The
Cul
tura
l Dim
ensi
on
John Hooker
Carnegie Mellon University
University of Pittsburgh
January 2009
Wha
t cul
ture
isCulture is about
ho
w w
e t
hin
k.
It determines our deepest assumptions, most of
which we not even aware.
Like an iceberg, culture lies mostly beneath the surface.
Lang
uage
Cui
sine
Dre
ss, h
airs
tyle
Ove
rt r
elig
ion
Co
nce
pt
of
auth
ori
ty
Con
cept
s
of s
pace
and
time
Gu
ilt v
s.
sham
e
Ru
le-b
ased
vs.
rela
tio
nsh
ip
-bas
ed
Apo
lloni
an
vs.
Dio
nysi
anU
nive
rsal
izin
g
ratio
nalit
y?
Man
agem
ent
of in
form
atio
n
Str
ess
man
agem
ent
Cov
ert r
elig
ion
Fun
dam
enta
l
conc
eptio
n of
real
ity
Pop
cul
ture
Cul
ture
vs.
per
sona
lity
Every culture contains the f
ull
ra
ng
e of human personalities.
Culture is about the framework
into which these personalities fit,
no
tabout ”national character.”
However, different personalities
succeed in different cultures.
Tw
o ty
pes
of c
ultu
res
There are 5000+ cultures in the world, all very
different.
But they can be classified roughly as:
rela
tio
nsh
ip-b
ase
d
rule
-ba
se
d.
Relationship-based = life is organized primarily
around p
ers
on
al
rela
tio
nsh
ips.
Africa, Asia, Middle East, South America
Meetings
Personal connections vs. strictly business
Deals
Personal trust vs.
contracts & law
Trust the p
ers
on
vs. trust the s
yste
m.
Traffic behavior
Negotiation vs.
regulation.
Traffic in China
Concept of authority.
Relationship-based –authority rests in the p
ers
on.
Rule-based –authority derives from r
ule
s.
Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques
King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz Al-Saud
Many cultural traits
co
rre
late
with the rule-based,
relationship-based distinction.
Rel
atio
nsh
ip-
bas
edR
ule
-bas
ed
Hig
h po
wer
dis
tanc
eLo
w p
ower
dis
tanc
e
Sha
me-
base
dG
uilt-
base
d
Hig
h-co
ntex
tLo
w-c
onte
xt
Cor
rupt
ion
as
brib
ery
Cor
rupt
ion
as
chea
ting
Pow
er d
ista
nce
Po
we
r d
ista
nceis the
degree to which less
powerful people a
cce
pt
their subordinate position.
Rel
atio
nsh
ip-
bas
edR
ule
-bas
ed
Hig
h p
ow
er
dis
tan
ceL
ow
po
wer
d
ista
nce
Sha
me-
base
dG
uilt-
base
d
Hig
h-co
ntex
tLo
w-c
onte
xt
Cor
rupt
ion
as b
riber
yC
orru
ptio
n as
ch
eatin
g
Relationship-basedcountries
tend to be h
igh
power
distance.
Behavior is regulated by p
eo
ple
with authority.
Rules are legitimated and
enforced by authority figures.
Leaders are expected to be
wise and caring.
Example: Deng Xiaoping
Deng Xiaoping
De facto leader of China
1978-1992
Rule-based countries tend to
be l
owpower distance.
People respect the r
ule
smore
than superiors.
Example: Sweden.
Karl XVI Gustaf
Swedish King since 1973
High power distance:
Children obey and respect parents, teachers.
Employees are reluctant to challenge the boss or discuss
problems.
•Guangzhou executives
•Filipino maids
High power distance:
Ideal boss is benevolent or
fatherly autocrat (rarely female).
Large differences in salary/skills.
Class differences, limited upward
mobility.
Dalit (untouchable)
India
Low power distance:
Children are allowed to contradict their parents.
Two-way discussion in classroom.
Discipline may be a
problem; parents side
with child rather than
teacher.
No corporal punishment.
Low power distance:
Consultative management.
Employees bring concerns and grievances to the boss.
Ideal boss inspires workers.
Labor unions.
Smaller salary differences;
workers may resent
executive perks.
•Scandinavian vs. U.S. offices.
•Power distance higher in
U.S. business
Solidarity logo, Poland
Rel
atio
nsh
ip-
bas
edR
ule
-bas
ed
Hig
h po
wer
dis
tanc
eLo
w p
ower
dis
tanc
e
Sh
ame-
bas
edG
uilt
-bas
ed
Hig
h-co
ntex
tLo
w-c
onte
xt
Cor
rupt
ion
as b
riber
yC
orru
ptio
n as
ch
eatin
g
Re
lati
on
sh
ip-b
ase
dcultures enforce behavior
norms by s
ha
me.
Loss of face.
Humiliation.
Punishment on the spot.
Direct and constant supervision.
•Department store cashier.
No guilt.
•Shohei Nazawa and Yamaichi Securities
Key point for shame-based cultures:
Failure to supervise g
ive
s p
erm
issio
n to break the “rules.”
•Public transit.
•Exam cheating.
•Government regulation.
Gu
iltis more important in
rule
-ba
se
dcultures.
Guilt encourages obedience to
rules without supervision.
But it may be a poor motivator
and carry high psychological
cost.
•Ein gutes Gewissen ist an
sanftes Ruhekissen.
Guilt is reinforced by fear of
punishment.
Con
text
In l
ow
-co
nte
xt
cu
ltu
res, information and behavior
norms are spelled out.
Typical of rule-based cultures.
The rules are spelled out.
In h
igh
-co
nte
xt
cu
ltu
res, these are implicit in the
cultural context.
Norms are transm
itted by the people around you.
Particularly authority figures.
Rel
atio
nsh
ip-
bas
edR
ule
-bas
ed
Hig
h po
wer
dis
tanc
eLo
w p
ower
dis
tanc
e
Sha
me-
base
dG
uilt-
base
d
Hig
h-c
on
text
Lo
w-c
on
text
Cor
rupt
ion
as b
riber
yC
orru
ptio
n as
ch
eatin
g
In l
ow
-co
nte
xt cultures,
There any many s
ign
s,
timetables, maps.
Co
ntr
acts
are written, long,
and detailed.
•Fixed once signed.
•Disputes resolved by
lawsuits.
People expect the rules to be
in writing.
People p
ay
att
en
tio
n t
o
wri
tte
n r
ule
s.
•Example: restroom sign.
In h
igh
-co
nte
xt cultures,
People already know what to do.
Co
ntr
acts
are vague, verbal, or nonexistent.
•Except in “low uncertainty tolerance” cultures, e.g. Latin
America.
•Agreements evolve with the situation.
•Legal system weak.
•Disputes resolved by negotiation.
People d
on
’t p
ay
att
en
tio
n t
o
wri
tte
n r
ule
s.
•But good for high-tech information
transfer.
Cor
rupt
ion
Co
rru
pti
onis behavior that
undermines a cultural system.
So corrupting behavior is
dif
fere
ntacross cultures.
Rel
atio
nsh
ip-
bas
edR
ule
-bas
ed
Hig
h po
wer
dis
tanc
eLo
w p
ower
dis
tanc
e
Sha
me-
base
dG
uilt-
base
d
Hig
h-co
ntex
tLo
w-c
onte
xt
Co
rru
pti
on
as
bri
ber
yC
orr
up
tio
n a
s ch
eati
ng
In relationship-based cultures, b
rib
ery
is common
.
Also kickbacks, facilitating payments.
Short cut to relationship building.
System is
slo
w but
sta
ble.
•e.g., Chinese economy
In rule-based cultures, c
he
ati
ng
is common
.
Income tax evasion, business scandals, plagiarism
.
Relatively little supervision.
System is
eff
icie
nt
but
un
sta
ble.
Tw
o m
ore
clas
sifi
cati
ons
Masculine
Feminine
Uncertainty tolerant
Uncertainty avoiding
These do not necessarily correlate with rule-
based/relationship-based or with each other.
Mas
culi
ne/f
emin
ine
The distinction can be understood
in two ways…
Ma
scu
lin
eF
em
inin
e
Uncertainty tolerant
Uncertainty avoiding
Mas
culi
ne/f
emin
ine
Attitude toward m
ascu
lin
e v
alu
es.
Masculine: Men are expected to be t
ou
gh.
Feminine: Men & women more s
imil
ar.
Attitude toward c
om
pe
titi
on.
Masculine:
co
mp
eti
tio
nvalued.
Feminine:
co
op
era
tio
nvalued.
Japan
USA, UK, Ireland
Philippines
India
Bantu cultures in
Africa
Arab cultures
Eastern Slavic
cultures
Machismocultures
Scandinavia
Western Slavic
cultures
Thailand
Masculine values
MasculineFeminine
Masculine
Feminine
Competitiiveness
Unc
erta
inty
Attitudes toward unpredictability
in life…
Masculine
Feminine
Un
ce
rta
inty
to
lera
nt
Un
ce
rta
inty
av
oid
ing
Unc
erta
inty
Uncertainty tolerant:
Willing to take risks.
Entrepreneurial in business.
Comfortable with travel, relocation.
Unc
erta
inty
Uncertainty avoiding:
Prefer familiar surroundings.
Risk-averse in business.
Dysfunctional bureaucracy serves as ritual.
Unc
erta
inty
Some uncertainty avoiding cultures:
Greece.
Latin America.
Slavic cultures.
Belgium.
France.