The Workforce in Indonesian Organizations: An
Analysis Based Upon the Cultural Dimensions of
Hofstede’s Model
Bella Santya Artina1, Dita Desnasari2, Fita Fitriyah3, Rainda Goesti Rizkita4
Master of Management, Faculty of Economics and Business, Diponegoro
University, Semarang, 50241, Indonesia1,2,3,4
Correspondence Email: bellasantya96@[Link]
ABSTRACT
Culture has been understood as one of the factors that has a strong component in
influencing all management activities. This study was aimed to study the role of six
cultural dimensions of Hofstede’s model and its impact on the workforce in
Indonesian organizations. This study is qualitative research and using the meta-
analysis method. Indonesia has a high power distance and collectivism, moderately
in masculine, low preference for avoiding uncertainty, long-term oriented, and
restraint which has an impact on the workforce. Results of this study showed that
practical understanding of cultural dimensions of Hofstede’s model and its impact
on the workforce in Indonesian organizations.
Keywords: Indonesia, workforce, organizational performance, cultural dimensions,
hofstede’s model
INTRODUCTION
In 2019, Indonesia ranked fourth out of 67 countries as the best country to invest or
do business (CEOWORLD Magazine, 2019). Indonesia is also the only country in
Southeast Asia to be a member of the G20. Indonesia ranks third as the country
with the largest economic growth among the G20 countries in the first quarter of
2019 at 5.07 percent, behind only China at 6.4 percent and India at 5.8 percent.
Indonesia has the potential for economic growth in the future because of the golden
opportunity in the form of a demographic bonus until 2045 which if properly utilized
can drive the economy in Indonesia (Arieza, 2019). This is the reason why Indonesia
is made as a destination country for investment or business for several foreign
countries.
In order for management practices to run effectively, it is necessary to understand
the cultural characteristics of each country. Culture plays an important role in
shaping an employee's ethics (Yousef, 2001) and has a strong component to being
able to influence all management activities (Solomon, 1995). Lack of the adaptability
of a manager or employee can cause conflict. Conflict can be triggered by
differences in cultural backgrounds, such as language differences, environmental
conditions, and interactions in work relationships (Jassawalla et al., 2004).
Hofstede’s theory can be used to motivate employees (Boyer, 2009). Within
understanding index scores to this country, it is evident that Indonesian employees
have a low tolerance for uncertainty, thus relying on strict controls as a motivator.
As well, Indonesians tolerate a balance of non-performance reward systems
between superior and subordinate, primarily given as an increase of status, position,
56
age, and seniority. Incentive-oriented reward systems have an uncertainty of placing
the employee’s future income or advancement within the firm.
Based on this, deeper research needs to be done about the workforce motivation in
Indonesian organizations. Using the meta-analysis method, this study aims to
identify the roles of the cultural dimensions of the Hofstede’s model and its impact
on the workforce in Indonesian organizations.
RESEARCH METHOD
This study uses qualitative research and meta-analysis based on the results of
Hofstede's model cultural dimensions in Indonesia. This meta-analysis is research
that uses secondary data in the form of data from the results of previous studies
such as books, journals, and relevant research articles. Data analysis technique
used is descriptive analysis and to assess whether a meta-analysis needs to be
tested for sensitivity, namely by comparing the results of research. If the results are
the same or almost the same, it can be concluded that variations between studies
are not so important in the data set. Analysis in the meta-analysis is based on the
availability of information from each research result. Because the makers of meta-
analysis generally do not have basic research data, the practical dimensions of the
effect sizes combined in the meta-analysis are the same as those reported in the
combined article (Anshor, 2017). Meanwhile, to find out the conclusions of
qualitative research, it can be done by calculating the same percentage of findings
for the same problem. The conclusion of the analysis is found by examining the
results of research by examining the method and data analysis in each study so that
it can be known the strengths and weaknesses of previous research.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The Six Dimensions Of Hofstede’s Model
The cultural dimension is used to distinguish characteristics between national
cultures. The majority of the population of a country will have the same national
character. One of the most widely used dimensions of national culture is the model
developed by Geert Hofstede. Hofstede (2011) identified six dimensions of national
culture namely power distance, individualism-collectivism, masculinity-feminity,
uncertainty avoidance, long-term-short-term orientation, and indulgence-restraint.
1. Power Distance. The first dimension of national culture is called Power Distance.
Power Distance defines the extent to which a person can accept the difference
in power between followers and leaders (Hofstede, 2011). This dimension relates
to the extent of tolerance possessed by the community to accept differences in
power and status at the organizational and community level (Spector, 2012).
Power distance is related to hierarchy and egalitarianism (Graf et al., 2012).
Egalitarianism is a doctrine or view that explains that humans are destined to
have the same degree. Inversely proportional to the hierarchy, the hierarchy is a
system of levels that is more clearly visible (rank).
2. Individualism-Collectivism. The second dimension of national culture includes
Individualism and its opposite, Collectivism. Individualism-Collectivism is defined
as community characteristics not individual characteristics or in other words the
extent to which people in a society are integrated into a group (Hofstede, 2011).
Individualism refers to the extent to which a person sees himself focused on the
interests and needs of individuals rather than others, individualism is different
57
from egoism. Individualism implies a loose social framework, where individuals
focus on their own personalities (Hofstede, 1980). Hofstede also said that the
national environment which has collectivism values tends to have loyal
individuals, collectivist culture leads to the extent to which a person sees himself
as interconnected with others and focuses on group interests (Spector, 2012).
3. Masculinity-Feminity. The third dimension of national culture is called Masculinity
and its opposite, Femininity. Masculinity-Femininity is also defined as the
characteristics of society rather than individual characteristics that refer to the
spread of values between genders which is a fundamental problem for society.
The value of Masculinity consists of competitiveness, individual assertiveness,
materialism, ambition, and power. Unlike the value of Feminism, placing values
are related to ambition and relationships and the quality of life (Hofstede, 2011).
Masculinity leads to the extent to which an organization focuses on achievement
and performance that is contrary to the health and well-being of employees
(Spector, 2012).
4. Uncertainty Avoidance. The fourth dimension of national culture is Uncertainty
Avoidance. This dimension is related to the level of comfort or inconvenience of
the community in facing future situations that cannot be known (Spector, 2012).
This culture tries to minimize the likelihood of the situation by applying strict codes
of conduct, rules and laws, rejection of distorted opinions, and belief in absolute
truth "there is only one truth and we have it" (Hofstede, 2011). The strong
dimensions of Uncertainty Avoidance will influence the level of anxiety and
aggressiveness of individuals (Hofstede, 1980).
5. Long or Short Term Orientation. The fifth dimension of national culture is called
the Long-Term Orientation and the opposite is the Short-Term Orientation. This
dimension is related to choosing one's focus for future, present, and past efforts.
Long-Term Orientation has the characteristics that society is future-oriented and
more dynamic. In contrast, Short-Term Orientation has the characteristics that
society is oriented to the past and present, and is more static (Browaeys & Price,
2015)
6. Indulgence-Restraint. The sixth dimension of national culture is Indulgence-
Restraint. Indulgence-Restraint is a new national cultural dimension that emerged
in 2010 (Hofstede et al., 2010). This dimension is related to basic human desires
related to enjoying life. Indulgence has the characteristics of satisfying the basic
and natural desires associated with enjoying life and having fun. In contrast, the
Restraint has the characteristics of a community controlling satisfaction of needs
with applicable social norms (Hofstede, 2011).
Hofstede’s Dimensions In Indonesia
At present, Indonesia is the fourth most populous country in the world with a
population of around 264 people ("The World Bank," 2019). Abundant population
should be utilized properly by Indonesia to support the country's economy. But in
reality, Indonesia still lacks skilled and qualified workers because there is still a
mismatch between the educational background and demands from the world of work
("Tempo," 2017). Stehle & Erwee (2007) also said that Indonesia has an abundance
of cheap but unskilled labor supply due to lack of training provided. Based on
"Hofstede Insights" (2019), Indonesia has the characteristics of a national culture
that is high power distance, low uncertainty avoidance, collectivist, masculine, long-
term oriented, and restraint.
58
Figure 1.
Hofstede’s Dimensions in Indonesia
90 78
80
70 62
60 48
46
Score
50 38
40
30
20 14
10
0
Power Individualism Masculinity Uncertainty Long Term Indulgence
Distance Avoidance Orientation
Hofstede's Dimensions
Sumber: “Hofstede Insights” (2019)
Power Distance. Indonesia has a high power distance score of 78. This score shows
that seniority and status or rank play a role in society or a community. Orientation
hierarchy in Indonesia tends to status, power, and age (Wong-Mingji et al., 2014).
Older people are usually more respected and valued in their environment
(Mangundjaya, 2013). Indonesian people are accustomed to calling their office
partners beginning with the mention "Pak" or "Bu" then followed by the first name
(Irawan, 2017). As a country with a high power distance culture, Indonesian workers
look forward to clear directions from their superiors like teachers and students
(Wahjudi et al., 2014). According to Sulastini (2016), the characteristics of high
power distance possessed by Indonesians include inequality of rights between
power holders and non-power holders, hierarchical orientation, superiors that cannot
be accessed, and leaders are directives.
High power distance also means the power doesn’t distribute well. It shows an
individual or group of people who on the top level, process decision making by
centralizing, and using autocratic. Indonesian workers would expect to be clearly
directed by the boss or manager that applies in Indonesia. Indonesian workers
characteristics are visible, socially acceptable, wide, and unequal disparity between
rich and poor (Novianti, 2018). Power is centralized and managers count on the
obedience of their team members. Employees or inferiors expect to be told what to
do and when (Hidasi, 2017). They must follow the instruction or order from the boss
without any refutations, although sometimes the instruction is not appropriate in the
employee’s mind. Employees can refuse the instruction, but it rarely occurred. But
all of the decisions depend on the boss. Dependency on the boss is relatively high
(Rahmawati, 2015). With a high power distance culture is also less suitable
participatory applied in Indonesian society, because they tend to be afraid to express
opinions (Stehle, 2012).
Individualism-Collectivism. Indonesia has a relatively low individualism score of 14.
This score shows that Indonesia is very thick with a collectivist culture. Depending
on whether people’s self-image is defined in terms of “I” or “We”, cultures can be
classified as individualist or [Link] was correlation between members and
their group (Hidasi, 2017). “We” characteristics identify on one social group,
decisions are primarily made according to what is the best for the group, focus on
belonging to an organization, visible clearly of family in the role of relationship
59
(Novianti, 2018). Low score in individualism show the attitude of self-interest and
family as a common interest in a group. Most of it is made jointly to the group, which
needs high emotional dependence to each other. It relates with loyalty, which
everyone has responsibility to develop strong relationship with fellow members in
the group (Rahmawati, 2015).
Indonesians have a tight social framework. It aims to maintain their relationship.
Indonesians are also accustomed to helping each other in their work (Irawan, 2017).
They believe that they live in a world not alone and will always need the help of
others, so they maintain mutual relations with their relatives (Mangundjaya, 2013).
These collectivist values will ultimately affect work relations between leaders and
family-oriented employees (Wong-Mingji et al., 2014). For example, when an
employee has a family who dies on a workday it is incumbent on the employee to
attend the funeral service. In Indonesia, obligations to the family in ritual ceremonies
such as marriage, funerals, or mitoni (celebrating seven months of pregnancy) are
very important actions. Indonesians maintain family relationships for their emotional
well-being (Irawanto, 2009). Group interest up above self-interest, focus peer on
peer. System evaluation is being prepared well by organizations that include the
culture of organisational and their direct impact of. The main purpose of their system
evaluation is to achieve the group's goals (Armia, 2002).
Masculinity-Feminity. Indonesia has a moderate masculinity score of 46. This score
shows that the status and symbols of success are very important in Indonesia. In
frequently, the position held by someone becomes more important than everything.
This is due to the prestige owned by Indonesians (Irawan, 2017). Hidasi (2017) also
shows that status and visible symbols of success are important but it is not always
material gain that is the motivating force, but rather the position that a person may
be holding. This prestige is part of status and dignity that so important to
Indonesians.
Indonesian workers is now in transition to minimize gender differences in
workplaces, improved that women’s participation in the labor force has increased
significantly compared with men (Suharnomo, 2009). Cultivating friendships will
improve our success in the business world in Indonesia (Goodfellow, 2020).
Uncertainty Avoidance. Indonesia has a low uncertainty avoidance score of 48. This
score means that maintaining workplace and harmony in a relationship is very
important in Indonesia, and no one wishes to be the transmitter of bad or negative
news or feedback (Hidasi, 2017). The characteristics of countries with weak
uncertainty avoidance usually work slowly and with less initiative (Suharnomo,
2009). Indonesians are used to not showing negative emotions when they are upset
or angry and they will keep smiling and polite. Harmony of relations has become a
very important thing in Indonesia (Irawan, 2017). There is a phrase that illustrates
the workings of Indonesians namely “Asal Bapak Senang” or Keep the Boss Happy,
meaning that if he can keep the boss happy then employees who do such things will
be valued and considered as valuable employees (Sulastini, 2016).
The law, rules and regulation is used to assist in defending themselves from
uncertainty of the other’s behavior. That’s why there are many rules and regulation
in Indonesia to control attitude and behavior of society, particularly for employee in
working place. It makes the monitoring system on employee is more complex and
60
rigorous (Rahmawati, 2015). Monitoring system is used to controlling process
organizational. Simplicity of monitoring system is used by Indonesia. For example,
creating and planning a simple budgeting system (Armia, 2002).
Long or Short Term Orientation. Indonesia has a high long-term orientation score of
62. This score shows that Indonesia has a long-term oriented culture. It can also be
said that Indonesia has a pragmatic culture, where people believe that truth really
depends on the situation, context, and time. They are able to adapt traditions to
changing situations, have a strong tendency to save and invest, make savings, and
persevere in achieving results (Irawan, 2017). Hidasi (2017) shows that the long-
term orientation interpreted that the extent to which a society shows a pragmatic
future-oriented perspective rather than a conventional historical short-term point of
view. This dimension measures how society response of long-term devotion about
Indonesia customize (tradisi), visionary, and relationship between society and
benevolence. According to Rinuastuti et al. (2014), Indonesia's long-term oriented
culture has the characteristics of having perseverance, always being careful,
prioritizing efforts to build market share rather than pursuing short-term profits,
respecting tradition, fulfilling social responsibility, and maintaining the honor of
others in do business.
Indulgence-Restraint. Indonesia has a relatively low Indulgence score of 38. This
score shows that Indonesia has a restraint culture. Restraint culture tends to lead to
cynicism and pessimism. This cultural orientation has a perception that their actions
are controlled by social norms, and they assume that pampering themselves is
wrong (Irawan, 2017). Society from a restraint culture may more often engage in
negative word of mouth communication, be more cynical and may express more
negative feelings (Erdogan, 2017).
CONCLUSIONS
This study shows the fact between Hofstede's cultural dimensions and workforce in
Indonesia, it can be concluded that Indonesia has a high power distance and
collectivism, is quite masculine, has a low preference to avoid uncertainty, has a
long-term orientation, and restrictions that affect the workforce. This finding is
consistent with Hofstede's research. Indonesia has a high score of 78 in power
distance based on Hofstede Research. Each dimension was interpreted and
generalized to the impact on the workforce in Indonesian organizations.
The results of this study showed that the practical understanding of Hofstede's
cultural dimensions of the model and its impact on the workforce in Indonesian
organizations. The value of high power distance also shows the community that
tends to be afraid to argue, because of dependence with superiors they respect.
High collectivism values are influenced by the cultural value of "gotong royong" also
affects Indonesian employees. Indonesian employees prefer collaborative culture
rather than individualism, and tend to maintain relationships with fellow colleagues.
The cultural dimension of uncertainty avoidance shows the correlation between
facing uncertainty avoidance and how the level of organizational reaction.
Furthermore, Indonesia has a long-term orientation, identifying that Indonesia be
able to adapt traditions to changing situations.
61
Hofstede's dimension of national culture gives more attention to relationships in
society or relationships between parties. It doesn't concern the factors inside the
individual, such as motivation, mental toughness, painstaking, competence, and
maturity. In the workplace, different people represent different values, different
values represent different behavior patterns. One of the biggest challenges of
working in a multicultural country is learning how to engage and fit in a multicultural
setting.
REFERENCES
Ansor, S. (2017). Studi Meta Analisis Strategi dan Pemanfaatan Jurnal Elektronik
(E-journals) untuk Mahasiswa Lulusan Universitas Negeri Malang dalam Upaya
Publikasi Ilmiah Bereputasi Internasional. E-journal Universitas Airlangga, 3(1),
63-73.
Arieza, U. (2019). Melihat “Taji” Indonesia di Antara Negara Raksasa G20. CNN
Indonesia. Retrieved from
[Link]
407329/melihat-taji-indonesia-di-antara-negara-raksasa-g20
Armia, C. (2002). Pengaruh Budaya Terhadap Efektivitas Organisasi: Dimensi
Budaya Hofstede. Jurnal Akuntansi Dan Auditing Indonesia, 6(1), 103–117.
Boyer, J. (2009). Understanding Hofstede’s Theory to Motivate Cross Cultural
Employees.
Browaeys, M.J., & Price, R. (2015). Understanding Management Cross-Cultural
Management. Edinburgh: Pearson Education Limited.
CEOWORLD Magazine. (2019). Retrieved from [Link]
countries-to-invest-in-or-do-business-for-2019/
Erdogan, Akdeniz, A., & Gulnil. (2017). The Potential Implications of Indulgence and
Restraint on Service Encounters in Tourism and Hospitality. ECOFORUM, 6(3),
1–7.
Goodfellow, R. (2020). Indonesian Business Culture.
Graf, A., Koeszegi, S. T., & Pesendorfer, E. M. (2012). Cross-Cultural Negotiations
and Power Distance: Strategies Applied by Asian and European Buyers and
Sellers in Electronic Negotiations. Nankai Business Review International, 3(3),
242–256. [Link]
Hidasi, J. (2017). Doing Business in Hungary and Indonesia – An Intercultural
Approach. 37–44.
Hofstede Insights. (2019). Retrieved October 29, 2019, from [Link]
[Link]/country-comparison/india,indonesia,sri-lanka/
Hofstede, G. (1980). Motivation, Leadership, and Organization: Do American
Theories Apply Abroad? Organizational Dynamics, 9(1), 42–63.
[Link]
Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing Cultures: The Hofstede Model in Context.
Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), 1–26.
[Link]
Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and Organizations. In
International Studies of Management & Organization. 10.
[Link]
Hutchings, K., & Wahyuni Ratnasari, S. (2006). Cross-cultural Non-Work Transition
Stresses: Domestic Transferees in Indonesia. Cross Cultural Management: An
International Journal, 13(2), 114–131.
[Link]
62
Irawan, D. A. (2017). Expatriates Perceptions toward Hofstede’s Indonesia Cultural
Dimensions. The Winners, 18(2), 83–92.
[Link]
Irawanto, D. W. (2009). An Analysis of National Culture and Leadership Practices in
Indonesia. Journal of Diversity Management, 4(2), 41–48.
[Link]
Jassawalla, A., Truglia, C., & Garvey, J. (2004). Cross-Cultural Conflict and
Expatriate Manager Adjustment. Management Decision, 42(7), 837–849.
[Link]
Mangundjaya, W. L. H. (2013). Is There Cultural Change in the National Cultures of
Indonesia? International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology
Conferences, 1–11.
Novianti, K. R. (2018). Cultural dimension issues in Indonesia human resource
management practices: a structured literature review. Management and
Economics Journal (MEC-J), 2(3), 294. [Link]
j.v0i0.5073
Rahmawati, M. (2015). Hofstede’s dimensions of national culture in indonesia.
Rinuastuti, H., Hadiwidjojo, D., Rohman, F., & Khusniyah, N. (2014). Measuring
Hofstede’s Five Cultural Dimensions at Individual Level and Its Application to
Researchers in Tourists’ Behaviors. International Business Research, 7(12),
143–152. [Link]
Solomon, C. (1995). Learning to Manage Host-country Nationals. Workforce.
Retrieved from [Link]
host-country-nationals/
Spector, P. E. (2012). Industrial and Organizational Psychology. New Jersey: John
Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Stehle, W., & Erwee, R. (2007). Cultural Differences Influencing German HR
Policies in Asia. Journal of Asia Business Studies, 2(1), 34–47.
[Link]
Suharnomo. (2009). Study on Employee Motivation in Indonesia: does culture really
matter? 1–18.
Sulastini. (2016). Indonesian National Culture in Supporting the Implementation of
Carbon Economy. International Journal of Managerial Studies and Research,
4(12), 61–66. [Link]
Suutari, V., Raharjo, K., & Riikkilä, T. (2002). The Challenge of Cross-Cultural
Leadership Interaction: Finnish Expatriates in Indonesia. Career Development
International, 7(7), 415–429. [Link]
Tempo. (2017). Indonesia Still Lacks Skilled Workforce Needed by
[Link] from [Link]
lacks-skilled-workforce-needed-by-industries
The World Bank in Indonesia. (2019). Retrieved January 22, 2020, from The World
Bank website: [Link]
Wahjudi, D., Singgih, M. L., Suwignjo, P., & Baihaqi, I. (2014). The Impact of Power
Distance and Individualism on Total Quality Management: An Empirical
Research on Indonesian Manufacturing Firms. 6th International Conference on
Operations and Supply Chain Management, 1–12.
[Link]
Wong-MingJi, D. J., Kessler, E. H., Khilji, S. E., & Gopalakrishnan, S. (2014). Cross-
Cultural Comparison of Cultural Mythologies and Leadership Patterns. South
Asian Journal of Global Business Research, 3(1), 79–101.
[Link]
63
Yousef, D. A. (2001). A Moderator Between Organizational Commitment and Job
Satisfaction in a Cross-cultural Context. Personnel Review, 30(2), 152–169.
[Link]
64
