1

Dimensions of national Cultures

Geert has operated in an international environment since 1965, and his curiosity as a social psychologist led him to the comparison of nations, first as a travelling international staff member of a multinational (IBM) and later as a visiting professor at an international business school in Switzerland. His 1980 book Culture's Consequences combined his personal experiences with the statistical analysis of two unique data bases. The first and largest comprised answers of matched employee samples from 40 different countries to the same attitude survey questions. The second consisted of answers to some of these same questions by his executive students who came from 15 countries and from a variety of companies and industries. Systematic differences between nations in these two data bases occurred in particular for questions dealing with values. Values, in this case, are "broad preferences for one state of affairs over others", and they are mostly unconscious.

The first four dimensions

The values that distinguished countries (rather than individuals) from each other grouped themselves statistically into four clusters. They dealt with four anthropological problem areas that different national societies handle differently: ways of coping with inequality, ways of coping with uncertainty, the relationship of the individual with her or his primary group, and the emotional implications of having been born as a girl or as a boy. These became the Hofstede dimensions of national culture: Power Distance, Uncertainty Avoidance, Individualism versus Collectivism, and Masculinity versus Femininity. Between 1990 and 2002, these dimensions were largely replicated in six other cross-national studies on very different populations from consumers to airline pilots, covering between 14 and 28 countries. In the 2010 third edition of our book Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, scores on the dimensions are listed for 76 countries.

Power Distance

Power distance 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".

Uncertainty Avoidance

Uncertainty avoidance deals with a society's tolerance for uncertainty and ambiguity. 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. People within these cultures are more phlegmatic and contemplative, and not expected by their environment to express emotions.

Individualism

Individualism on the one side versus its opposite, collectivism, is the degree to which individuals are integrated into groups. On the individualist side we find societies in which the ties between individuals are loose: everyone is expected to look after her/himself and her/his 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

Masculinity versus its opposite, femininity, refers to the distribution of emotional 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 more assertive and more competitive, but not as much as the men, so that these countries show a gap between men's values and women's values.

The fifth dimension: Long-Term Orientation

Research by Michael Bond and colleagues among students in 23 countries led him in 1991 to adding a fifth dimension called Long- versus Short-Term Orientation. In 2010, research by Michael Minkov allowed to extend the number of country scores for this dimension to 93, using recent World Values Survey data from representative samples of national populations. Long- term oriented societies foster pragmatic virtues oriented

2
towards future rewards, in particular saving, persistence, and adapting to changing circumstances. Short-term oriented societies foster virtues related to the past and present such as national pride, respect for tradition, preservation of "face", and fulfilling social obligations.

The sixth dimensions: Indulgence versus Restraint

In the same book a sixth dimension, also based on Minkov's World Values Survey data analysis for 93 countries, has been added, called Indulgence versus Restraint. Indulgence stands for a society that allows relatively free gratification of basic and natural human drives related to enjoying life and having fun. Restraint stands for a society that suppresses gratification of needs and regulates it by means of strict social norms.

Dimension scores are relative

The country scores on these dimensions are relative - societies are compared to other societies. These relative scores have been proven to be quite stable over decades. The forces that cause cultures to shift tend to be global or continent-wide - they affect many countries at the same time, so that if their cultures shift, they shift together, and their relative positions remain the same.

Scores around the world

Power distance scores are high for Latin, Asian and African countries and smaller for Anglo and Germanic countries. Uncertainty avoidance scores are higher in Latin countries, in Japan, and in German speaking countries, lower in Anglo, Nordic, and Chinese culture countries. Individualism prevails in developed and Western countries, while collectivism prevails in less developed and Eastern countries; Japan takes a middle position on this dimension. Masculinity is high in Japan, in some European countries like Germany, Austria and Switzerland, and moderately high in Anglo countries; it is low in Nordic countries and in the Netherlands and moderately low in some Latin and Asian countries like France, Spain and Thailand. Long-term orientation scores are highest in East Asia, moderate in Eastern and Western Europe, and low in the Anglo world, the Muslim world, Latin America and Africa. Indulgence scores are highest in Latin America, parts of Africa, the Anglo world and Nordic Europe; restraint is mostly found in East Asia, Eastern Europe and the Muslim world.

Ancient roots of culture

The grouping of country scores points to some of the roots of cultural differences. These should be sought in the common history of similarly scoring countries. All Latin countries, for example, score relatively high on both power distance and uncertainty avoidance. Latin countries (those today speaking a Romance language i.e. Spanish, Portuguese, French, Italian or Romanian) have inherited at least part of their civilization from the Roman empire. The Roman empire in its days was characterized by the existence of a central authority in Rome, and a system of law applicable to citizens anywhere. This established in its citizens' minds the value complex which we still recognize today: centralization fostered large power distance and a stress on laws fostered strong uncertainty avoidance. The Chinese empire also knew centralization, but it lacked a fixed system of laws: it was governed by men rather than by laws. In the present-day countries once under Chinese rule, the mindset fostered by the empire is reflected in large power distance but medium to weak uncertainty avoidance. The Germanic part of Europe, including Great Britain, never succeeded in establishing an enduring common central authority and countries which inherited its civilizations show smaller power distance. Assumptions about historical roots of cultural differences always remain speculative but in the given examples they are plausible. In other cases they remain hidden in the course of history.

Correlations

The country scores on the six dimensions are statistically correlated with a multitude of other data about the countries. For example, power distance is correlated with the use of violence in domestic politics and with income inequality in a country. Uncertainty avoidance is associated with Roman Catholicism and with the legal obligation in developed countries for citizens to carry identity cards. Individualism is correlated with national wealth and with mobility between social classes from one generation to the next. Masculinity is correlated negatively with the percent of women in democratically elected governments. Long-term orientation is correlated with school results in international comparisons. Indulgence is correlated with sexual freedom and a call for human rights like free expression of opinions.

Dimensions are widely used

The Hofstede model of dimensions of national culture has been applied in the practice of many domains of human social life, from the interpersonal to the national, in public domains and in business, in education and in health care. According to the Web of Science, in 2008 more than 800 peer-reviewed articles in scientific journals cited one or more of Geert Hofstede's publications. Of particular interest are the applications in the field of marketing, advertising and consumer behaviour, in which Dutch scholar Marieke de Mooij plays a key role

Geert Hofstede proposed a systematic framework for assessing and differentiating national cultures in relation to organizational culture known as the cultural dimensions theory. He gathered and analyzed extensive data on the world's values and cultures, particularly through the IBM survey study, in order to build a comprehensive model which argues that people differ across on the extent to

3
which they endorse six dimensions of values power (equality versus inequality), collectivism (versus individualism), uncertainty avoidance (versus tolerance), masculinity (versus femininity), temporal orientation, and indulgence (versus restraint).
Contents
[hide]

1 Research history and methodology 2 Dimensions of national cultures

o o o

2.1 Differences between cultures on the values dimensions 2.2 Correlations of values with other country differences 2.3 Applications of the model

2.3.1 Why is it important to be aware of cultural differences? 2.3.2 What are the practical applications of the theory?

2.3.2.1 International communication 2.3.2.2 International negotiation 2.3.2.3 International management 2.3.2.4 International marketing

3 Limitations of Hofstedes model

3.1 Questionable choice of national level

4 See also

3.1.1 Individual level: cultural dimensions versus individual personalities 3.1.2 Organizational level 3.1.3 Occupational level 3.1.4 Gender level

5 References 6 Notes 7 External links

[edit]Research

history and methodology

In 1965, Geert founded the personnel research department of IBM Europe (which he managed until 1971). Between 1967 and 1973, he executed a large survey study regarding national values differences across the worldwide subsidiaries of this multinational corporation: he compared the answers of 117,000 IBM matched employees samples on the same attitude survey in different countries. He first focused his research on the 40 largest countries, and then extended it to 50 countries and 3 regions, at that time probably the largest matched-sample cross-national [1] database available anywhere.. This initial analysis identified systematic differences in national cultures on four primary dimensions: power distance (PDI), individualism (IDV), uncertainty avoidance (UAI) and masculinity [2] (MAS), which are described below. As Hofstede explains on his academic website, these

4
dimensions regard four anthropological problem areas that different national societies handle differently: ways of coping with inequality, ways of coping with uncertainty, the relationship of the individual with her or his primary group, and the emotional implications of having been born as a girl [3] or as a boy . In 1980 he published Culture's Consequences, a book which combines the statistical analysis from the survey research with his personal experiences. In order to confirm the early results from the IBM study and to extend them to a variety of populations, six subsequent cross-national studies have successfully been conducted between 1990 and 2002. Covering between 14 to 28 countries, the samples included commercial airline pilots, students, civil service managers, 'up-market' consumers and 'elites'. The combined research established value scores on the four dimensions for a total of 76 countries and regions. In 1991, Michael Harris Bond and colleagues conducted a study among students in 23 countries, using a survey instrument developed with Chinese employees and managers. The results from this study led Hofstede to add a new fifth dimension to his model: long term orientation (LTO) initially called Confucian dynamism. In 2010, the scores for this dimension have been extended to 93 countries thanks to the research of Micheal Minkov who used the recent World Values [4] Survey. Finally, Minkovs World Values Survey data analysis of 93 representative samples of national populations also led Geert Hofstede to identify a sixth last dimension: indulgence versus restraint. [edit]Dimensions

of national cultures

Power distance index (PDI): Power distance is the extent to which the less powerful members of organizations and institutions (like the family) accept and expect that power is distributed unequally. Cultures that endorse low power distance expect and accept power relations that are more consultative or democratic. People relate to one another more as equals regardless of formal positions. Subordinates are more comfortable with and demand the right to contribute to and critique the decision making of those in power. In high power distance countries, less powerful accept power relations that are more autocratic and paternalistic. Subordinates acknowledge the power of others simply based on where they are situated in certain formal,hierarchical positions. As such, the power distance index Hofstede defines does not reflect an objective difference in power distribution, but rather the way people perceive power differences. Individualism (IDV) vs. collectivism: The degree to which individuals are integrated into groups. In individualistic societies, the stress is put on personal achievements and individual rights. People are expected to stand up for themselves and their immediate family, and to choose their own affiliations. In contrast, in collectivist societies, individuals act predominantly as members of a life-long and cohesive group or organization (note: The word collectivism in this sense has no political meaning: it refers to the group, not to the state). People have large extended families, which are used as a protection in exchange for unquestioning loyalty. Uncertainty avoidance index (UAI): a society's tolerance for uncertainty and ambiguity. It reflects the extent to which members of a society attempt to cope with anxiety by minimizing uncertainty. People in cultures with high uncertainty avoidance tend to be more emotional. They try to minimize the occurrence of unknown and unusual circumstances and to proceed with careful changes step by step by planning and by implementing rules, laws and regulations. In contrast, low uncertainty avoidance cultures accept and feel comfortable in unstructured

situations or changeable environments and try to have as few rules as possible. People in these cultures tend to be more pragmatic, they are more tolerant of change. Masculinity (MAS), vs. femininity: The distribution of emotional roles between the genders. Masculine cultures values are competitiveness, assertiveness, materialism, ambition and power, whereas feminine cultures place more value on relationshipsand quality of life. In masculine cultures, the differences between gender roles are more dramatic and less fluid than in feminine cultures where men and women have the same values emphasizing modesty and caring. As a result of the taboo on sexuality in many cultures, particularly masculine ones, and because of the obvious gender generalizations implied by Hofstede's terminology, this dimension is often renamed by users of Hofstede's work, e.g. to Quantity of Life vs. Quality of Life. Long term orientation (LTO), vs. short term orientation: First called Confucian dynamism, it describes societies time horizon. Long term oriented societies attach more importance to the future. They foster pragmatic values oriented towards rewards, including persistence, saving and capacity for adaptation. In short term oriented societies, values promoted are related to the past and the present, including steadiness, respect for tradition, preservation of ones face, reciprocation and fulfilling social obligations. Indulgence, vs. restraint: Societies with a high rate of indulgence allow hedonistic behaviors: people can freely satisfy their basic needs and desires. On the opposite side, restraint define societies with strict social norms, where gratification of drives are suppressed and regulated.

[edit]Differences

between cultures on the values dimensions

Putting together national scores (from 1 for the lowest to 120 for the highest), Hofstedes six dimensions model allow international comparison between cultures, also called comparative [5] research: Power distance index shows very high scores for Latin and Asian countries, African areas and the Arab world. On the other hand Anglo and Germanic countries have a lower power distance (only 11 for Austria and 18 for Denmark). For example, the United States has a 40 on the cultural scale of Hofstedes analysis. Compared to Guatemala where the power distance is very high (95) and Israel where it is very low (13), the United States is in the middle. In Europe, power distance tends to be lower in northern countries and higher in southern and eastern parts: for example, 90 for Romania, 57 for Spain vs. 31 for Sweden and 35 for the United Kingdom. Regarding the individualism index, there is a clear gap between developed and Western countries on one hand, and less developed and eastern countries on the other. North America and Europe can be considered as individualistic with relatively high scores: for example, 80 for Canada and Hungary. In contrast, Asia, Africa and Latin America have strong collectivistic values: Colombia scores only 13 points on the IDV scale, and Indonesia 14. The greatest contrast can be drawn comparing two extreme countries on this dimension: 6 points for Guatemala vs. 91 points score for the United States. Japan and the Arab world have middle values on this dimension.

Uncertainty avoidance scores are the highest in Latin American countries, Southern and Eastern Europe countries including German speaking countries, and Japan. They are lower for Anglo, Nordic, and Chinese culture countries. However few countries have very low UAI. For example, Germany has a high UAI (65) and Belgium even more (94) compared to Sweden (29) or Denmark (23) despite their geographical proximity. Masculinity is extremely low in Nordic countries: Norway scores 8 and Sweden only 5. In contrast, Masculinity is very high in Japan (95), and in European countries like Hungary, Austria and Switzerland influenced by German culture. In the Anglo world, masculinity scores are relatively high with 66 for the United Kingdom for example. Latin countries present contrasting scores: for example Venezuela has a 73 point score whereas Chiles is only 28. High long term orientation scores are typically found in East Asia, with China having 118, Hong Kong 96 and Japan 88. They are moderate in Eastern and Western Europe, and low in the Anglo countries, the Muslim world, Africa and in Latin America. However there is less data about this dimension. There is even less data about the sixth dimension. Indulgence scores are highest in Latin America, parts of Africa, the Anglo world and Nordic Europe; restraint is mostly found in East Asia, Eastern Europe and the Muslim world.

[edit]Correlations

of values with other country differences

Researchers have grouped some countries together by comparing countries value scores with other country difference such as geographical proximity, shared language, related historical background, similar religious beliefs and practices, common philosophical influences, identical political systems, in other words everything which is implied by the definition of one nations culture. For example, low power distance is associated with consultative political practices and income equity, whereas high power distance is correlated with the use of bribery and corruption in domestic politics and the unequal distribution of income. Individualism is positively correlated with mobility between social classes and with national wealth. In fact, when a country gets richer it has been observed that people get more [6] individualistic. Another example of correlation has been drawn by the Sigma Two Group in 2003. They have studied the correlation between countries cultural dimensions and their [7] predominate religion, based on the World Factbook 2002. On average, predominantly Catholic countries show very high uncertainty avoidance, relatively high power distance, moderate masculinity and relatively low individualism, whereas predominantly atheist countries tend to be collectivistic, with low uncertainty avoidance, moderate masculinity score and very high power distance. [edit]Applications

of the model

[edit]Why is it important to be aware of cultural differences? "Culture is more often a source of conflict than of synergy. Cultural differences are a [8] nuisance at best and often a disaster." Despite the evidence that groups are different from each other, we tend to believe that deep inside all people are the same. In fact, as we are generally not aware of other countries cultures, we tend to minimize cultural differences. This leads tomisunderstandings and misinterpretations between people from different countries.

Instead of the convergence phenomena we expected with information technologies availability (the global village culture), cultural differences are still significant today and diversity tends to increase. So, in order to be able to have cross-cultural relations, we have to be aware of these cultural differences. With his five dimensions model, Geert Hofstede shed light on these differences. Therefore, it is a great tool to use in order to have a general overview and an approximate understanding of other cultures and, to know how to behave towards individuals from other countries. Because, we still need to cooperate with members of other cultures, and maybe more than ever with the new problems which have arisen for several decades like environmental issues. Therefore cross-cultural understanding is indispensable.

Why are you referring to five dimensions when already six have been listed in the previous paragraphs. [edit]What are the practical applications of the theory? Geert Hofstede is perhaps the best known sociologist of culture and anthropologist in the context of applications for understanding international business. Many articles and research papers refer to his publications, with over 20,000 citations to his 2003 book Culture's Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations Across [9] [3] Nations (which is an updated version of his first publication ). The five dimensions model is widely used in many domains of human social life, and particularly in the field of business. Practical applications were developed almost immediately. In fact, when it comes to business, promoting cultural sensitivity will help people work more effectively when interacting with people from other countries, and will participate to make transactions are successful. [edit]International communication In business, it is commonly agreed that communication is one of the primary concerns. So, for professionals who work internationally; people who interact daily with other people from different countries within their company or with other companies abroad; Hofstedes model gives insights into other cultures. In fact, cross-cultural communication requires being aware of cultural differences because what may be considered perfectly acceptable and natural in one country, can be confusing or even offensive in another. All the levels in communication are affected by cultural dimensions: verbals (words and language itself), non verbals (body language, gestures) and etiquette dos and donts (clothing, gift-giving, dining, customs and protocol). And this is also valid for written communication as explained in William Wardrobes essay "Beyond Hofstede: Cultural applications for communication with Latin American [10] Businesses". [edit]International negotiation In international negotiations, communication style, expectation, issue ranking and goals will change according to the negotiators countries of origin. If applied properly, the understanding of cultural dimensions should increase success in negotiations and [11] reduce frustration and conflicts. For example, in a negotiation between Chinese and Canadian, Canadian negotiators may want to reach an agreement and sign a contract, whereas Chinese negotiators may want to spend more time for non business activities, small talks and hospitality with preferences for protocol and form in order to first establish the relationship.

When negotiating in Western countries, the objective is to work toward a target of mutual understanding and agreement and 'shake-hands' when that agreement is reached a cultural signal of the end of negotiations and the start of 'working together'. In Middle Eastern countries much negotiation takes place leading into the 'agreement', signified by shaking hands. However, the deal is not complete in the Middle Eastern culture. In fact, it is a cultural sign that 'serious' negotiations are just beginning.
[8]

[edit]International management These considerations are also true in international management and cross-cultural [12] leadership. Decisions taken have to be based on the countrys customs and values. When working in international companies, managers may provide training to their employees in ordrer to make them sensitive to cultural differences, develop nuanced business practices, with protocols across countries. Hofstede's dimensions offer guidelines for defining culturally acceptable approaches to corporate organizations. As a part of the public domain, Geert Hofstedes work is used by [13] numerous consultancies worldwide. But only 3 of them are regarded as partners and have Hofstedes a full support with regular contacts. The American firm ITAP International Inc. and its ITAP International Alliance propose full-service consulting based on Hofstedes approach using the Culture in the Workplace [14] Questionnaire Similarly, Itim international, headquartered in Sweden offers culture and management consultancy, training and coaching. Itim focus, in the Netherlands and Finland, concentrate on change consultancy at organizational level.

[edit]International marketing As in communication, negotiation and management, the five dimensions model is very useful in international marketing too because it defines national values not only in business context but in general. Marieke de Mooij has studied the application of Hofstedes findings in the field of global branding, advertising strategy and consumer behavior. As companies try to adapt their products and services to local habits and preferences they have to understand the [15] specificity of their market. For example, if you want to market cars in a country where the uncertainty avoidance is high, you should emphasize on their safety, whereas in other countries you may base your advertisement on the social image they give you. Cell phone marketing is another interesting example of the application of Hofstedes model for cultural differences: if you want to advertise cell phones in China, you may show a collective experience whereas in the United States you may show how an individual uses it to save time and money. The variety of application of Hofstedes abstract theory is so wide that it has even been translated in the field of web designing in which you have to adapt to national preferences according to [16] cultures values. [edit]Limitations

of Hofstedes model

9
Even though Hofstedes model is generally accepted as the most comprehensive framework of national cultures values by those studying business culture, its validity and its limitations have been extensively criticized. To give only one example, in a recent article in the Academy of Management's flagship journal, The Academy of Management Review, Galit Ailon deconstructs Hofstede's book Culture's Consequences by mirroring it against its own [17] assumptions and logic. Ailon finds inconsistencies at the level of both theory and methodology and cautions against an uncritical reading of Hofstede's cultural dimensions. Literature in subjects actually studying culture, such as anthropology or social psychology, don't even mention the existence of Hofstede's model. [edit]Questionable

choice of national level

Aside from Hofstede's 5 cultural dimensions, there are other factors on which culture can be analyzed. There are other levels for assessing culture. These levels are overlooked often because of the nature of the construction of these levels. [edit]Individual level: cultural dimensions versus individual personalities Hofstede acknowledges that the cultural dimensions he identified, as culture and values, are theoretical constructions. They are tools meant to be used in practical applications. Generalizations about one countrys culture are helpful but they have to be regarded as such, i.e. as guidelines for a better understanding. They are group-level dimensions which describe national averages which apply to the population in its entirety. Hofstede's cultural dimensions enable users to distinguish countries but are not about differences between members of societies. They dont necessarily define individuals personalities. National scores should never be interpreted as deterministic for individuals. For example, a Japanese person can be very comfortable in changing situations whereas on average, Japanese people have high uncertainty avoidance. There are still exceptions to the rule. Hofstedes theory can be contrasted with its equivalence at individual level: the trait theory about human personality. [edit]Organizational level Within and across countries, individuals are also parts of organizations such as companies. Hofstede acknowledges that the [] dimensions of national cultures are not relevant for [2] comparing organizations within the same country. In contrast with national cultures, embedded in values, organizational cultures are embedded in practices. From 1985 to 1987, [18] Geerts institute IRIC (Institute for Research on Intercultural Cooperation) has conducted a separate research project in order to study organizational culture. Including 20 organizational units in two countries (Denmark and the Netherlands), six different dimensions of practices, or communities of practice have been identified: Process-Oriented vs. Results-Oriented Employee-Oriented vs. Job-Oriented Parochial vs. Professional Open System vs. Closed System Loose Control vs. Tight Control Pragmatic vs. Normative

Managing international organizations involves understanding both national and organizational cultures. Communities of practice across borders are significant for multinationals in order to hold the company together. [edit]Occupational level

10

Within the occupational level, there is a certain degree of values and convictions that people hold with respect to the national and organizational cultures they are part of. The culture of management as an occupation has components from national and organizational cultures. This is an important distinction from the organizational level. [edit]Gender level When describing culture, gender differences are largely not taken into consideration. However, there are certain factors that are useful to analyze in the discussion of crosscultural communication. Within each society, mens culture differs greatly from womens culture. Although men and women can often perform the same duties from a technical standpoint, there are often symbols to which each gender has a different response. In situations where one gender responds in an alternative manner to their prescribed roles, the other sex may not even accept their deviant gender role. The level of reactions experienced by people exposed to foreign cultures can be compared similarly to the reactions of gender behaviors of the opposite sex. The degree ofgender differentiation in a country depends primarily on the culture within that nation and its history. [edit]See

also

Cultural relativism Cultural norms Cultural identity Culture shock National character studies National identity Cross-cultural communication Intercultural communication Intercultural communication principles International relations Intercultural competence Cross-cultural leadership Emotions and Culture Uncertainty reduction theory Sociology of gender Fons Trompenaars Edward T. Hall

[edit]References Culture, leadership, and organizations: the GLOBE study of 62 societies (1st ed.). SAGE Publications. 29 April 2004. ISBN 9780761924012., Read it