One of the weaknesses of cross-cultural analysis has been the inability to transcend the tendency to equalize culture with the concept of the nation state. A nation state is a political unit consisting of an autonomous state inhabited predominantly by a people sharing a common culture, history, and language or languages. Cultures do not have strict borders like nation states. Its expression and even core beliefs can assume many permutations and combinations as we move across distances.
The field of cross cultural analysis has been severly criticised by people like Nigel Holden, for being too dialogue-oriented and excessively focused on cultural difference and foreign-language competence. They argue that intercultural communication is a determinant of atmosphere in interactions. In a major diasagreement with Hofstede, organisational processes are thought to be more important than organisational cultures.
Culture has an interpretative function for the members of a group, which share that particular culture. Although all members of a group or society share their culture, expressions of culture-resultant behaviour are modified by the individuals' personality to a considerable degree. Cross-cultural analysis aims to harness this utilatarian function of culture as a tool for increasing human adaptation and improving communication.
Bibliography:
- Dawkins, Richard (1976). The Selfish Gene. Oxford University Press
- French, W.L. and C.H. Bell (1979). Organization development. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
- Hofstede, Geert "Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind", 1997
- Holden, N. J. (2002). Cross-cultural management: A knowledge management perspective. Harlow, UK: Financial Times/Prentice Hall
Different models of Culture - Trying to define as complex a phenomenon as culture with just two layers proved quite a challenge and the 'Onion' model arose.
Geert Hofstede (1991) sees culture as "the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from another." He proposes four layers, each of which includes the lower level. 'culture' being like an onion can be peeled, layer-by layer.The figure on the right shows how Hofstede illustrates the differences between personality, culture, and human nature.
Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner (1997) adopt a similar onion-like model of culture. However, their model expands the core level of the very basic two-layered model, rather than the outer level. In their view, culture is made up of basic assumptions at the core level. These 'basic assumptions' are somewhat similar to 'values' in the Hofstede model.
Source: Hofstede, G. 1991. Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. New York: McGraw-Hill, 6.
Copyright Dot-Connect 2007. All rights reserved. Suomenniementie 15, 00950 Helsinki, Finland info@dot-connect.com