Geert Hofstede
霍夫斯坦的的文化维度简介,分析
Long-term Orientation --- 长远规划
核心价值: 长远利益 核心区别: 服务(fúwù)于目标/不投入 关键元素: 节俭和储蓄是
良好的价值观
Short-term Orientation --- 短期规划
核心价值: 爱面子 核心区别: 正确/错误(cuòwù) 关键元素: 期望马上获得
✓ Long vs. Short-term Orientation (Confucian Dynamism)
2
精品资料
Power Distance Index (PDI)
The power distance dimension has to do with inequality in a society. In a high power distance environment there would be greater tolerance for, and expectation of, inequality in prestige, wealth and power.
晋 升 晋升根据个人业绩
晋升依据资历和年龄
决策
个人职责(zhízé)
精品资料
赞成集体决策9
Masculinity (MAS)
--- Masculinity vs. Femininity
This dimension has two elements. One deals with the values held and the other with role expectations.
• Equality between men and women
Money and things are important
hofstede et al
University of Limburg
Bram Neuijen
University of Groningen
Denise Davat Ohayv
Institute for Research on intercultural Cooperation
Geert Sanders
UniverΒιβλιοθήκη ity of GroningenThis paper presents the results of a study on organizational cultures in twenty units from ten different organizations in Denmark and the Netherlands. Data came from in-depth interviews of selected informants and a questionnaire survey of a stratified random sample of organizational members. Data on task, structure, and control characteristics of each unit were collected separately. Quantitative measures of the cultures of the twenty units, aggregated at the unit level, showed that a targe part of the differences among these twenty units could be explained by six factors, related to established concepts from organizational sociology, that measured the organizational cultures on six independent dimensions. The organizational culture differences found resided mainly at the levei of practices as perceived by members. Scores of the units on the six dimensions were partly explainable from organizational idiosyncrasies but were also significantly correlated with a variety of task, structural, and control-system characteristics of the units. INTRODUCTION The "Organizational Culture" Construct The term "organizational cultures" entered the U.S. academic literature, as far as we know, with an article in Administrative Science Quarterly by Pettigrew in 1979 ("On Studying Organizational Cultures") and is thus a relatively recent addition. In the U.S. managennent literature, the same term, in the singular, had been casually used by Blake and Mouton (1964) to denote what others then called "climate." More customary became "corporate culture," a term that had already figured in an article by Silverzweig and Allen in 1976 but which gained popularity after a book carrying this title, by Deal and Kennedy, appeared in 1982 and especially after the success of its companion volume, from the same McKinsey-Harvard Business School team, Peters and Waterman's In Search of Excellence, which appeared in the same year. Since then, an extensive literature has developed on the topic, which has also spread to the European language areas accessible to us. "Culture" has become a fad, among managers, among consultants, and among academics, with somewhat different concems. Fads pass, and this one is no exception. Nevertheless, we believe it has left its traces on organization theory. Organizational/corporate culture has acquired a status similar to structure, strategy, and control. Weick (1985) has even argued that "culture" and "strategy" are partly overlapping constructs. There is no consensus about its definition, but most authors will probably agree on the following characteristics of the organizational/cofporate culture construct: it is (1) holistic, (2) historically determined, (3) related to anthropological concepts, (4) socially constructed, (5) soft, and (6) difficult to change. All of these characteristics of organizations have been separately recognized in the literature in the previous decades: what was new about organizational culture was their integration into one construct. The literature on organizational cultures consists of a remarkable collection of pep talks, waf stories, and some insightful in-depth case studies. There is, we believe, a dearth of ordi28&Admim8trative Science Quarteriy, 35 (1990): 286-316
跨文化交流-权利距离
Formation and definition of PDI 权力距离指数的来源和定义
Status 现状 Formation 形成、来源 Definition 定义 Please turn to our handouts 请同学们看材料
Status现状：Inequality in society
There is inequality everywhere, in any society. Some people are stronger, smarter, wealthier, or more powerful than some other people. But Physical and intellectual capacities, power, wealth, and status may or may not go together.
Children are expected and educated to be obedient to their parents. Independent behavior of child is not encouraged. Younger ones are always being taken care of by older ones and parents. Younger children are expected to yield to older ones. Authority continues to play a role in children’s life, even if they are adults.
Power is centralized as much as possible in a few hands. Subordinates expect to be told what to do. An ideal boss is a good father. Privileges and status symbols are expected and popular.
Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions
What are Hofstede's five Cultural Dimensions?Read the About . . . section on the right side of this page. Then review the definitions of each Hofstede Dimension listed below. Following that, you can select the country or countries you're interested in from the list in the left margin of this page.On each country page you will find the unique Hofstede graphs depicting the Dimension scores and other demographics for that country and culture - plus an explanation of how they uniquely apply to that country.* Description for each of Hofstede's Dimensions listed belowPower Distance Index (PDI) that is the extent to which the less powerful members of organizations and institutions (like the family) accept and expect that power is distributed unequally. This represents inequality (more versus less), but defined from below, not from above. It suggests that a society's level of inequality is endorsed by the followers as much as by the leaders. Power and inequality, of course, are extremely fundamental facts of any society and anybody with some international experience will be aware that 'all societies are unequal, but some are more unequal than others'.Individualism (IDV) on the one side versus its opposite, collectivism, that is the degree to which individuals are inte-grated into groups. On the individualist side we find societies in which the ties between individuals are loose: everyone is expected to look after him/herself and his/her immediate family. On the collectivist side, we find societies in which people from birth onwards are integrated into strong, cohesive in-groups, often extended families (with uncles, aunts and grandparents) which continue protecting them in exchange for unquestioning loyalty. The word 'collectivism' in this sense has no politicalmeaning: it refers to the group, not to the state. Again, the issue addressed by this dimension is an extremely fundamental one, regarding all societies in theworld.Masculinity (MAS) versus its opposite, femininity, refers to the distribution of roles between the genders which is another fundamental issue for any society to which a range of solutions are found. The IBM studies revealed that (a) women's values differ less among societies than men's values; (b) men's values from one country to another contain a dimension from very assertive and competitive and maximally different from women's values on the one side, to modest and caring and similar to women's values on the other. Theassertive pole has been called 'masculine' and the modest, caring pole'feminine'. The women in feminine countries have the same modest, caring values as the men; in the masculine countries they are somewhat assertive and competitive, but not as much as the men, so that these countries show a gap between men's values and women's values.Uncertainty Avoidance Index (UAI) deals with a society's tolerance for uncertainty and ambiguity; it ultimately refers to man's search for Truth. It indicates to what extent a culture programs its members to feel eitheruncomfortable or comfortable in unstructured situations. Unstructured situations are novel, unknown, surprising, different from usual. Uncertainty avoiding cultures try to minimize the possibility of such situations by strict laws and rules, safety and security measures, and on the philosophical and religious level by a belief in absolute Truth; 'there can only be one Truth and we have it'. People in uncertainty avoiding countries are also more emotional, and motivated by inner nervous energy. The opposite type, uncertainty accepting cultures, are more tolerant of opinions different from what they are used to; they try to have as few rules as possible, and on the philosophical and religious level they are relativist and allow many currents to flow side by side. People within these cultures are more phlegmatic and contemplative, and not expected by their environment to express emotions.Long-Term Orientation (LTO) versus short-term orientation: this fifth dimension was found in a study among students in 23 countries around the world, using a questionnaire designed by Chinese scholars It can be said to deal with Virtue regardless of Truth. Values associated with Long Term Orientation are thrift and perseverance; values associated with Short Term Orientation are respect for tradition, fulfilling social obligations, and protecting one's 'face'. Both the positively and the negatively rated values of this dimension are found in the teachings of Confucius, the most influential Chinese philosopher who lived around 500 B.C.; however, the dimension also applies to countries without aConfucian heritage.Websites directly related to Geert HofstedeGeert Hofstede's personal WebsiteItim - An international consulting organization utilizing Prof. Hofstede's concepts.Itimfocus - An international consulting organization in the field of culture & change management that uses scans and tools based on scientific research undertaken by Professor Hofstede.Gert Jan Hofstede's personal WebsiteGeert Hofstede™ is a trademark of Geert Hofstede BV, Velp, the Netherlands What are the practical applications for Geert Hofstede's research on cultural differences?Geert HofstedeFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, searcherard Hendrik Hofstede (born 3 October 1928, Haarlem) is an influential Dutch psychologist, who studied the interactions between national cultures and organizational cultures. He is also an author of seve ng Culture's Consequences[1] and Cultures and Organizations,Software of the Mind, co-authored by his son Gert JanHofstede.[2] Hofstede's study demonstrated that there arenational and regional cultural groupings that affect thebehaviour of societies and organizations, and that arevery persistent across time.Contents[hide]• 1 Hofstede's Framework for Assessing Culture• 2 Criticism• 3 Bibliographyo 3.1 Articles• 4 See also• 5 Notes• 6 External links[edit] Hofstede's Framework for Assessing Cultures found five dimensions of culture in his study of n ational work related values:•Low vs. high power distance - This dimension measures how much the less powerful members of institutions and organizations expect and accept that power isdistributed unequally. In cultures with low power distance (e.g. Ireland, Austria, Australia, Denmark, New Zealand), people expect and accept power relations that are moreconsultative or democratic. People relate to one another more as equals regardless of formal positions. Subordinates are more comfortable with and demand the right tocontribute to and critique the decisions of those in power. In cultures with high power distance (e.g. Malaysia), the less powerful accept power relations that are autocratic orpaternalistic. Subordinates acknowledge the power of others based on their formal,hierarchical positions. Thus, Low vs. High Power Distance does not measure or attempt to measure a culture's objective, "real" power distribution, but rather the way people perceive power differences.•Individualism vs. collectivism - This dimension measures how much members of the culture define themselves apart from their group memberships. In individualist cultures, people are expected to develop and display their individual personalities and to choose their own affiliations. In collectivist cultures, people are defined and act mostly as amember of a long-term group, such as the family, a religious group, an age cohort, a town, or a profession, among others.•Masculinity vs. femininity - This dimension measures the value placed on traditionally male or female values (as understood in most Western cultures). In so-called 'masculine' cultures, people value competitiveness, assertiveness, ambition, and the accumulation of wealth and material possessions. In so-called 'feminine' cultures, people value relationships and quality of life. This dimension is often renamed by users ofHofstede's work, e.g. to Quantity of Life vs. Quality of Life. Another reading of the same dimension holds that in 'M' cultures, the differences between gender roles are moredramatic and less fluid than in 'F' cultures•Low vs. high uncertainty avoidance - This dimension measures how much members of a society attempt to cope with anxiety by minimizing uncertainty. In cultures with high uncertainty avoidance, people prefer explicit rules (e.g. about religion and food) and formally structured activities, and employees tend to remain longer with their present employer. In cultures with low uncertainty avoidance, people prefer implicit or flexible rules or guidelines and informal activities. Employees tend to change employers morefrequently.Michael Harris Bond and his collaborators subsequently found a fifth dimension which was initially called Confucian dynamism. Hofstede later incorporated this into his framework as:•Long vs. short term orientation - This dimension describes a society's "time horizon," or the importance attached to the future versus the past and present. In long term oriented societies, people value actions and attitudes that affect the future:persistence/perseverance, thrift, and shame. In short term oriented societies, people value actions and attitudes that are affected by the past or the present: normative statements, immediate stability, protecting one's own face, respect for tradition, and reciprocation of greetings, favors, and gifts.ndencies and not characteristics of individuals. A Japanese person for example canhave a very low 'uncertainty avoidance' compared to a Filipino even though their'national' cultures point strongly in a different direction. Consequently, a country'sscores should not be interpreted as deterministic.[edit] CriticismHofstede's conceptualization of culture as static and essential has attracted somecriticism. In a recent article in the Academy of Management's flagship journal, TheAcademy of Management Review, Galit Ailon deconstructs Hofstede's book Culture'sConsequences by mirroring it against its own assumptions and logic[3]. Ailon findsseveral inconsistencies at the level of both theory and methodology and cautionsagainst an uncritical reading of Hofstede's cultural dimensions.Hofstede's work has not just also been criticized because he seems to identify cultureswith nations based on the supposition that within each nation there is a uniformnational culture. Other types of cultures are acknowledged to exist but allowed little,if any, influence.[4][edit] Bibliography日本The Buddhist-Shinto societies also have an additional Dimension, that of LongTerm Orientation (LTO). Geert Hofstede added this Dimension after the originalstudy, and it was applied to twenty-three of the fifty original countries in hisstudy. The Buddhist/Shinto Countries of Taiwan and Japan have LTO as themost closely correlating Dimension.* * *Power Distance Index (PDI) that is the extent to which the less powerfulmembers of organizations and institutions (like the family) accept and expectthat power is distributed unequally. This represents inequality (more versusless), but defined from below, not from above. It suggests that a society's levelof inequality is endorsed by the followers as much as by the leaders. Power and inequality, of course, are extremely fundamental facts of any society and anybody with some international experience will be aware that 'all societies are unequal, but some are more unequal than others'.Individualism (IDV) on the one side versus its opposite, collectivism, that is the degree to which individuals are inte-grated into groups. On the individualist side we find societies in which the ties between individuals are loose: everyone is expected to look after him/herself and his/her immediate family. On the collectivist side, we find societies in which people from birth onwards are integrated into strong, cohesive in-groups, often extended families (with uncles, aunts and grandparents) which continue protecting them in exchange for unquestioning loyalty. The word 'collectivism' in this sense has no political meaning: it refers to the group, not to the state. Again, the issue addressed by this dimension is an extremely fundamental one, regarding all societies in the world.Masculinity (MAS) versus its opposite, femininity, refers to the distribution of roles between the genders which is another fundamental issue for any society to which a range of solutions are found. The IBM studies revealed that (a) women's values differ less among societies than men's values; (b) men's values from one country to another contain a dimension from very assertive and competitive and maximally different from women's values on the one side, to modest and caring and similar to women's values on the other. The assertive pole has been called 'masculine' and the modest, caring pole 'feminine'. The women in feminine countries have the same modest, caring values as the men; in the masculine countries they are somewhat assertive and competitive, but not as much as the men, so that these countries show a gap between men's values and women's values.Uncertainty Avoidance Index (UAI) deals with a society's tolerance for uncertainty and ambiguity; it ultimately refers to man's search for Truth. It indicates to what extent a culture programs its members to feel either uncomfortable or comfortable in unstructured situations. Unstructured situations are novel, unknown, surprising, different from usual. Uncertainty avoiding cultures try to minimize the possibility of such situations by strict laws and rules, safety and security measures, and on the philosophical and religious level by a belief in absolute Truth; 'there can only be one Truth and we have it'. People in uncertainty avoiding countries are also more emotional, and motivated by inner nervous energy. The opposite type, uncertainty accepting cultures, are more tolerant of opinions different from what they are used to; they try to have as few rules as possible, and on the philosophical and religious level they are relativist and allow many currents to flow side by side. Peoplewithin these cultures are more phlegmatic and contemplative, and not expected by their environment to express emotions.Long-Term Orientation (LTO) versus short-term orientation: this fifth dimension was found in a study among students in 23 countries around the world, using a questionnaire designed by Chinese scholars It can be said to deal with Virtue regardless of Truth. Values associated with Long Term Orientation are thrift and perseverance; values associated with Short Term Orientation are respect for tradition, fulfilling social obligations, and protecting one's 'face'. Both the positively and the negatively rated values of this dimension are found in the teachings of Confucius, the most influential Chinese philosopher who lived around 500 B.C.; however, the dimension also applies to countries without a Confucian heritage.文化维度文化维度是荷兰国际文化合作研究所所长霍夫斯塔德(Geert Hofstede)及其同事在对文化因素进行定量研究时采用的概念。
Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions
• 5. Long Term Orientation (LTO) – This refers to how much society values long-standing – as opposed to short term – traditions and values. This is the fifth dimension that Hofstede added in the 1990s after finding that Asian countries with a strong link to Confucian philosophy acted differently from western cultures. In countries with a high LTO score, delivering on social obligations and avoiding "loss of face" are considered veryt Hofstede's research gives us insights into other cultures so that we can be more effective when interacting with people in other countries. If understood and applied properly, this information should reduce your level of frustration, anxiety, and concern. But most important, Geert Hofstede will give you the 'edge of understanding' which translates to more successful results.
基于电影《服务外包》的商务跨文化交际课堂
基于电影《服务外包》的商务跨文化交际课堂作者：严禛来源：《校园英语·中旬》2015年第05期【摘要】随着市场全球化的进程和世界贸易的逐步加深，越来越多的大学开设了商务跨文化交际课程。
本文基于Geert Hofstede的文化维度理论，通过《服务外包》（Outsourced）这部反映了美国与印度的文化差异所引起的一系列问题的电影来分析商务跨文化交际课堂设置，旨在为该课堂提供新的课堂教学方法和新的研究切入点。
【关键词】文化维度商务跨文化交际课堂一、前言在全球经济飞速发展的当代社会下，越来越多的公司已经不满足于本土市场，转而开发具有无限潜力的全球市场，随之而来的除了无限的利益还有冲突。
为了培养能够适应全球竞争的人才，越来越多的高校开设了商务交际堂，同时也存在多个方面的问题，本文试以电影《服务外包》为例来为该课程的课堂教学提供参考意见。
客观地说文化就是社会价值系统的总和。
这是一个抽象的概念，指导我们的行为和思想，作为整个社会群体，我们有着相同的文化符号。
了解目标市场的国家的文化有助于其制定合理的营销和管理政策，更好的完成商务跨文化交际。
这篇文章通过Geert Hofstede的文化维度理论，来解释文化带来的冲突和问题，为商务跨文化交际课堂提供切实可行的教学方法。
二、Geert Hofstede的文化维度理论霍夫斯坦德教授对世界五十多个国家的文化进行过调查、分析、比较发现：“对不同文化及价值观的研究，是此类策略成功的关键。
” （Hofstede，Geert 2001）Geert Hofstede发现，文化差异的五个维度上：权力距离（Power distance）；个人主义（Individualism）和集体主义（Collectivism）；男性主义（Masculinity）和女性主义（Femininity）；不确定性规避（Uncertainty Avoidance）；长期取向（Long-term orientation）和短期取向（Short-term orientation）。
cultural dimensions
一.Read the books or papers about Hofstede’s Cultural Dimension and the GLOBE Study and discuss about the difference of national culture.1.The GLOBE Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness study on Nine Units of Measurement or "Cultural Dimensions" (全球领导学及组织行为效率)(1)Performance Orientation(成就导向):It “reflects the extent to which acommunity encourages and rewards innovation, high standards, excellence, and performance improvement”;It “relates to the extent to which leaders set ambitious goals, communicate high expectations for their subordinates, build their subordinates’ self-confidence, and intellectually challenge them”.(2)Uncertainty Avoidance(不确定性规避): It is "the extent to which a society,organization, or group relies on social norms, rules, and procedures to alleviate the unpredictability of future events”; it’s about the extent to whichambiguous situations are felt as threatening – i.e., about the extent to which deliberate measures (such as making and enforcing rules and procedures) are taken to reduce ambiguity.(3)In-Group Collectivism(小圈子集体主义):“the degree to which individuals express pride, loyalty, and cohesiveness in their organizations or families” .(4)Power Distance(权力距离):“the extent to which a community accepts and endorses authority, power differences, and status privileges”.(5)Gender Egalitarianism（性别平等主义）:“the degree to which a collective minimizes gender inequality”(6)Humane Orientation（人道取向）:“the degree to which an organization or society encourages and rewards individuals for being fair, altruistic, friendly, generous, caring, and kind to others"(7)Institutional Collectivism（机构性集体主义）:“the degree to which organizational and societal institutional practices encourage and reward collective distribution of resources and collective action”(8)Future Orientation（未来取向）:“the degree to which a collectivity encourages and rewards future-oriented behaviors such as planning and delaying gratification”(9)Assertiveness（有主见）:“the degree to which individuals are assertive, confrontational, and aggressive in their rela tionships with others”现总结如下：2. Geert Hofstede’s “Cultural Dimensions”:(1)Power Distance(PD权力距离):Or the degree to which members of a societyautomatically accept a hierarchical or unequal distribution of power inorganisations and society.(权力距离:指的是社会中对于“权力分配不均等”的接受程度,或是说,在社会之中权利分配的分散或集中程度)(2)Individualism(IDV个人主义与集体主义):Or the degree to which an individualperceives him or her self to be separate from a group and free from group pressure to conform. (个人/集体主义:指的是在社会中成员们倾向于以个人或是集体来定义自己的程度)(3)Masculinity(MAS男性特质与女性特质):Or the degree to which a society looksfavourably on aggressive and materialistic behaviour.(Masculinity/femininity 男性度/女性度:指的是社会成员对于“决断力和物质成功”或“感性和人际关系”的偏好程度)(4)Uncertainty/Avoidance Index(UAI对不确定性的回避):Or the degree to whichmembers of a given society deal with the uncertainty and risk of everyday life and prefer to work with long-term acquaintances and friends rather than with strangers (不确定性规避:指的是社会中其成员对于风险和未知性的容忍程度)(5)Long Term Orientation(LTO):This refers to how much society values long-standing– as opposed to short term – traditions and values. This is the fifth dimension that Hofstede added in the 1990s after finding that Asian countries with a strong link to Confucian philosophy acted differently from western cultures. In countries with a high LTO score, delivering on social obligations and avoiding "loss of face" are considered very important.(时间导向性 指的是社会对于短期收效或长远效果的偏好程度。
沙特阿拉伯文化(1)
The high Uncertainty Avoidance Index (UAI) ranking of 68, indicates the society’s low level of tolerance for uncertainty. In an effort to minimize or reduce this level of uncertainty, strict rules, laws, policies, and regulations are adopted and implemented. The ultimate goal of these populations is to control everything in order to eliminate or avoid the unexpected. As a result of this high Uncertainty Avoidance characteristic, the society does not readily accept change and is very risk adverse.
文化及中国文化理论概述
文化及中国文化理论概述文化及中国文化理论综述周雨第一部分文化的概念一、文化的定义1．泰勒（1871）：文化或文明是一个复杂的整体，它包括知识、信仰、艺术、法律、伦理道德、风俗和作为社会成员的人通过学习而获得的任何其他能力和习惯。
2．帕克和伯吉斯（1921）：一个群体的文化指这一群体所生活的社会遗传结构的总和，这些社会遗传结构又因这一群人特定的历史生活和种族特点而获得其社会意义。
3．威斯勒（1929）：某个社会或部落所遵循的生活方式被称作文化，它包括所有标准化的社会传统行为。
部落文化是该部落的人所遵循的共同信仰和传统行为的总和。
4．斯莫尔（1905）：文化是指某一特定时期的人们为试图达到他们的目的而使用的技术、机械、智力和精神才能的总和。
“文化”包括人类为达到个人或社会目的所采用的方法手段。
5．威利（1929）：文化是一个反应行为的相互关联和相互依赖的习惯模式系统。
6．亨廷顿（1945）：我们所说的文化是指人类生产或创造的，而后传给其他人，特别是传给下一代人的每一件物品、习惯、观念、制度、思维模式和行为模式。
7．《词海》：“文化”一词有三种含义：一、从广义上说，文化是指人类社会历史实践过程中所创造的物质财富和精神财富的总和；二、从狭义上讲，文化是指社会的意识形态，以及与之相适应的制度和组织机构。
其二，范指一般知识，包括语文知识在内。
其三，指中国古代封建王朝所实施的文治和教化的总称。
8．梁漱溟：文化，就是吾人生活所依靠之一切。
俗常以文字、文学、思想、学术、教育、出版等为文化，乃是狭义的。
文化之本义，应在经济、政治、乃至一切无所不包。
9．张岱年、方克立：广义的文化，着眼于人类与一般动物、人类社会与自然界的本质区别，着眼于人类卓立于自然的独特生产方式，其涵盖面非常广泛，所以又被称作“大文化”。
狭义的文化，排除人类社会—历史生活中关于物质创造活动及其结果的部分，专注于精神创造活动及其结果，所以又被称作“小文化”。
霍夫斯泰德的文化价值尺度的历史
霍夫斯泰德的文化价值尺度的历史霍夫斯泰德的文化价值尺度(Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions)是一个用于描述不同国家和地区文化差异的理论模型。
它是由荷兰社会心理学家Geert Hofstede在20世纪70年代和80年代开发的，旨在帮助全球企业或跨文化团队了解不同文化套路和领导风格对商业和组织效率的影响。
Hofstede的文化价值尺度理论是基于对IBM 20多万名员工在不同国家分支机构的文化价值观调查的分析。
2万个调查样本被分析，统计出了5个基本文化维度：权利距离；个人主义与集体主义；男性化与女性化；不确定性规避；短期-长期导向。
每个维度都反映了不同国家的重要文化差异。
权利距离是指某个文化中个体认为在不同隔离层次中的人员之间的不平等程度。
在一个高度权利距离的文化中，人们更容易接受等级较高的人和组织。
在低权利距离的社会中，人们接受平等和共同决策。
个人主义和集体主义谈到的是社会团体对个人和集体的看法。
在一个个人主义的社会中，个人的欲望和权利比团体的利益更重要。
在一个集体主义社会中，团体的利益比个体的权利更重要。
男性化和女性化是指文化中的控制和竞争导向上存在的差异。
在男性化的文化中，人们强调成功、竞争和成就。
在女性化的文化中，更多的关注工作与生活的平衡以及支持他人。
不确定性规避是指不同文化中的人们对风险和不确定性的恐惧水平。
在高不确定性规避的文化中，人们更可能采用保守和传统的方法处理业务和组织问题。
在低不确定性规避的文化中，人们更愿意尝试风险并采用更加创新和灵活的方法。
短期-长期导向是指社会为了获得未来回报而牺牲当前利益的倾向，以及为当前利益而忽略未来利益的倾向。
在长期导向的文化中，人们努力工作、学习和创新，以获得更高的回报。
短期导向的文化更注重当前的会计利益，而不考虑长远的投资。
Hofstede的文化价值尺度被广泛应用于跨文化沟通、国际商务和领导培训中。
尤其是在全球化进程加速的今天，了解本土文化价值、神话和风俗的重要性越来越得到重视。
hofstede 中文
Geert Hofstede 文化分类理论译者注：霍夫斯太德的研究领域是研究企业文化及跨国管理学学生所必须要涉足的。
据笔者经验，应用各大中文搜索键入中文和英文搜索引擎中键入英文所得到的结果相去甚远，关于霍氏的中文资料十分匮乏。
其中的可参考性还有待商榷，比如，某著名大学研究生的论文中，对于该维度的阐述仅有4级，不免贻笑大方。
现摘译霍夫斯太德研究的最新文献，望抛砖引玉，也望求志同道合者共同进步。
吉尔特•霍夫斯太德教授指导了一系列关于工作环境中的价值观如何受文化影响的研究。
1967年至1973年间，霍夫斯太德教授在70多个国家的IBM公司采集关于员工价值观的数据，至2001年，他的研究已经拓展到74个国家和地区。
后续研究证实了先前的研究成果。
研究对象包括了在23个国家的航空公司飞行员，14个国家的行政事务经理，15个国家的高端消费者及19个国家的杰出人物。
通过分析早期及后续的研究数据，霍夫斯太德教授提出了一系列维度来描述、区分文化差异：权利距离、个人主义-集体主义、不确定性的规避及男性气质-女性气质。
之后，在霍氏与中国雇员及经理的合作中，又发展了一个新的衡量维度----长远取向-短期取向文化。
该维度基于孔夫子的儒学思想，并已应用于23个国家。
原文：Prof. Geert Hofstede conducted perhaps the most comprehensive study of how values in the workplace are influenced by culture.Geert Hofstede analyzed a large data base of employee values scores collected by IBM between 1967 and 1973 covering more than 70 countries, from which he first used the 40 largest only and afterwards extended the analysis to 50 countries and 3 regions. In the editions of GH's work since 2001, scores are listed for 74 countries and regions, partly based on replications and extensions of the IBM study on different international populations.Subsequent studies validating the earlier results have included commercial airline pilots and students in 23 countries, civil service managers in 14 counties, 'up-market' consumers in 15 countries and 'elites' in 19 countries.From the initial results, and later additions, Hofstede developed a model that identifies four primary Dimensions to assist in differentiating cultures: Power Distance - PDI, Individualism - IDV, Masculinity - MAS, and Uncertainty Avoidance - UAI.Geert Hofstede added a fifth Dimension after conducting an additional international study with a survey instrument developed with Chinese employees and managers.That Dimension, based on Confucian dynamism, is Long-Term Orientation - LTO and was applied to 23 countries.权利距离指数——Power Distance Index (PDI)聚焦于不同国家人与人之间的平等程度。
hofstede文化价值观
hofstede文化价值观Hofstede文化价值观是由荷兰人文学家吉尔特·霍夫斯泰德（Geert Hofstede）在20世纪70年代提出的一个文化维度分析框架。
该框架包括了个人主义与集体主义、不确定性规避、权力距离、男性化与女性化和长期与短期取向五个文化维度。
这些文化维度可以帮助解释不同国家或地区人们的行为、偏好、态度和价值观等方面的差异。
以下是对霍夫斯泰德提出的每个文化维度的解释。
个人主义与集体主义个人主义文化强调个人的自由、权利和独立性，个人的兴趣和目标高于群体。
集体主义文化则注重整个群体的利益，个人认同和归属感更重要。
在个人主义文化中，适当的个人主张和追求个人目标被认为是正常的，而在集体主义文化中，合群和忍让被视为优先的。
不确定性规避不确定性规避文化强调面对未来的不确定性和风险时采取的行动和态度。
低不确定性规避文化更能接受风险和不确定性，更重视自身的经验、自我决策和自由意志。
高不确定性规避文化更倾向于规避未知的风险，更重视稳定性、规范性和传统性，更愿意使用权威和专家的指导。
权力距离权力距离文化指的是人们对集体体制中的权力分配和控制的态度。
低权力距离文化倾向于平等，人们的地位和职位差异比较小，决策分散在较高层次的人群之间，更重视个人的权利和自由。
高权力距离文化更倾向于集中决策和控制，尊重权威，尊重地位、等级和身份差异。
男性化与女性化男性化文化强调竞争和成功，个人的成就和自我价值被看作是重要的，而女性化文化则强调关怀和共同利益，重视社会贡献和人际关系，相对较少强调权势和地位。
男性化文化通常更强调竞争、成就、挑战和控制，女性化文化更强调合作、共识、平衡和情感。
长期与短期取向长期取向文化强调未来，更注重远见和长期的规划和成功。
短期取向文化则更注重即时收益，并更倾向于解决当前的困难和问题，可能更重视传统和历史。
这些文化维度被广泛应用于跨文化研究和跨国企业的管理实践。
通过对不同文化的理解，企业可以更好地解决跨文化沟通、谈判等挑战，以及在全球市场中更好地适应和运营。
Hofstede's_Dimension
High Power Distance
Social hierarchy is clear; every one has a rightful place --- Centralization of power --- Lots of supervisory personnel --- A rigid value system that determines the worth of each job
The Study on Value Dimension
Subjects: 117,000 employees of IBM Worldwide subsidiaries Methods Grouped by cultural values Survey and Interview
--- the extent to which a culture is conductive between two sets of values and role expectations. Masculinity ---Males value “achievement, Masculinity --dominate the society, with females being controlled by males earnings, material ，high position” Femininity friendly Females atmosphere, Femininity ----- value Sexual“equality; are position security, environment and treated equally to males in all aspects of the society cooperation
Hofstede 文化
Individualism
How a culture handles the individual vs. the group (US=91; ZA=65; Thailand=20) High Low USA 91 Guatemala 6 Australia 90 Equador 8 UK 89 Panama 11 Canada 80 Venezuela 12 Netherlands 80 Colombia 13 New Zealand 79 Indonesia 14
Masculinity
How a culture handles assertiveness vs. modesty (US=62; ZA=63; Thailand=34) High Low Japan 95 Sweden 5 Austria 79 Norway 8 Venezuela 73 Netherlands 14 Italy 70 Denmark 16 Switzerland 70 Costa Rica 21 Mexico 69 Yugoslavia 21
Uncertainty Avoidance
• How a culture handles risk and uncertainty(US=46; ZA=49; Thailand=64) High Low Greece 112 Singapore 8 Portugal 104 Jamaica 13 Guatemala 101 Denmark 23 Uruguay 100 Sweden 29 Belgium 94 Hong Kong 29 Japan 92 UK 35
Factor Analysis
• Goal is to reduce, statistically, the number of dimensions it takes to describe a phenomenon completely while losing as little information as possible. • The following example shows how factor analysis would reduce what looks like a two dimensional distribution to only one dimension:
hofstede的名言
hofstede的名言请问您是指荷兰文化心理学家格尔特·霍夫斯泰德（Geert Hofstede）的名言吗？如果是的话，我提供一些他的著名名言：1. "Culture is more often a source of conflict than of synergy."（文化更常是冲突而非协同的源泉。
）2. "If we learn to understand other cultures, we open up the possibility of living together in peace."（如果我们学会理解其他文化，就有可能和平共处。
）3. "Culture is the collective programming of the mind that distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from others."（文化是区分一个群体或类别的成员与其他人的心智集体编程。
）4. "Culture is like an iceberg; what people see above the surface is only a small part of a much larger whole."（文化就像冰山；人们在表面看到的只是一个远比实际更大的整体的一小部分。
）5. "Cultural differences should not separate us from each other, but rather cultural diversity brings a collective strength that can benefit all of humanity."（文化差异不应将我们彼此分离，相反，文化多样性带来的共同力量对整个人类都会有益。
Geert Hofstede cultural dimensions
Geert Hofstede cultural dimensions
• Power Distance • Individualism • Masculinity • Uncertainty Avoidance • Long-Term Orientation
Hofstede’s Power distance Index measures the extent to which the less powerful members of organizations and institutions (like the family) accept and expect that power is distributed unequally. This represents inequality (more versus less), but defined from below, not from above. It suggests that a society’s level of inequality is endorsed by the followers as much as by the leaders.
4. MASCULINITY versus FEMININITY
A measure of a society's goal orientation: a masculine culture emphasises status derived from wages and position; a feminine culture emphasises human relations and quality of life.
5. TIME ORIENTATION
02_Hofstede’s_Cultural_Dimensions
Power-Distance
(con’t)
HIGH Power-Distance cultures
Malaysia Mexico Venezuela Philippines Singapore France Hong Kong India Columbia
LOW Power-Distance cultures
Uncertainty Avoidance Power-Distance Masculinity-Femininity Individualism-Collectivism (Quantity vs. Quality of Life)
Uncertainty Avoidance
The extent to which a society feels threatened or is comfortable by uncertain and ambiguous situations. STRONG Uncertainty Avoidance
Uncertainty Avoidance
(con’t)
STRONG Uncertainty Avoidance Cultures
Greece Portugal Belgium Japan Peru France Chili Spain Argentina
Weak Uncertainty Avoidance Cultures
Singapore Hong Kong Denmark the Philippines Sweden Great Britain United States India Ireland Malaysia
Power-Distance
hofstede六个维度理论
hofstede六个维度理论荷兰社会心理学家福斯特德（GeertHofstede）提出了一个重要的研究理论，即“Hofstede六个维度理论”。
该理论源于他在IBM六十年代在全球70个国家/地区和地区进行的调查，旨在了解本土文化影响下，不同地域之间企业文化的差异。
根据他的研究，确定了帮助研究者比较不同文化之间的差异的六个维度：社会结构、个人主义/集体主义、性别角色分工、不确定性规避、实用主义/谐调主义以及强调程度。
本文将着重介绍Hofstede六个维度理论，并就这六个维度在中国的应用情况进行深入讨论。
首先，社会结构（social structure）是Hofstede研究的第一个维度，指的是一个社会是否是由相对集权或自由运作的，以及社会是否有等级制度，还是重视相互尊重。
根据Hofstedes的研究，中国的社会主义传统和社会分层结构使其属于高度集权的社会，而等级制度也在国民的日常生活中处处可见。
其次，个人主义/集体主义（individualism/collectivism）是Hofstede研究的第二个维度，根据这一维度，不同国家/地区的文化程度上主张个人利益还是集体利益。
根据Hofstedes的研究，中国属于集体主义文化，在中国，集体利益远大于个人利益，以集体及群体为中心，重视亲情和友谊。
第三，性别角色分工（gender role differentiation）是Hofstede 研究的第三个维度，指的是在某一文化中，男性和女性的角色区分如何。
根据Hofstedes的研究，中国是一个以女性为主的文化，男性在家庭、职场中均远次于女性。
在中国，男性普遍被认为拥有“负责任”的伦理观念和“教师角色”，即男性需要照顾女性，赡养家庭。
第四，不确定性规避（uncertainty avoidance）是Hofstede研究的第四个维度，指的是一个文化如何应对不确定性的能力或方式。
根据Hofstedes的研究，中国属于低不确定性规避文化，在中国，人们不太害怕不确定性，愿意冒险，有更积极的风险承受能力。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
吉尔特·霍夫斯塔德（Hofstede）的五个文化尺度是用来衡量不同国家文化差异、价值取向的一个有效架构：权力距离。
一国范围内人与人之间的不平等程度。
个人主义与集体主义。
个人对于人际关系（他们所属的家庭或组织）的认同与重视程度。
男性气质与女性气质。
男性气质的文化有益于权力、控制、获取等社会行，与之相对的女性气质文化则更有益于个人、情感以及生活质量。
不确定性规避。
一国范围内人们对于结构性情景（相对于非结构性情景、非常规态势）的偏爱程度。
长期取向与短期取向。
长期：着眼于未来的价值取向，比如储蓄习惯和坚持力。
短期：着眼于短期和眼前的价值取向，比如尊重传统、重视履行社会义务。
权力距离是指“一个社会对组织机构中权力分配不平等的情况所能接受的程度。
”在权力距离大的文化中，下属对上司有强烈的依附性，人们心目中理想的上司是开明专制君主，是仁慈的独裁者；在权力距离小的文化中，员工参与决策的程度较高，下属在其规定的职责范围内有相应的自主权。
个人主义是指一个松散的社会结构，假定其中的人们都只关心自己和最亲密的家庭成员；而集体主义则是在一个紧密的社会结构中人们分为内部群体与外部群体，人们期望自己所在的那个内部群体照顾自己，而自己则对这个内部群体绝对忠诚。
所谓“不确定性的规避”，是指“一个社会对不确定和模糊态势所感到的威胁程度，试图保障职业安全，制订更为正式的规则，拒绝越轨的观点和行为，相信绝对忠诚和专业知识来规避上述态势。
”
男性气质与女性气质，是指“社会中‘男性’价值观占优势的程度，即自信、追求金钱和物质、不关心别人、重视个人生活质量”；其反面则是“女性”价值占优势。
长期导向性、短期导向性表明一个民族对长远利益和近期利益的价值观。
具有长期导向的文化和社会主要面向未来，较注重对未来的考虑，对待事物以动态的观点去考察；注重节约、节俭和储备；做任何事均留有余地。
短期导向性的文化与社会则面向过去与现在，着重眼前的利益，注重对传统的尊重，注重负担社会的责任；在管理上最重要的是此时的利润，上级对下级的考绩周期较短，要求立见功效，急功近利，不容拖延。
要了解一个国家的管理文化，你不仅仅要有关于这个国家的知识，还要对它的文化有一个完整概念，能够心领神会。
Hofstede的独特统计调研法给出的结果告诉我们，即便在处理最基本的社会问题上，另一个国家的人们的思想、感受以及行动可能都会和我们有很大的差别。
Hofstede的文化尺度理论同时提醒管理人员与战略家们必须牢记：人类总会习惯性地根据根据他的既有经验去思考、感受和行动，尤其是在国际环境中工作的时候。