Главная Случайная страница


Категории:

ДомЗдоровьеЗоологияИнформатикаИскусствоИскусствоКомпьютерыКулинарияМаркетингМатематикаМедицинаМенеджментОбразованиеПедагогикаПитомцыПрограммированиеПроизводствоПромышленностьПсихологияРазноеРелигияСоциологияСпортСтатистикаТранспортФизикаФилософияФинансыХимияХоббиЭкологияЭкономикаЭлектроника






For the opposite, collectivist, pole

4. Training: have training opportunities (to improve your skills or learn new skills).

5. Physical conditions: have good physical working conditions (good ventilation and lighting, adequate work space, etc.).

6. Use of skills: fully use your skills and abilities on the job.

A frequently asked question is whether it is correct to treat individualism and collectivism as opposite poles of the same dimension. Shouldn’t they be seen as two separate dimensions? The answer is that it depends on whether we compare societies [then it is one dimension] or individuals within societies [then they should be treated as two separate dimensions]. This is known as the level of analysis issue (Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005: 75-82).

Researchers for many years have maintained that self-orientation versus collective orientation is one of the basic pattern variables that determine human action.

 

Table 1. Ranking of Forty Countries on Individualism and Collectivism

 

Country Ranking* Country     Ranking*  
Argentina Japan
Australia Mexico
Austria Netherlands
Belgium New Zealand
Brazil Norway
Canada Pakistan
Chile Peru
Colombia Philippines
Denmark Portugal
Finland Singapore
France South Africa
Germany Spain
Great Britain Sweden
Greece Switzerland
Hong Kong Taiwan
India Thailand
Iran Turkey
Ireland U.S.A.
Israel Venezuela
Italy Yugoslavia

 

*A high score means the country can be classified as collective; a lower score is associated with cultures that promote individualism.

(Source of data in tables 1 - 4: Geert Hofstede. Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values. – Beverly Hills: Sage, 1980.)

 

Individualism. Some of its components need to be commented on: (1) the individual is the single most important unit in any social setting, (2) independence rather than dependence is stressed, (3) individual achievement is rewarded, and (4) the uniqueness of each individual is of paramount value (Triandis). According to Hofstede's findings, the United States, Australia, Great Britain, Canada, the Netherlands, and New Zealand tend toward individualism. In those countries, competition rather than cooperation is encouraged; personal goals take precedence over groups goals; people tend not to be emotionally dependent on organizations; every individual has the right to private property, thoughts and opinions. These cultures stress individual initiative and achievement, and they value individual decision making.

Collectivism. Collectivism is characterized by a rigid social framework that distinguishes between in-groups and out-groups. People count on their in-group (relatives, clans, organizations) to look after them, and in exchange for that they believe they owe absolute loyalty to the group.

 

Collectivism means greater emphasis on (a) the views, needs, and goals of the in-group rather than oneself; (b) social norms and duty defined by the in-group rather than behavior to get pleasure; (c) beliefs shared with the in-group rather than beliefs that distinguish self from in-group; and (d) great readiness to cooperate with in-group members.

In collective societies such as those in Pakistan, Colombia, Venezuela, Taiwan, and Peru, people are born into extended families or clans that support and protect them in exchange for their loyalty. A "we" consciousness prevails: Identity is based on the social system; the individual is emotionally dependent on organizations and institutions; the culture emphasizes belonging to organizations; organizations invade private life and the clans to which individuals belong; and individuals trust group decisions even at the expense of individual rights. One example of a collective culture is China, where individual rights severely subordinated, and group action has been a distinctive characteristic. This view toward working as a group is also expressed in the Chinese proverb, "No matter how stout, one beam cannot support a house."

Collective behavior, like so many aspects of culture, has deep historical roots. Look at the message of collectivism in these words from Confucius: "If one wants to establish himself, he should help others to establish themselves at first."

Collectivism is also contextual. That is to say, we can observe the collective pattern in various settings and contexts. For example, in collective classrooms, such as those found in Mexico, harmony and cooperation in learning are stressed instead of competition. Think of what is being said in the Mexican saying, "The more we are the faster we finish."

Numerous co-cultures in the United States can be classified as collective, for example Mexican Americans, African Americans and Native Americans.

Triandis estimated that about 70% of the population of the world lives in collective cultures. This fact alone should be sufficient motivation for members of other cultures to understand the perceptions and communication behaviors of these collective cultures. It is easy to imagine how differently cultures might approach the intercultural setting – whether that setting be a classroom or a factory. Knowing these and other differences in communication styles could facilitate successful intercultural communication.

 

Uncertainty Avoidance

 

At the core of uncertainty avoidance is the inescapable truism that the future is unknown. As the term is used by Hofstede, uncertainty avoidance defines the extent to which people within a culture are made nervous by situations which they perceive as unstructured, unclear, or unpredictable, situations which they therefore try to avoid by maintaining strict codes of behavior and a belief in absolute truths.

 

According to Hofstede & Hofstede (2005: 165-167), all human beings have to face the fact that we do not know what will happen tomorrow: the future is uncertain, but we have to live with it anyway.

Extreme ambiguity creates intolerable anxiety. [Anxiety is a term taken from psychology and psychiatry that expresses s diffuse “state of being uneasy or worried about what may happen.” It should not be confused with fear, which has an object. We are afraid of something, but anxiety has no object.] Every human society has developed ways to alleviate [= lessen] this anxiety. These ways belong to the domains of technology, law, and religion. Technology helps to avoid uncertainties caused by nature. Laws and rules try to prevent uncertainties in the behavior of other people. Religion is a way of relating to the transcendental forces [existing apart from the material universe] that are assumed to control man’s personal future.

 

Uncertainty avoidance index covers the country differences on the following three items:

  1. Job stress (1 to 5 scale).
  2. Agreement with the statement “Company rules should not be broken – even when the employee thinks it is in the company’s best interest” (1 to 5 scale). This item was labeled rule orientation.
  3. The percentage of employees expressing their intent to stay with the company for a long-term career. The question was “How long do you think you will continue working for IBM?” and the answers ran (1) Two years at the most; (2) From two to five years; (3) More than five years (but I probably will leave before I retire; and (4) Until I retire. The percentage in a country answering 3 or 4 was correlated with the mean answers on items 1 and 2.

 

It was the differences in mean answers by country for the three questions that were correlated. So if in a country more people felt under stress at work, in that same country more people wanted rules to be respected and more people wanted to have a long-term career. But the individuals who held each of these feelings did not need to be the same persons.

Uncertainty avoidance should not be confused with risk avoidance. Uncertainty is to risk as anxiety is to fear. Fear and risk are both focused on something specific: an object in the case of fear, an event in the case of risk. Rather than leading to reducing risk, uncertainty avoidance leads to a reduction of ambiguity.

High-Uncertainty Avoidance. High-uncertainty-avoidance cultures try to avoid uncertainty and ambiguity by providing stability for their members, establishing more formal rules, not tolerating deviant ideas and behaviors, seeking consensus, and believing in absolute truths and the attainment of expertise. They are also characterized by a higher level of anxiety and stress: People think of the uncertainty inherent in life as a contin­uous hazard that must be avoided. There is a strong need for written rules, planning, regulations, rituals, and ceremonies, which add structure to life. Nations with a strong uncertainty-avoidance tendency are Portugal, Greece, Peru, Belgium, and Japan (see Table 2).

Low-Uncertainty Avoidance. At the other end of the scale we find countries like Sweden, Denmark, Ireland, Norway, the United States, Finland, and the Netherlands, which have a low-uncertainty-avoidance need. They more easily accept the uncertainty inherent in life and are not as threatened by deviant people and ideas, so they tolerate the unusual. They prize initiative, dislike the structure associated with hierarchy, are more willing to take risks, are more flexible, think that there should be as few rules as possible, and depend not so much on experts as on themselves, generalists, and common sense. As a whole, members of low-uncertainty-avoidance cultures are less tense and more relaxed—traits reflected in the Irish proverb "Life should be a dance, not a race."

 

Последнее изменение этой страницы: 2016-06-10

lectmania.ru. Все права принадлежат авторам данных материалов. В случае нарушения авторского права напишите нам сюда...