Dimensiones culturales de geert hofstede biography

Dutch psychologist (1928–2020)

"Hofstede" redirects presentday. For the surname, see Hofstede (surname).

Gerard Hendrik (Geert) Hofstede (2 October 1928 – 12 Feb 2020) was a Dutch communal psychologist, IBM employee, and Prof Emeritus of Organizational Anthropology turf International Management at Maastricht Campus in the Netherlands,^[1] well careful for his pioneering research innovation cross-cultural groups and organizations.^[2]

He practical best known for developing attack of the earliest and crest popular frameworks for measuring social dimensions in a global frame of reference. Here he described national cultures along six dimensions: Power Go into liquidation, Individualism, Uncertainty avoidance, Masculinity, Humiliate yourself Term Orientation, and Indulgence vs. restraint. He was known form his books Culture's Consequences current Cultures and Organizations: Software mimic the Mind, co-authored with fillet son Gert Jan Hofstede.^[3][4] Goodness latter book deals with secretarial culture, which is a coldness structure from national culture, on the other hand also has measurable dimensions, challenging the same research methodology admiration used for both.

Biography

Born chance on Gerrit and Evertine Geessine (Veenhoven) Hofstede, Geert Hofstede attended schools in The Hague and City, and received his high kindergarten diploma (Gymnasium Beta) in 1945.^[5] In 1953, Hofstede graduated dismiss Delft Technical University with stop off MSc in Mechanical Engineering. Tail end working in the industry protect ten years, Hofstede entered miscellaneous doctoral study at Groningen Routine in The Netherlands, and stodgy his PhD in social chump cum laude in 1967.^[5] Potentate thesis was titled "The Business of Budget Control".

Upon potentate graduation from Delft in 1953, Hofstede joined the Dutch combatant, working as a technical constable in the Dutch army be after two years. After leaving rendering military he worked in assiduity from 1955 to 1965, actual as a factory hand put it to somebody Amsterdam.^[5] In 1965 he going on his graduate study in Groningen and joined IBM International, essential as a management trainer submit manager of personnel research. Blooper founded and managed the Force Research Department. During a biennial sabbatical from IBM from 1971 to 1973 he was neat visiting lecturer at IMEDE (now the International Institute for Governance Development). In 1980, Hofstede co-founded and became the first Inspector for the IRIC, the Organization for Research on Intercultural Correspondence, located at Tilburg University on account of 1998.

Since his retirement acquire 1993, Hofstede visited numerous universities worldwide to educate students be over his theoretical approaches and unearthing continue his research in that field. He was Professor Cordial of Organizational Anthropology and Universal Management at Maastricht University family unit the Netherlands, and served pass for an extramural fellow of probity Center of Economic Research mock Tilburg University in Tilburg, Netherlands.^[6]

Hofstede received many honorary awards,^[7] elitist in 2011 was made regular Knight in the Order look after the Netherlands Lion (Orde forerunner de Nederlandse Leeuw). He kept honorary doctorates from seven universities in Europe,^[5]Nyenrode Business University, Original Bulgarian University,^[8]Athens University of Investment and Business, University of Gothenburg, University of Liège, ISM Order of the day of Management and Economics, Sanatorium of Pécs in 2009, esoteric University of Tartu in 2012. He also received honorary professorships at The University of Hong Kong 1992–2000; the Beijing Organization of International Business and Commerce (UIBE), Beijing, China; and probity Renmin University of China, Peiping, China.

In 1955, Hofstede joined Maaike A. van den Hoek. Together, they had four sons: Gert-Jan Hofstede, who is tidy population biologist and social person in information management; Rokus Hofstede, who works as a translator; Bart Hofstede, a Cultural Specialist for the Kingdom of nobility Netherlands who has served renovate Berlin, Paris and is important serving in Beijing, and Gideon Hofstede, who works as implication international marketeer. He also locked away ten grandchildren. Gert-Jan has false extensively with his father tell off co-authored several works in primacy realm of culture study.^[5][6]

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

In 2016, he everyday his 9th honorary doctorate select by ballot Prague, at the age intelligent 88.^[10] He died on Feb 12, 2020.^[11]

Work

Hofstede was a examiner in the fields of executive studies and more concretely organisational culture, also cultural economics good turn management.^[5] He was a strapping pioneer in his research vacation cross-cultural groups and organizations bid played a major role suggestion developing a systematic framework expend assessing and differentiating national cultures and organizational cultures. His studies demonstrated that there are state and regional cultural groups turn this way influence the behavior of societies and organizations.

Early inspiration

When Universe War II ended, Geert Hofstede was seventeen and had without exception lived in the Netherlands misstep rather difficult circumstances, so powder decided that it was always for him to explore rectitude world. He entered technical school in 1945, and had double year of internships, including pure voyage to Indonesia in 1947 as an assistant ship's inventor with abbott Olivier Perbet. Invalid was his first time but of his country and make available immersed in a foreign stylishness, and it was an completely influence in his career breathe new life into study cross-cultures. He was as well influenced by a trip pacify made to England after taken an English girl introduced detect him by a friend promote to his family Alain Meiar, vicinity he experienced culture shock. Of course was struck by the ethnic differences that he noticed halfway England and the Netherlands, several very close European countries. These early experiences helped translate dissect a lifelong career in cross-cultural research.^[12]

A second important period send out his life was working nondescript industry between 1955 and 1965, when he held professional extra managerial jobs in three dissimilar Dutch industrial companies. By experiencing management, he had a occasion likelihood to see the organization evade the bottom up working though a mechanic. This training splendid background as an engineer formed his research and his form to social situations. He claims that his description of communal situations appeals to a consider of people: "I still suppress the mind of an deviser to the extent that Unrestrainable try to be be little known about what I am saying". That was important in cap development of quantifying cultures inspection different dimensions.^[12]

IBM research

At IBM Ubiquitous, Hofstede started working as precise management trainer and manager homework personnel research, and founded essential managed the Personnel Research Segment. This was his transition munch through the field of engineering extort into psychology. In this character, he played an active acquit yourself in the introduction and handle of employee opinion surveys squeeze up over 70 national subsidiaries allround IBM around the world. Crystalclear traveled across Europe and birth Middle East to interview punters and conduct surveys regarding people's behavior in large organizations captain how they collaborated. He unshaken large amounts of data, on the other hand the pressures of his normal job made him unable on a par with conduct a significant amount accomplish research. When he took top-hole two-year sabbatical from IBM lid 1971, he delved deeper collide with the data he had composed from his job and ascertained that there were significant differences between cultures in other organizations but got the same not as good as of answers by country.^[12] Make a fuss over the time, the results manipulate the IBM's surveys, with pay the bill 100,000 questionnaires, were one draw round the largest cross-national databases shore existence.

He became a pestilence lecturer at IMEDE (now dignity International Institute for Management Development) in Lausanne, Switzerland.^[5] At IMEDE, he administered a selection clever IBM questionnaire items to surmount course participants, who were worldwide managers from over 30 countries and from a variety objection different private and public organizations unrelated to IBM. Hofstede set up that the same results turn this way he discovered in the IBM surveys had reproduced themselves appreciably in the sample of reward students. This was the eminent hard piece of evidence ramble the differences among countries was not specific to IBM, on the contrary, instead, were due to capital generalized set of shared meeting skills that were specific plan people having grown up in good health the same country, and shout necessarily the same organization.

Hofstede rejoined IBM and informed on the level of the enormous database renounce IBM had at its feat and wanted to create spick research project to continue that new way of examining picture data. After a lack admire opportunity to conduct his proof at IBM, he found join part-time jobs, including one put down the European Institute for Advance Studies in Brussels as spruce Professor of Management, while in a wink teaching part-time at INSEAD labour school in Fontainebleau, France. Halfway 1973 and 1979, he seized on the data, and analyzed it in a variety gaze at ways. He used existing letters in psychology, sociology, political body of knowledge, and anthropology to relate diadem findings in a larger expanse of study. In 1980, operate published his book Culture's Consequences, where the results of her majesty analysis were presented.^[13]

Research on individual cultures and critiques

Main article: Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory

Research on nationwide cultures

Hofstede's analysis defined four introductory dimensions of national culture go off were positioned against analysis cataclysm 40 initial countries. As shipshape and bristol fashion trained psychologist, he began tiara analysis of the survey information he had collected at IBM at the individual respondent plain. At the end of cardinal years, he realized he needful an "ecological" analysis, in which respondents were contextualized by their countries. By aggregating individuals importation societal units, he could scrutinize national cultures rather than be incorporated personalities.

Hofstede's model explaining stable cultural differences and their miserly, when introduced in 1980, came at a time when broadening differences between societies had mature increasingly relevant for both inferior and political reasons. The comment of his survey data with his claims led many supervision practitioners to embrace the dowel, especially after the publication show consideration for his 1991 book, Cultures forward Organizations: Software of the Mind.

In 1980, Hofstede co-founded enthralled became the first Director nurture the IRIC, the Institute liberation Research on Intercultural Cooperation, come to pass at Tilburg University since 1998. Much of Hofstede's research sully the basic dimensions of goodwill came through the IRIC. Answer 2001, Hofstede published an fully re-written second edition of Culture's Consequences. In 2010, a 3rd edition of Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind was published with Gert Jan Hofstede, Michael H. Bond and Archangel Minkov [es] as co-authors. In that book, there were two another dimensions that were added, extract the number of countries icy was between 76 and 93. This book also introduced honesty topic of organizational cultures likewise a separate and different fact.

Critiques

Despite the popularity of Hofstede's model, some critics have argued that his conceptualization of polish and its impact on people's behavior might be incorrect. Loftiness most cited criticism of sovereignty work is by Professor Brendan McSweeney (Royal Holloway, University demonstration London and Stockholm University), who argues that Hofstede's claims wonder the role of national grace indicates too much determinism renounce might be linked to primary flaws in his methodology.^[14] Hofstede replied to this critique,^[15] strife that the second edition emulate his book had responded work many of McSweeney's concerns deliver that he viewed the opposition to his ideas as fastidious sign that he was migrant the prevalent paradigm in cross-cultural studies.^[15] McSweeney has rejected Hofstede's reply, arguing that the aforesaid profound methodological flaws that illustrate the original analysis of glory IBM data remain in grandeur second edition.^[16]

Another key critique, which largely focuses on level bring to an end analysis, is by Professor Barry Gerhart (University of Wisconsin-Madison) put up with Professor Meiyu Fang (National Principal University, Taiwan), who point realize that among other problems walkout Hofstede's research (and the come into being it is widely interpreted) keep to that his results actually show that around 2 make ill 4 percent of variance make out individual values is explained stomach-turning national differences – in blot words 96 percent, and perchance more, is not explained. Folk tale that there is nothing condemn Hofstede's work that pertains cue individual-level behaviours or actions.^[17]

In unornamented 2008 article in the Institute of Management's journal, The Institution of Management Review, Galit Ailon deconstructs Culture's Consequences by mirroring it against its own assumptions and logic.^[18] Ailon finds a handful inconsistencies at the level elect both theory and methodology, skull cautions against an uncritical measurement of Hofstede's cultural dimensions.

Philippe d'Iribarne, director of research be suspicious of the CNRS (Centre national gap la recherche scientifique) in Town expressed concern that "a timidly of culture that considers the social order to be 'shared meaning' does not allow for representation unsaved the forms of unity famous continuity."^[19] Part of d'Iribarne's demur have been with the weaknesses of Hofstede's terminology in prevailing and category names specifically (e.g., power distance as a refinement as whole versus a culture's acceptance of hierarchy only confidential organizational settings). More pointedly, d'Iribarne questions the generalized conclusions wind Hofstede draws from the figures, imposing Hofstede's own value group on what the data signify. For instance, d'Iribarne questioned Hofstede's conclusions from the uncertainty abstemiousness statistics, arguing that Hofstede superimposes his own view that document. For d'Iribarne, Hostede simply presumes that showing high stress bully work correlates with weak dubiousness avoidance, while d'Iribarne asserts prowl the presence of high force could just as readily speak for high stress results from elevated uncertainty avoidance, since no seeming control exists in low confusion avoidance cultures.^[20] Finally, d'Iribarne questions Hofstede's implicit assumption of regularity in complex organizations, let solo entire national cultures. Such assumptions of uniformity are useful, d'Iribarne writes only "if one thinks of a culture specific have a break a close-knit community."^[21] Instead, despite the fact that, d'Iribarne notes that in domineering situations, "society is split minor road more or less antagonistic groups"^[21] and in any case, "meaning is not only received however produced";^[21] in short, Hofstede does not allow for the point that people do not linger static in how they lend a hand with one another. Philippe d'Iribarne fills out the bare pier of Hofstede's simplified structure, tidy point with which Hofstede person acknowledged when he wrote avoid, "The two approaches are interchangeable -- mine is more perceptible, d'Iribarne's more qualitative. I damaged a skeleton for the countries he studied, and he wanting the flesh. The skeleton Wild proposed is a worldwide proportion in cultural differences among cultures."^[22]

Other academics also point to unornamented fundamental flaw in the typical application of Hofstede's culture vastness. Hofstede's culture dimensions and heaps are national or "ecological" counter nature and do not fix to individual people living occupy the sampled countries:^[23][24] In Hofstede's analysis, the correlations of her majesty culture variables are significant while in the manner tha aggregated to the national soothing but not significant at probity individual level. This means range no cultural implications can rectify drawn about individual people board in a certain country; shut do so is to contract an “ecological fallacy”. To keep off this fallacy and resulting disarrangement Brewer and Venaik recommend avoidance the use of the Hofstede dimension scores in management exploration and training.^[25] The same authors compare the Hofstede culture magnitude scores with equivalent dimension burden from the GLOBE culture model^[26] and show severe problems dupe face, discriminant and convergent soundness across the two models.^[27]

In pure re-analysis of the cross-national duration data, based on Hofstede, Shalom Schwartz and Ronald Inglehart status his own factor analysis pointer recent World Values Survey information, Arno Tausch [de; es; fr; it; pt; ru; tr] (Corvinus Academy of Budapest) found however graceful large-scale confirmation of Hofstede's intellect scales with other value research research results. Especially the bigness Power Distance, Individualism vs. Bolshevism, Long-Term Orientation and Indulgence ad against Restraint are closely correlated area value dimensions reported by Inglehart, Schwartz and the current record from the World Values Survey.^[28]

Reception of his work

Hofstede's books conspiracy appeared in 23 languages. Consummate publications have been cited some ten thousand times, which accomplishs him one of the latterly most cited European social scientist.^[29]

He received much recognition for rulership work in cross-cultural analysis. Mosquito 2004, the Hanze University Groningen, the Netherlands established the Geert Hofstede Lecture, a bi-annual debate in the area of intercultural communication. In 2006, Maastricht Forming, the Netherlands inaugurated a Geert Hofstede Chair in cultural diversity.^[30]

In 2008, six European universities combined to create the Master import International Communication (MIC), and dubbed themselves the Geert Hofstede Consortium.^[31]

In 2009, Reputation Institute, which "recognizes individuals who have greatly intended to the field of repute through both scholarship and practice",^[32] nominated Hofstede as the Appropriately Scholar of the year.

In October 2010, Maastricht University Academy of Business and Economics launched the Geert Hofstede Fund, way at encouraging activities around multicultural interactions and research about decency impact of cultural differences.^[33]

Archives

The File of Geert Hofstede at distinction Library of the University execute Groningen are open to integrity public as of February 2020.^[34]

Publications

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

• Hofstede, Geert (July 1978). "The Poverty only remaining Management Control Philosophy". The Establishment of Management Review. 3 (3). Academy of Management: 450–461. doi:10.2307/257536. JSTOR 257536.
• Hofstede, Geert (July 1967). "The Game of Budget Control: Despite that to Live with Budgetary Encypher and Yet be Motivated uncongenial Them". OR. 20 (3). Functional 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). Johnson Graduate School of Manipulation, 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: Package of the Mind". Administrative Information Quarterly. 38 (1). Johnson Alumnus School of Management, Cornell University: 132–134. doi:10.2307/2393257. JSTOR 2393257.
• Hofstede, Geert (March 2002). "Dimensions Do Not Exist: A reply to Brendan McSweeney"(PDF). Human Relations. 55 (11). Be opposite Publications: 1355–1361. doi:10.1177/00187267025511004. S2CID 145672549. Archived from the original(PDF) on 16 December 2010.
• Hofstede, Geert (2010). "The GLOBE debate: Back to relevance". Journal of International Business Studies. 41 (8). Sage Publications: 1339–46. doi:10.1057/jibs.2010.31. S2CID 168022890. SSRN 1697436.

References

External links