Culture and Motivation
According to Robbins, DeCenzo, and Coulter (2011) “motivation is the process by which a person’s efforts are energized, directed, and sustained toward attaining a goal” (p. 267). Organizations are always looking for new ways to motivate employees. In a global economy it is important to understand that cultural differences can impact how an organization can motivate its employees. Geert Hofstede (as cited in Sledge, Miles, & Coppage, 2008) believed there are five dimensions of culture. These five dimensions are power distance, individualism versus collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity versus femininity, and Confucian dynamism (p. 1670). This paper will discuss each dimension of culture and how they could effect employee motivation.
Power Distance
According to Sledge, Miles, and Coppage (2008) power distance is “the degree to which control and influence are distributed unequally in society” (p. 1670). In a country with a high power distance employees would not feel comfortable voicing their opinions or disagreeing with their managers. Empowering employees would not work well because employees would be scared to take actions on their own. Employees would feel more comfortable with structure and strict procedures. In countries with low power distance managers could benefit from empowering employees. Employees are free to voice their opinions and develop and express new ideas or plans. Empowerment would motivate employees more in a country with low power distance.
Individualism versus Collectivism
According to Sledge, Miles, and Coppage (2008) individualism versus collectivism is “the concepts of ‘I and Me’ versus ‘We and Us’” (p. 1670). Some cultures rely heavily on groups and teams. Collective societies look at group accomplishments rather than individual accomplishments. Some countries such as China and Japan rely heavily on groups. Countries like the United States and Canada are more of an individualism society. People focus more on individual accomplishments. Teams have started to become popular in the United States, but are not as effective as in a collective society. In a country where individualism is strong individual recognition and rewards would be effective motivators.
Uncertainty Avoidance
Sledge, Miles, and Coppage (2008) explain uncertainty avoidance as “the degree of risk aversion” (1670). In a country with high uncertainty avoidance there may be more policies and procedures in place. In a culture with low uncertainty avoidance companies could empower employees to develop new ideas.
I never even thought about this word “individualism” before I came to America. Instead of collective, normal is the way I considered as my culture, and for American culture, I would say they are selfish and unkindly sometimes back then. However, after my 2-year study here and all the research I’ve been read for this paper, now I say that neither individualism nor collectivism is purely bad or good.
This article provides me a detailed research on a group of American and Chinese adults with plenty of data and analysis. They provided a lot of real and objective opinion on the comparison between individualism and collectivism. The fact of the whole respondents are students gives me an advantage on finding better ways to understand and use this research in my
Geert Hofstede performed the most lauded research on The Dimensions of Culture theory. His findings and the model that he created were outlined in his 1980 book “Cultures Consequences.” The work was met with both acclaim and disregard from fellow academics. Hofstede’s work is generally quoted and cited without any hesitation even today and his model is still widely used the main guideline for dealing with human resources from a cultural perspective.
It is human nature to see those who are different and group them into distinct categories. The distinction of Individualism versus Collectivism is one that is currently being studied extensively. On one side, individualism sees individuals as the fundamental unit of a society. Individuals are supposed to be unique, independent, and most importantly, willing to put their own interests above all others. On the other hand, collectivism views the basic building block of society as social groups, stressing the interpersonal bonds between people. Collectivist values dictate that group goals and values have higher precedence than an individual’s. Due to the seemingly polar opposite nature of these ideologies, it is inevitable that they will be compared to see which is more beneficial to the country and its people. Some might point to the success of the US, an extremely individualistic country, in support of individualistic values. They will point to the freedom of choice and diversity that individualism boasts of. Others stress the flaws of the US in response, and while both sides do have their truths, the costs that come with individualistic values are too great to be ignored. Highly individualistic attitudes have caused many large scale problems which have long been identified as difficult to resolve issues. These problems include, but are not limited to, promoting aggressive acts, creating an obsession with social power, and allowing a system of injustice to be born.
(1994). Beyond Individualism/Collectivism: New Cultural Dimensions of Values. In U.Kim, H.C. Triandis, C. Kagitcibasi, S. Choi & G. Yoon (Eds.). Individualism and Collectivism: Theory, Method, and Applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 112-115.
Although equality is more present in collectivism, individualism creates an equal environment where everyone has the chance to act according to their own goals and eventually benefit the collective. Individualism also allows for private property, where individuals own the land rather than the government. This principle allows for companies to be established and for the economy to grow as a result. All these values support the superior ideas of individualism and how the associated characteristics are better than those associated with collectivism.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Those in collectivist cultures value their group membership, respect group processes and decisions, and expect other in-group members to look after or protect them in case of needs or crisis. For them, keeping good and harmonious relationships inside their in-group is a priority; and avoiding loss of face is important. Their identity is based on the strong and cohesive in-groups to which they belong. In collectivist cultures, cooperation is high within in-groups, but is unlikely when the other person belongs to an out-group. As a comparison, people in individualist cultures are good at forming new in-groups and getting along with those from out-groups.
Collectivism and individualism, both have a fair share of issues. The articles that exemplify both collectivism and individuality are “1984”, “Anthem” and a poem called “Unknown Citizen”. Collectivism and individualism have an even amount of dilemmas, both collectivism and individualism come from totally different perspectives. The Struggles associated with a collectivism is that everything, every action, every thought, every person acts as a whole in unison, so there isn’t any room for different opinions and thoughts, as for an individualist society people have to sacrifice themselves both physically, mentally and overcome their
Culture forms the framework for our thoughts and behavior and is defined as sets of values and principles individuals have about how nature and society work, as well as the norms of behavior, derived from that set of values (Gorodnichenko & Roland, 2014). According to Heine (2012), cultures that are individualistic include a variety of customs that encourage individuals to place their own personal goals ahead of those of the collective. In contrast, cultures that are collectivistic include many cultural practices, institutions, and customs that encourage individuals to place more emphasis on collective goals. Furthermore, the dimensions of collectivism and individualism help us to understand cultural differences in a wide variety of psychological
In an attempt to understand the dissimilarities of employees from a cross-cultural perspective, Geert Hofstede (1980) conducted a pioneering survey that measured the work-related values of employees who worked for IBM subsidiaries located in 53 different countries (Hofstede & Bond, 1984). When analyzing the results, Hofstede discovered that cultures were divisible into four distinct categories, masculinity/femininity, power distance, uncertainty avoidance and individualism/collectivism (Bochner 1994). Hofstede stated that the four categories relate to the core cultural values of
For instance, in the Ivory Coast, the group goal prevails. Indeed, individuals share a common goal and work for the group or organization’s success. Oscar Rudenstam in his article “Individualism vs Collectivism” points out that in a collectivist culture as the one in the Ivory Coast, the workplace is prioritized higher than the individual self. This mindset means that individuals are more likely to put the institution’s interests before their own and work together to achieve the institution’s goal. In fact, the Ivory Coast motto “Union- Discipline- Work’’ best illustrate this point. On the other hand, in the United States, the individual goal and the “self-made man’’ concept are pronounced. In the same article “Individualism vs Collectivism”, Rudenstam comments that “it is typical of an individual who is relatively individualistic to prioritize individual ambitions to a higher degree and strive to fulfill such ambitions’’. Rudenstam believe that an individualistic individual tends to value self accomplishment more. The individual is the only person responsible for his success and achievements. A collectivist culture which promotes and work for the institution’s success opposes an individualist culture where individuals are focus on achieving their personal
Civilizations are typically broken up into two categories: collectivist. Individualist cultures, like those of the United States and Western Europe, highlight personal accomplishment regardless of the expense of team goals, causing a powerful awareness of competition. Collectivist cultures, including these of China, Korea, and Asia, emphasize work and family team aims above desires or individual needs.
Some of the business expert also suggested that cross- national differences are diminishing because the advancement of technology, including the day-to day activities of multinational corporations(Flora,Chiang&Birtch,Thomas,2006). This type of view point casts a doubt on how much of influence that national culture of a country wields on the multinational corporations especially in the management practices, and employee attitudes towards reward practices in particular. Geet Hofstede have distinguished national culture with four bi-polar dimensions: masculinity-feminity,individualism-collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, and power distance. Hofstede view that cultural – influence attributes of a nation do exist and these distinctions will provide and organization with further understanding on how work related values and behavior are different between cultures. In the reward- system area, Hofstede give a useful view into how employee needs and reward preferences are likely to be vary in different cultures(Flora,Chiang&Birtch,Thomas,2006). When a culture of a country score high on masculinity-femininity, this suggests there are divisions of roles and values between genders. Its shows that masculinity cultures are emphazing assertiveness, achievement and material success, an interest in acquiring huge sum of money for financial gain and achieving material success are highly desirable. The view is very different in feminine driven culture. In feminine driven culture human relationship are more value. Their culture is center more around concern for others, supporting each other’s and good quality of life. An example are financial and power oriented rewards will be more preferred in Hong Kong, China than in Finland; where relationship -and
Motivation is an important function in organizations to motivate their employees for their ability to perform well, improving their skills, increasing productivity, job satisfaction and employee extension. Employees also are not a machines that we could just program their task in their brain and they will do it automatically, they require motivation to actually do their job properly. And so, after discussing the process models of the Maslow’s “Hierarchy of needs”, Douglas McGregor theory X and Y, and also the Herzberg’s “two factor motivation hygiene theory.” understanding the ways of motivating people, the human nature, and the substance of nature. I believe that the true motivation can only come from within and also managers can actually motivate all of their employees.