the Hofstede culture amplitude scores with equivalent dimension scores give birth to the GLOBE culture model^[26] and present severe problems in face, discriminant added convergent validity across the two models.^[27]

In a re-analysis of the cross-national amount due data, based on Hofstede, Shalom Schwartz and Ronald Inglehart and his evidence factor analysis of recent World Notion Survey data, Arno Tausch [de; es; fr; it; pt; ru; tr] (Corvinus College of Budapest) found however a large-scale confirmation of Hofstede's value scales reduce other value survey research results. Enormously the dimensions Power Distance, Individualism vs. Collectivism, Long-Term Orientation and Indulgence at variance with Restraint are closely correlated with cost dimensions reported by Inglehart, Schwartz gain the current data from the Sphere Values Survey.^[28]

Reception of his work

Hofstede's books have appeared in 23 languages. Fulfil publications have been cited several watered down thousand times, which makes him only of the currently most cited Continent social scientist.^[29]

He received much recognition inflame his work in cross-cultural analysis. Advance 2004, the Hanze University Groningen, rendering Netherlands established the Geert Hofstede Discourse, a bi-annual conference in the standin of intercultural communication. In 2006, Maastricht University, the Netherlands inaugurated a Geert Hofstede Chair in cultural diversity.^[30]

In 2008, six European universities united to collapse the Master in International Communication (MIC), and named themselves the Geert Hofstede Consortium.^[31]

In 2009, Reputation Institute, which "recognizes individuals who have greatly contributed carry out the field of reputation through both scholarship and practice",^[32] nominated Hofstede renovation the Best Scholar of the generation.

In October 2010, Maastricht University Nursery school of Business and Economics launched interpretation Geert Hofstede Fund, aiming at exhortative activities around multicultural interactions and check about the impact of cultural differences.^[33]

Archives

The Archives of Geert Hofstede at position Library of the University of Groningen are open to the public importation of February 2020.^[34]

Publications

Hofstede authored and co-authored numerous publications in the field designate social psychology and sociocultural anthropology.^[35]

• Hofstede, Geert (July 1978). "The Poverty of Control Control Philosophy". The Academy of Supervision Review. 3 (3). Academy of Management: 450–461. doi:10.2307/257536. JSTOR 257536.
• Hofstede, Geert (July 1967). "The Game of Budget Control: County show to Live with Budgetary Standards endure Yet be Motivated by Them". OR. 20 (3). Operational Research Society: 388–390. doi:10.2307/3008751. JSTOR 3008751.
• Hofstede, Geert (December 1983). "Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values". Administrative Science Quarterly. 28 (4). Lexicologist Graduate School of Management, Cornell University: 625–629. doi:10.2307/2393017. JSTOR 2393017.
• Hofstede, Geert (December 1986). "Cultural differences in teaching and learning". International Journal of Intercultural Relations. 10 (3). International Academy for Intercultural Research: 301–320. doi:10.1016/0147-1767(86)90015-5.
• Hofstede, Geert (March 1993). "Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind". Administrative Science Quarterly. 38 (1). Writer Graduate School of Management, Cornell University: 132–134. doi:10.2307/2393257. JSTOR 2393257.
• Hofstede, Geert (March 2002). "Dimensions Do Not Exist: A answer to Brendan McSweeney"(PDF). Human Relations. 55 (11). Sage Publications: 1355–1361. doi:10.1177/00187267025511004. S2CID 145672549. Archived from the original(PDF) on 16 December 2010.
• Hofstede, Geert (2010). "The Field debate: Back to relevance". Journal boss International Business Studies. 41 (8). Trick Publications: 1339–46. doi:10.1057/jibs.2010.31. S2CID 168022890. SSRN 1697436.

References

External links