speaking, meeting others quickly and putting them at ease…making a good impression…These skills are not necessary for collectivists. When it comes time for a person to meet unknown others in a larger society, members of the collective act as go-betweens and make introductions, describe the person's accomplishments and abilities, and so forth. In short, individualists have to rely on themselves.... Collectivists have a supportive group that assists in this same goal.31
If you are wondering what individualism and collectivism have to do with expanding into international business markets and boosting sales in Asia, know that when you sit at the negotiating table with your Asian partners, your conversation should not be about you and your company but about collaboration and working in harmony with them.
Table 2.1 on page 15 shows the Individualism Index from Geert Hofstede's research on cultural differences, including the rankings of the U.S., Great Britain, Canada, and eight of the Asian countries included in this book (Myanmar and The Philippines were not part of the original Hofstede study). In this index, the higher the number, the greater the degree of individualism. Countries positioned lower on this index are more focused on making sure that you will be consensus-seeking and team-focused before they commit to doing business with you long-term.32
Table 2.1 The Individualism Index
* Myanmar does not have a world ranking because it was not included in Hofstede's cultural dimensions work,33 or the GLOBE Studies.34
** This score is from an exploratory study of Myanmar culture by Dr. Charles Rarick,35 which uses Hofstede's value dimensions. Refer to Chapter 10 for more information.
2. How Are Power and Authority Viewed?
Many cultures around the globe are ascriptive. In ascriptive cultures, characteristics including class, age, sex, higher education, and religion are considered more important than in achievement-oriented cultures. In some ascriptive cultures, power is held over people. In others, including many of the Asian countries included in this book, power is considered to be participative.
As Michael DeCaro, former Chief Audit Executive and VP of Finance, Asia Pacific, and Japan, for Dell, explains
“Western leaders that arrive on the scene and simply announce decisions without getting everyone involved have a much greater likelihood of finding it difficult to achieve their objectives in Asia. For example, in Japan, a position of authority simply allows a leader to take the lead in gaining and developing consensus as to what the ultimate decision will be.”
The differences in perceived inequalities between people in Asian countries are captured by Geert Hofstede's Power Distance (PDI) dimension, reflecting the degree to which a culture is comfortable with power inequalities. The higher the PDI number, the greater the power distance, meaning members of a culture “expect and accept that power is distributed unequally.” For example, the U.S. score of 40 on the PDI in Table 2.2 is relatively low on the PDI, reflecting the belief that ‘all men are created equal.’ Nevertheless, reality teaches us that there will be inequalities in society.
Table 2.2 The Power Distance Index
* Myanmar does not have a world ranking because it was not included in Hofstede's cultural dimensions work,36 or the GLOBE Studies.37
** This score is from an exploratory study of Myanmar culture by Dr. Charles Rarick,38 which uses Hofstede's value dimensions. Refer to Chapter 10 for more information.
3. How Do We Compare Rules and Relationships?
Fons Trompenaars and Charles Hampden-Turner speak of this distinction in terms of universalist and particularist cultures (see Table 2.3). As they point out in Riding the Waves of Culture:
Table 2.3 Universalism-Particularism Chart
“One serious pitfall for universalist cultures in doing business with more particularist ones is that the importance of the relationship is often ignored. The contract will be seen as definitive by the universalist, but only a rough guideline or approximation by the particularist.”
The authors have identified different countries' cultural preferences with respect to rules and relationships. In one example, they discovered which cultures would follow the rule of law and which would consider the circumstances to protect a friend from the police. Table 2.3 indicates where some Western cultures fall on this universalist-particularist continuum, together with the six Asian cultures included in Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner's study.39 The higher the number, the more universalist the culture.
4. How Do We View Time?
One key subtlety about time concerns the concepts of monochronic and polychronic. In the West, we expect an executive stopped by another colleague en route to a meeting, to say that he or she can't stop to chat. In polychronic cultures, such as those in Asia, it's common for several things to happen at once and punctuality is not as essential. People in the U.S. tend to be less comfortable with constant interruptions; such simultaneous comings and goings are common in polychronic societies like India and Malaysia.
Like cocktail party guests, some of whom arrive promptly whereas others only show up after the event is in full swing, there are considerable variations within as well as between cultures when it comes to perceptions of time.
With respect to the concepts of monochronic time, meaning linear or sequential, doing one thing at a time, and polychronic or synchronic time, meaning doing several things at a time or multitasking, a study published in the Journal of Consumer Research found that the U.S. falls within the middle of the continuum (3.18, where 1.0 is monochronic and 5.0 is polychronic).40
In Asian countries, the equivalent figure was 4.0. Given the central theme of this book – relationships – this movement is a good thing.
As Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner point out, polychronic cultures are less focused on punctuality. Although recent research indicates that the U.S. is moving toward a more polychronic orientation,41 the culture has typically been monochronic. Although you may not ever need to use either of these terms directly, what we are stressing here is encapsulated by this quote of Hall's:
“It is impossible to know how many millions of dollars have been lost in international business because monochronic and polychronic people do not understand each other or even realize that two such different time systems exist.”42
Table 2.4 on page 19 shows different concepts
Richard Brislin,
Robert J. House, Paul J. Hanges, Mansour Javidan, Peter W. Dorfman, and Vipin Gupta,
C. Rarick and I. Nickerson, “An Exploratory Study of Myanmar Culture Using Hofstede's Value Dimension” (February 20, 2006), doi:10.2139/ssrn.1114625.
Robert J. House, Paul J. Hanges, Mansour Javidan, Peter W. Dorfman, and Vipin Gupta,
C. Rarick and I. Nickerson, “An Exploratory Study of Myanmar Culture Using Hofstede's Value Dimension” (February 20, 2006), doi:10.2139/ssrn.1114625.
Kaufman, C.F., Lane, P.M., and Lindquist, J. “Exploring More Than 24 Hours a Day: A Preliminary Investigation of Polychronic Time Use,”
Ibid.
Edward T. Hall,
