Source. Section from Chapter 2 - Panocová, R. (2020). Theories of Intercultural Communication. Safarik University, Slovakia. pp.

28-38

2.3 Research basis for Hofstede’s cultural

dimensions

In the 1970s Hofstede had access to a large database of

questionaires about values of people in more than 50
countries all over the world. They all were employed by the
multinational corporation IBM. He used these data to find
dimensions of cultural differences. In his research analysis
Hofstede (1980) identified four main value dimensions in
which cultures differ.
Power distance
Uncertainty avoidance
Individualism versus collectivism
Masculinity versus femininity

The first one in the list is power distance, which is related

to the different solutions to the basic problem of human
inequality. Uncertainty avoidance is concerned with the
level of stress in a society in the face of an unknown future.
Individualism versus collectivism focuses on the
integration of individuals into primary groups, and
masculinity versus femininity maps the division of
emotional roles between women and men. The IBM data
analysed by Hofstede and his four cultural dimensions
empirically supported the four basic problem areas defined
earlier by Inkeles and Levinson (1969).
External validations of the data continued and resulted
in a list of 400 significant correlations between the IBM-
based scores and results of other studies, published in
Hofstede (2001). According to Hofstede (2011: 7) also
“recent validations show no loss of validity, indicating that
the country differences these dimensions describe are,
indeed, basic and enduring”.

28
 Shortly after the first publication, Hofstede and Bond
(1988) added a fifth cultural dimension, long-term
orientation versus short-term orientation, based on the
research carried out in the Far East. This dimension is related
to the choice of focus for people’s efforts: the future or the
present and past. Finally, in the 2000s, Hofstede et al. (2010)
included a sixth dimension indulgence versus restraint,
associated with the gratification versus control of basic
human desires related to enjoying life (Hofstede, 2011: 8).
On the basis of a score on each dimension, an
individual country has been assigned a position, relative to
other countries. The six cultural dimensions are statistically
distinct and occur in all possible combinations, although
some combinations tend to be more frequent than others
(Hofstede, 2011: 8). In the next sections we will consider
each cultural dimension in more detail.

2.4 Power distance

The power distance dimension is related to the acceptance

of unequality as normal by people with very little power and
influence in society. Hofstede (2011: 9) emphasizes that
power and inequality are characteristic of any society and
although all societies are unequal, some are more unequal
than others.
Cultures with low scores on this dimension believe that
power differences should be minimal. This means that
people with hierarchically higher position are not considered
superior to people with lower positions. Subordinates expect
to be consulted and people at all levels reach out to people
at all other levels. In addition, people with little power
believe that they can gain more power through hard work
and motivation (Hofstede, 1980). Low power distance
cultures prefer having pluralist governments based on

29
majority vote and changed peacefully, where the occurrence
of corruption cases is less frequent and scandals normally
mean the end of a political career (Hofstede, 2011: 9).
An example of a country with a low index of power
distance is Austria.4 This means that prototypical features of
Austrian culture are independence and equal rights. A
hierarchy exists, but it is rather a matter of convenience. At
work, superiors are accessible, experience of team members
is valued, subordinates are consulted. The communication
style is direct and participative.
On the other hand, cultures with high scores on the
power distance dimension accept differences in power in
society as natural. The role of hierarchy is decisive. People
in superior positions give instructions to subordinates and
subordinates are not consulted, they act in line with the
superior’s orders. High power distance cultures often have
autocratic governments. Corruption is frequent, with a
strong tendency to cover up scandals (Hofstede, 2011: 9).
There tends to be a large gap between income at the top and
bottom of the hierarchy (Hofstede, 2011: 9).
Interestingly, Hofstede’s interactive web tool labels
Slovakia, as a high power distance country.5 The power
distance index shows that in Slovakia it is taken for granted
that some people have more power than others. It is also
accepted and expected that these people use their power for
the general well-being of others. Superiors are expected to
supervise their subordinates. A good boss should be highly

4
This information is available at https://www.hofstede–
insights.com/country–comparison/austria/, retrieved 11 August,
2019.
5 This information is available at https://www.hofstede–

insights.com/country–comparison/slovakia/, retrieved 11 August,

2019.

30
visible and tells others what to do. Hierarchical
organizations are accepted as a norm. According to
Hofstede’s web interpretation of the score for Slovakia, “a
key issue for foreigners to understand is that in spite of the
very high score, a manager still has to prove him or herself
in order to make people respect and accept decisions from
above or the (foreign) headquarter“.
Hofstede et al. (2010) found that power distance scores
tend to be higher for East European, Latin American, Asian
and African countries and lower for English-speaking
Western countries.

2.5 Uncertainty avoidance

The dimension of uncertainty avoidance “indicates to what

extent a culture programs its members to feel either
uncomfortable or comfortable in unstructured situations.
Unstructured situations are novel, unknown, surprising, and
different from usual” (Hofstede, 2011: 10). Hofstede
emphasizes that uncertainty avoidance is not identical with
risk avoidance, but “it deals with a society’s tolerance for
ambiguity” (Hofstede, 2011: 10).
Typically, cultures with high scores on the uncertainty
avoidance dimension do not feel comfortable in ambiguous
situations. Therefore, there are strict codes of behaviour and
a tendency to support beliefs in absolute truths. Work
organizations have precise rules and require punctuality
(Jandt, 2004). Hofstede’s research results indicate that
“people in uncertainty avoiding countries are also more
emotional, and motivated by inner nervous energy”
(Hofstede, 2011: 11).
Greece is a nation that can be seen as a prototypical
culture avoiding uncertainty in Hofstede’s model.
Bureaucracy, laws and rules are perceived as indispensable

31
to create a safe environment. The high score in this
dimension also tells us that Greeks tend to show their
emotions easily through body language. According to
Hofstede, “the Greek myth about the “birth” of the world
tells us a lot about high Uncertainty Avoidance: at the very
beginning there was only Chaos but then Chronos (Time)
came in to organize life and make it easier to manage”.6
In contrast, cultures with low scores on uncertainty
avoidance accept ambiguity and less structured context more
easily. Individual people are more open to innovations and
in general to ideas which are different from what they are
used to (Hofstede, 2011: 11). Rules are frequently ignored
and punctuality has to be taught or reinforced (Dainton and
Zelley, 2011: 185).
Among European countries, Sweden scores low on this
cultural dimension. In everyday life this means that the
attitude to norms and rules is more flexible. Swedes are also
convinced that if rules do not work properly, they should be
changed. In addition, a general expectation is that the rules
must be meaningful. In workplace, schedules remain
flexible, hard work is done only when required by the
situation. On the other hand, people are not afraid of
innovative ideas.7
Hofstede et al. (2010) report that uncertainty avoidance
seems higher in East and Central European countries, Latin
countries, in Japan and in German speaking countries.

6
This information is available at https://www.hofstede–
insights.com/country–comparison/greece/, retrieved 11 August,
2019.
7
This information is available at https://www.hofstede–
insights.com/country–comparison/sweden/, retrieved 11 August,
2019.

32
Typically lower scores are found in English speaking
countries, Nordic countries and countries with Chinese
culture.

2.6 Individualism versus collectivism

The individualism versus collectivism dimension addresses

the issue of how people define themselves and their
relationships with others. Hofstede (1980, 2011) considers
this dimension fundamental in all societies world-wide.
Hofstede (2011: 11) lists ten major features in which
individualistic and collectivistic cultures differ and we will
consider some of them in more detail.
First, individualistic cultures emphasize individual
responsibility of taking care of oneself and one’s immediate
family. This contrasts with collectivists where people are
part of larger groups from birth and it is a responsibility of
the extended family or another larger group to protect
individuals. In return, loyalty to such a larger social unit is
expected.
The most obvious difference between the two ends of
this dimension is the one between I-consciousness and We-
consciousness. The former is often exemplified by the
question What’s in it for me?, perfectly acceptable especially
in situations when an individual person is asked for
something more standard. In other words, the focus on self
is prioritized over other relationships.
The right of privacy is valued in individualistic cultures
whereas in collectivistic cultures it is of less importance. For
instance, in Western European cultures it is normal first to
call and find out whether it is OK to visit a friend or a family
member. The same practice is not followed by typically
collectivistic cultures such as China or South Korea where it

33
is fully acceptable to enter the private life of members of the
extended family.
Another feature of individualistic cultures is that they
are often characterized as guilt cultures. This means that if
someone breaks the rules, he often feels guilty, guided by an
individually developed conscience that functions as a private
inner pilot (Hofstede et al. 2010: 110). On the other hand,
collectivistic cultures are described as shame cultures in the
sense that if rules are broken, the whole group to which a
person belongs to is ashamed of the behaviour of its
individual member. Hofstede et al. (2010: 110) explain that
“shame is social in nature, whereas guilt is individual;
whether shame is felt depends on whether the infringement
has become known by others. This becoming known is more
of a source of shame than the infringement itself“.
In individualistic cultures it is expected that people
freely express their personal opinions and speak their minds.
In collectivistic cultures, opinions and votes are
predetermined by the in-group and harmony is valued more
than expressing individual personal opinions directly. In line
with Hofstede et al. (2010), individualism tends to dominate
in developed and Western countries, while collectivism
prevails in less developed and Eastern countries.
Prototypical examples of individualistic cultures are the
United States, or the Netherlands, collectivistic cultures are
represented by China or South Korea. Interestingly, for
instance, Japan and Slovakia take a middle position on this
dimension.

2.7 Masculinity versus femininity

The next dimension focuses on the relationship between men

and women and what is considered a gender-appropriate
behaviour. It is important to understand that this dimension

34
is not about individuals, but about expected emotional
gender roles (Hofstede, 2011: 12). A typical property of
masculine cultures is that biological sex is taken as a basis
for distinct roles for men and women. This means that men
are expected to be assertive, ambitious and competitive
whereas women’s roles are supportiveness, nurturing and
deference. These roles are also visible in the workplace. In
masculine cultures, managers are supposed to be decisive
and assertive (Jandt, 2004). Women are not treated equally,
usually they are given lower salaries, less stable positions
and fewer opportunities to make progress in their
professional careers (Kim, 2001).
In contrast, in feminine cultures, biological sex is not
taken as a firm basis for distinctions between gender roles.
Men and women are equally assertive or deferent,
competitive or nurturing. Feminine cultures concentrate on
the facilitation of interpersonal relationships and concern for
the weak (Jandt, 2004). When applied to the workplace,
feminine cultures focus on a search for agreement and they
tend to prefer quality of life over material success.
Hofstede’s results show that Slovakia is a typical
masculine country. This means that it is highly success-
oriented. Only successful people can reach their goals.
Status is an important aspect in this, especially status
symbols like cars, impressive houses, branded clothes etc.
People work hard to achieve a high living standard and be
able to “show their achievements”. Long working hours are
needed in order to achieve this.8
On the other hand, the Netherlands has a typically
feminine culture. As mentioned above, in feminine countries

8
This information is available at https://www.hofstede–
insights.com/country–comparison/slovakia/, retrieved 11 August,
2019.

35
it is important to keep up the life/work balance. An effective
manager is supportive to their people, and decision making
is achieved through involvement. Managers aim for
consensus and people value equality, solidarity and quality
in their working lives. Conflicts are resolved by compromise
and negotiation and the Dutch are known for their long
discussions until consensus has been reached.9

2.8 Long-term versus short-term orientation

The fifth dimension is grounded in Confucian thinking and

was added after criticism of Hofstede’s original four
dimension for a Western bias. This dimension was added
after obtaining data from Chinese scholars (Hofstede, 2011:
13).
A long-term orientation is connected with thrift,
savings, perseverance, and the willingness to subordinate
oneself to achieving a goal. Characteristic features of long-
term oriented workplaces is a strong work ethic and having
distant goals to achieve (Hofstede, 2011: 15). People believe
that truth depends very much on context and time and they
can adapt traditions easily to changed conditions.
A short-term orientation focuses on a desire for
immediate satisfaction. People in short-termcultures tend to
spend money on the same expensive objects as their friends
or neighbours. They are worried about seeming less
important socially than they are. People also prefer fast
results to distant gain (Hofstede, 2011: 16). At work,

9
This information is available at https://www.hofstede–
insights.com/country–comparison/the–netherlands/, retrieved 11
August, 2019.

36
immediate pay and benefits are preferred to achievements in
the long term.
Long-term oriented cultures are found in East Asian
countries, followed by Eastern and Central Europe whereas
the United States and Australia, Latin American, African
and Muslim countries are rather short-term oriented
(Hofstede, 2011: 16). Slovakia is closer to the long-term end
of the scale, which means it is clearly a pragmatic country.10

2.9 Indulgence versus restraint

Finally, the sixth dimension was added in Hofstede et al.

(2010). Indulgence is characterized “by a perception that
one can act as one pleases, spend money, and indulge in
leisurely and fun-related activities with friends or alone. All
this predicts relatively high happiness” (Hofstede et al.,
2010: 281). At the opposite pole we find restraint
understood as “a perception that one’s actions are restrained
by various social norms and prohibitions and a feeling that
enjoyment of leisurely activities, spending, and other similar
types of indulgence are somewhat wrong” (Hofstede et al.,
2010: 281). As this dimension is new, further research is
needed, but according to Hofstede et al. (2010: 286) it
“solves the paradox of the poor Filipinas who are happier
than the rich citizens of Hong Kong”.
A closer look at individual countries and their scores
on this dimension reveals that indulgence tends to prevail in
South and North America, in Western Europe and in parts of
Sub-Sahara Africa. Restraint prevails in Eastern Europe, in
Asia and in the Muslim world (Hofstede, 2011: 16). If we

10
This information is available at https://www.hofstede–
insights.com/country–comparison/slovakia/, retrieved 11 August,
2019.

37
compare Slovakia and the Netherlands again, we find that
Slovakia is a culture of restraint with people restricted by a
number of social norms and feeling that indulging
themselves is somewhat wrong. This contrasts with the
Netherlands, clearly a culture of indulgence, at least the
Catholic south. People tend to be optimistic, act and spend
money as they wish.

SUMMARY

Hofstede’s six cultural dimensions provide a

framework for understanding differences
among cultures and various social contexts.
Individualism–collectivism concentrates on
the relationship between the individual and
the group. Power distance tells us how
influence is distributed in a culture.
Masculinity–feminity explains whether
dominant values are assertive or nurturing.
Uncertainty avoidance reflects tolerance of
the unknown and acceptance of risk. Short–
term orientation cultures tend to prefer
immediate results to long–term gain whereas
long–term cultures focus on the achievement
of distant goals. Cultures close to the
indulgence end of a cline are more open to
approving enjoying life whereas those closer
to the restraint end tend to regulate desires by
strict social norms. Each dimension
represents a cline where distinct cultures are
positioned.

38