!7Culture’sConsequences：ComparingValues-Behaviors-

Vol.27,No.1EckhardtReviewsHOFSTEDEReview:Culture’sConsequences:ComparingValues,Behaviors,InstitutionsandOrganisationsAcrossNationsbyGeertHofstede,2001,SecondEdition,(Sage,ThousandOaks,CA)US$97.95,hardcover,pp.596.hepublicationofthissecondeditionofCulture’sConsequencesmarksanimportantmomentinthefieldofcross-culturalstudies.Thefirsteditionofthisbook,publishedin1980,launchedwhatsomehavecalledarevolutionwithinthesocialsciences.Researcherswhopreviouslyhadnotquestionedwhethertheirtheoriesofhumanbehaviourwereapplicabletoallpeopleweresuddenlyconfrontedwithasystematicframeworkofculturaldimensionssuggestingthatnotonlybehaviourbuttheprocessesandmechanismsgoverningbehaviourcouldfundamentallyvarybasedonfourculturaldimensions.Thefirsteditionofthisbookbroughtthefieldofcross-culturalstudiestotheforefront(oratleastthefront)ofsocialscienceresearch.ButHofstede’sframeworkhascomeunderintensescrutinysinceitsfirstpublication,and,althoughthissecondeditionmakesmanyneededchangesandadditions,itwillbesignificanttoseewhethertheintellectualcommunitystillfindssimplisticframeworks,evenasinfluentialasHofstede’s,tostillberelevanttocross-culturalresearch.TThesecondeditionisanappropriateplaceforbusinessresearchersinterestedindoingcross-culturalworktogetanintroductiontothefield,asitincludesa(limited)surveyofmuchcross-culturalworkwithinthepasttwenty-fiveyears,aswellasintroducingtheabovementionedframework.Yet,ifnewresearchersareinspiredtoengageincross-culturalresearch,theymustgobeyondthisframeworktoadequatelyrepresentthedynamicandcomplexnatureofcultureonpsychologicalprocessesandbehaviour.Hofstede’sframeworkisperhapsmostappropriateasateachingaidforintroducingthenotionofculturaldifferencestobusinessstudents,asitprovidesaneasy-to-understandframeworkwithnumerousexamplesoftheirpracticalapplicability.HavingstudiedunderHofstededuringmyundergraduatestudy-abroaddaysatMaastrichtUniversity,Ihavesuccessfullyfollowedhisleadmanytimeswithmyglobalmarketingstudentsinteachingsuchtopicsasinterculturalmarketingcommunications.AlthoughHofstede’sframeworkforunderstandingnationaldifferenceshasbeenoneofthemostinfluentialandwidelyusedframeworksincross-culturalbusinessstudies,inthepasttenyearsorsoithasalsobecomeoneofthemostwidelycriticized.Detractorscontendthathisdichotomisedwayofrepresentingculturaldifferencesleadstounjustifiablegeneralizationsandignoresthesubtletiesandfrequentcontradictionsinherentinmanynationalcultures.Manysocialscientistscontendthatthereisinfactnosuchthingasnationalculture,sincesubcultureswithinacountrycanvarysogreatlyintheirvaluesandbeliefs.Moreover,theoriginaldataHofstedepresentedin1980inthefirsteditionofthisbook,fromwhichhederiveshisframework,havebeenmisunderstoodandapplied–89–AUSTRALIANJOURNALOFMANAGEMENTJune2002–90–ininappropriateways,whichhasalsoledtocriticismsoftheframeworkfromamethodologicalstance.Inthissecondedition,Hofstededoesnotpresentnewdata(thedatapresentedarethesameoriginaldatacollectedfromIBMemployeesinthelate1960sandearly1970s),butincludesinhisdiscussionsofeachidentifieddimensionofculturethefindingsfromnumerousstudieswhichhavesubsequentlyusedhisframework,includessomeadditionalcountries,removesdatedmaterial,redoescalculations,andrespondstohiscriticsheadon.ImpactoftheFirstEditionofCulture’sConsequencesinBusinessResearchAlthoughHofstede’sworkhaslargelyfallenoutoffavourwithmanybusinessscholarsforavarietyofreasonsthatwillbementionedshortly,itisstillwidelyusedinbusinessresearch.Andthereisnodenyingthehugeimpacthisworkhashadonbusinessthinkinginthepasttwentyyears.Hofstedehimselfdescribeshisimpactasparadigmshifting(p.73),andindeedhisworkwaswhatmademanybusinessscholarsfirstquestiontheuniversalapplicabilityofsomeofthemostcommonbusinessmodels—modelsthathavesincebeenshowntobeculturallyvariable,suchasthediffusionofinnovationmodelandtheadvertisingeffectsmodel.ThedatapublishedinthefirsteditionaswellasthissecondeditionofCulture’sConsequenceswerecollectedduringa53–countryprojecttotrytosystematicallyunderstandculturalsimilaritiesanddifferencesaroundtheworld,althoughinthisedition19morecountriesareadded,usingdatacollectedsubsequentlybyHofstede,aswellasbyotherresearchers.UsingIBMemployeesineachofthe53countriesbecausetheyaresimilartoeachotheronalmostalldimensionsexceptculture,Hofstedemeasuresculturalvaluesrelatingtospheressuchasinterpersonalrelationshipsandhierarchies.Fourdimensionsofculturethathelpedexplainthedifferencesamongtherespondentsemerge:1.Uncertaintyavoidance—asociety’stoleranceoftheunpredictable;2.Powerdistance—asociety’sacceptanceoftheunequaldistributionofpower;3.Individualism/Collectivism—theextenttowhichtheinterestsoftheindividualprevailovertheinterestsofthegroupwithinasociety;and4.Masculinity/Femininity—therelativestrengthofmasculinevs.femininevaluesinasociety.Sincetheinitialpublicationofthesefourdimensions,numerousotherresearchershave‘confirmed’thesedimensionsinvariousculturesaroundtheworldandutilizedthemtoanalyseanumberofbusinessissues,suchasvariationsinconsumerbehaviour,managementpractices,andportfoliomanagement.In1987,agroupofresearchersba