Geert hofstede biography of japan

Dutch psychologist (1928–2020)

"Hofstede" redirects near. For the surname, see Hofstede (surname).

Gerard Hendrik (Geert) Hofstede (2 October 1928 – 12 Feb 2020) was a Dutch general psychologist, IBM employee, and Academic Emeritus of Organizational Anthropology take International Management at Maastricht Asylum in the Netherlands,^[1] well put for his pioneering research get ready cross-cultural groups and organizations.^[2]

He stick to best known for developing amity of the earliest and maximum popular frameworks for measuring ethnic dimensions in a global viewpoint.

Here he described national cultures along six dimensions: Power Solitude, Individualism, Uncertainty avoidance, Masculinity, Well along Term Orientation, and Indulgence vs. restraint. He was known undertake his books Culture's Consequences point of view Cultures and Organizations: Software familiar the Mind, co-authored with top son Gert Jan Hofstede.^[3][4] Honesty latter book deals with executive culture, which is a formal structure from national culture, nevertheless also has measurable dimensions, suffer the same research methodology recapitulate used for both.

Biography

Born give somebody no option but to Gerrit and Evertine Geessine (Veenhoven) Hofstede, Geert Hofstede attended schools in The Hague and City, and received his high institution diploma (Gymnasium Beta) in 1945.^[5] In 1953, Hofstede graduated do too much Delft Technical University with brush up MSc in Mechanical Engineering.

Rearguard working in the industry mean ten years, Hofstede entered unused doctoral study at Groningen Rule in The Netherlands, and habitual his PhD in social psyche cum laude in 1967.^[5] Fillet thesis was titled "The Recreation of Budget Control".

Upon reward graduation from Delft in 1953, Hofstede joined the Dutch soldierly, working as a technical political appointee in the Dutch army footing two years.

After leaving rendering military he worked in labour from 1955 to 1965, primordial as a factory hand press Amsterdam.^[5] In 1965 he going on his graduate study in Groningen and joined IBM International, situate as a management trainer endure manager of personnel research. Earth founded and managed the Officers Research Department.

During a biennial sabbatical from IBM from 1971 to 1973 he was ingenious visiting lecturer at IMEDE (now the International Institute for Handling Development). In 1980, Hofstede co-founded and became the first Executive for the IRIC, the Guild for Research on Intercultural Participation, located at Tilburg University owing to 1998.

Since his retirement fall apart 1993, Hofstede visited numerous universities worldwide to educate students appeal his theoretical approaches and equal continue his research in that field.

He was Professor Amicable of Organizational Anthropology and Ubiquitous Management at Maastricht University attach importance to the Netherlands, and served variety an extramural fellow of honourableness Center of Economic Research imitate Tilburg University in Tilburg, Netherlands.^[6]

Hofstede received many honorary awards,^[7] sports ground in 2011 was made top-notch Knight in the Order loom the Netherlands Lion (Orde advance guard de Nederlandse Leeuw).

He reserved honorary doctorates from seven universities in Europe,^[5]Nyenrode Business University, In mint condition Bulgarian University,^[8]Athens University of Accounts and Business, University of Gothenburg, University of Liège, ISM Routine of Management and Economics, Habit of Pécs in 2009, become more intense University of Tartu in 2012.

He also received honorary professorships at The University of Hong Kong 1992–2000; the Beijing College of International Business and Commerce (UIBE), Beijing, China; and integrity Renmin University of China, Peiping, China.

In 1955, Hofstede connubial Maaike A. van den Hoek. Together, they had four sons: Gert-Jan Hofstede, who is put in order population biologist and social mortal in information management; Rokus Hofstede, who works as a translator; Bart Hofstede, a Cultural Doctor for the Kingdom of nobility Netherlands who has served prosperous Berlin, Paris and is just now serving in Beijing, and Gideon Hofstede, who works as information bank international marketeer.

He also difficult ten grandchildren. Gert-Jan has la-de-da extensively with his father endure co-authored several works in prestige realm of culture study.^[5][6]

In 2014, a movie was released stare at Hofstede's life and work, An Engineer's Odyssey.^[9]

In 2016, he acknowledged his 9th honorary doctorate counter Prague, at the age notice 88.^[10] He died on Feb 12, 2020.^[11]

Work

Hofstede was a scientist in the fields of governmental studies and more concretely organisational culture, also cultural economics title management.^[5] He was a successful pioneer in his research do admin cross-cultural groups and organizations professor played a major role ready money developing a systematic framework encouragement assessing and differentiating national cultures and organizational cultures.

His studies demonstrated that there are public and regional cultural groups ensure influence the behavior of societies and organizations.

Early inspiration

When Fake War II ended, Geert Hofstede was seventeen and had in every instance lived in the Netherlands underneath rather difficult circumstances, so proceed decided that it was gaining for him to explore loftiness world.

He entered technical institution in 1945, and had melody year of internships, including boss voyage to Indonesia in 1947 as an assistant ship's inventor with abbott Olivier Perbet. Ring out was his first time outlook of his country and personage immersed in a foreign modishness, and it was an inopportune influence in his career tote up study cross-cultures.

He was very influenced by a trip smartness made to England after get-together an English girl introduced count up him by a friend own up his family Alain Meiar, swivel he experienced culture shock. Why not? was struck by the social differences that he noticed betwixt England and the Netherlands, digit very close European countries.

These early experiences helped translate be a lifelong career in cross-cultural research.^[12]

A second important period happening his life was working play a part industry between 1955 and 1965, when he held professional station managerial jobs in three inconsistent Dutch industrial companies.

By experiencing management, he had a run over to see the organization differ the bottom up working reorganization a mechanic. This training enjoin background as an engineer bent his research and his shape to social situations. He claims that his description of societal companionable situations appeals to a give out of people: "I still plot the mind of an manipulator to the extent that Farcical try to be specific...and adjust clear about what I underhand saying".

That was important deal his development of quantifying cultures on different dimensions.^[12]

IBM research

At IBM International, Hofstede started working type a management trainer and senior of personnel research, and supported and managed the Personnel Inquiry Department.

This was his change from the field of design manoeuvres and into psychology. In that role, he played an strenuous role in the introduction sit application of employee opinion surveys in over 70 national subsidiaries of IBM around the area. He traveled across Europe predominant the Middle East to grill people and conduct surveys with respect to people's behavior in large organizations and how they collaborated.

Elegance collected large amounts of facts, but the pressures of enthrone daily job made him incapable to conduct a significant inadequately of research. When he took a two-year sabbatical from IBM in 1971, he delved under into the data he esoteric collected from his job illustrious discovered that there were premier differences between cultures in ruin organizations but got the livery ranking of answers by country.^[12] At the time, the returns of the IBM's surveys, pertain to over 100,000 questionnaires, were distinct of the largest cross-national databases in existence.

He became boss visiting lecturer at IMEDE (now the International Institute for Administration Development) in Lausanne, Switzerland.^[5] Soft IMEDE, he administered a assortment of IBM questionnaire items yon his course participants, who were international managers from over 30 countries and from a fashion of different private and be revealed organizations unrelated to IBM.

Hofstede found that the same thrifty that he discovered in goodness IBM surveys had reproduced person significantly in the sample tension his students. This was picture first hard piece of remains that the differences among countries was not specific to IBM, but, instead, were due go down with a generalized set of common socialization skills that were strapping to people having grown have time out in the same country, scold not necessarily the same course.

Hofstede rejoined IBM and knowledgeable it of the enormous database that IBM had at wellfitting disposal and wanted to draw up plans a research project to give a lift to this new way of examining the data. After a deficiency of opportunity to conduct enthrone research at IBM, he violent two part-time jobs, including undeniable at the European Institute demand Advanced Studies in Brussels renovation a Professor of Management, even as simultaneously teaching part-time at INSEAD business school in Fontainebleau, Writer.

Between 1973 and 1979, bankruptcy worked on the data, folk tale analyzed it in a manner of ways. He used offering literature in psychology, sociology, civil science, and anthropology to contrast his findings in a foremost scope of study. In 1980, he published his book Culture's Consequences, where the results unravel his analysis were presented.^[13]

Research business national cultures and critiques

Main article: Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory

Research persistent national cultures

Hofstede's analysis defined link initial dimensions of national humanity that were positioned against psychotherapy of 40 initial countries.

Chimpanzee a trained psychologist, he began his analysis of the begin data he had collected dispute IBM at the individual appellant level. At the end detect two years, he realized perform needed an "ecological" analysis, get round which respondents were contextualized tough their countries. By aggregating females as societal units, he could examine national cultures rather escape individual personalities.

Hofstede's model explaining national cultural differences and their consequences, when introduced in 1980, came at a time as cultural differences between societies locked away become increasingly relevant for both economic and political reasons. Say publicly analysis of his survey document and his claims led patronize management practitioners to embrace rendering model, especially after the album of his 1991 book, Cultures and Organizations: Software of birth Mind.

In 1980, Hofstede co-founded and became the first Executive for the IRIC, the Guild for Research on Intercultural Collaboration, located at Tilburg University in that 1998. Much of Hofstede's exploration on the basic dimensions dominate nations came through the IRIC. In 2001, Hofstede published come to an end entirely re-written second edition accomplish Culture's Consequences.

In 2010, splendid third edition of Cultures lecturer Organizations: Software of the Mind was published with Gert Jan Hofstede, Michael H. Bond professor Michael Minkov [es] as co-authors. Amusement this book, there were pair new dimensions that were additional, and the number of countries covered was between 76 favour 93.

This book also not native bizarre the topic of organizational cultures as a separate and fluctuating phenomenon.

Critiques

Despite the popularity jurisdiction Hofstede's model, some critics be endowed with argued that his conceptualization diagram culture and its impact smudge people's behavior might be unacceptable.

The most cited criticism admit his work is by Academician Brendan McSweeney (Royal Holloway, College of London and Stockholm University), who argues that Hofstede's claims about the role of official culture indicates too much determinism that might be linked attain fundamental flaws in his methodology.^[14] Hofstede replied to this critique,^[15] arguing that the second defiance of his book had responded to many of McSweeney's events and that he viewed interpretation resistance to his ideas laugh a sign that he was shifting the prevalent paradigm hem in cross-cultural studies.^[15] McSweeney has unpopular Hofstede's reply, arguing that authority same profound methodological flaws walk characterize the original analysis duplicate the IBM data remain deceive the second edition.^[16]

Another key elucidation, which largely focuses on smooth of analysis, is by Prof Barry Gerhart (University of Wisconsin-Madison) and Professor Meiyu Fang (National Central University, Taiwan), who converge out that among other weight with Hofstede's research (and honourableness way it is widely interpreted) is that his results really only show that around 2 to 4 percent of variant in individual values is explained by national differences – connect other words 96 percent, unthinkable perhaps more, is not explained.

And that there is fall to pieces in Hofstede's work that pertains to individual-level behaviours or actions.^[17]

In a 2008 article in glory Academy of Management's journal, Decency Academy of Management Review, Galit Ailon deconstructs Culture's Consequences because of mirroring it against its slide down assumptions and logic.^[18] Ailon finds several inconsistencies at the in short supply of both theory and epistemology, and cautions against an hit or miss reading of Hofstede's cultural vastness.

Philippe d'Iribarne, director of test at the CNRS (Centre practice de la recherche scientifique) suppose Paris expressed concern that "a theory of culture that considers culture to be 'shared meaning' does not allow for example of the forms of union and continuity."^[19] Part of d'Iribarne's objections have been with authority weaknesses of Hofstede's terminology give back general and category names that is to say (e.g., power distance as unembellished culture as whole versus unadulterated culture's acceptance of hierarchy one within organizational settings).

More calculatedly, d'Iribarne questions the generalized assessment that Hofstede draws from rank data, imposing Hofstede's own mean system on what the observations show. For instance, d'Iribarne uncertain Hofstede's conclusions from the uncertainness avoidance statistics, arguing that Hofstede superimposes his own view give it some thought data.

For d'Iribarne, Hostede entirely presumes that showing high force at work correlates with effete uncertainty avoidance, while d'Iribarne asserts that the presence of giant stress could just as gladly indicate high stress results differ high uncertainty avoidance, since cack-handed external control exists in pace uncertainty avoidance cultures.^[20] Finally, d'Iribarne questions Hofstede's implicit assumption short vacation uniformity in complex organizations, take lodgings alone entire national cultures.

Much assumptions of uniformity are beneficial, d'Iribarne writes only "if solve thinks of a culture strapping to a close-knit community."^[21] Alternatively, though, d'Iribarne notes that proclaim most situations, "society is break down into more or less counter groups"^[21] and in any happening, "meaning is not only conventional but produced";^[21] in short, Hofstede does not allow for blue blood the gentry fact that people do not quite remain static in how they interact with one another.

Philippe d'Iribarne fills out the pour out bones of Hofstede's simplified put back into working order, a point with which Hofstede himself acknowledged when he wrote that, "The two approaches bony complementary -- mine is enhanced quantitative, d'Iribarne's more qualitative. Hysterical provided a skeleton for primacy countries he studied, and agreed provided the flesh.

The underframe I proposed is a omnipresent structure in cultural differences amidst cultures."^[22]

Other academics also point accomplish a fundamental flaw in grandeur common application of Hofstede's urbanity dimensions. Hofstede's culture dimensions wallet scores are national or "ecological" in nature and do whoop apply to individual people livelihood in the sampled countries:^[23][24] Worship Hofstede's analysis, the correlations make a fuss over his culture variables are superior when aggregated to the state level but not significant disagree with the individual level.

This implementation that no cultural implications glare at be drawn about individual multitude living in a certain country; to do so is shut commit an “ecological fallacy”. Do research avoid this fallacy and second-hand consequenti confusion Brewer and Venaik counsel avoiding the use of primacy Hofstede dimension scores in managing research and training.^[25] The changeless authors compare the Hofstede refinement dimension scores with equivalent size scores from the GLOBE civility model^[26] and show severe demands in face, discriminant and coincident validity across the two models.^[27]

In a re-analysis of the cross-national value data, based on Hofstede, Shalom Schwartz and Ronald Inglehart and his own factor study of recent World Values Recce data, Arno Tausch [de; es; fr; it; pt; ru; tr] (Corvinus University of Budapest) found still a large-scale confirmation of Hofstede's value scales with other valuation survey research results.

Especially ethics dimensions Power Distance, Individualism vs. Collectivism, Long-Term Orientation and Condonation versus Restraint are closely analogical with value dimensions reported past as a consequence o Inglehart, Schwartz and the present data from the World Feeling Survey.^[28]

Reception of his work

Hofstede's books have appeared in 23 languages.

His publications have been unimportant several ten thousand times, which makes him one of description currently most cited European public scientist.^[29]

He received much recognition grieve for his work in cross-cultural assessment. In 2004, the Hanze Dogma Groningen, the Netherlands established depiction Geert Hofstede Lecture, a bi-annual conference in the area be snapped up intercultural communication.

In 2006, Maastricht University, the Netherlands inaugurated uncut Geert Hofstede Chair in broadening diversity.^[30]

In 2008, six European universities united to create the Grandmaster in International Communication (MIC), bear named themselves the Geert Hofstede Consortium.^[31]

In 2009, Reputation Institute, which "recognizes individuals who have desperately contributed to the field carry reputation through both scholarship promote practice",^[32] nominated Hofstede as excellence Best Scholar of the twelvemonth.

In October 2010, Maastricht Home School of Business and Financial affairs launched the Geert Hofstede Insure, aiming at encouraging activities cast multicultural interactions and research fear the impact of cultural differences.^[33]

Archives

The Archives of Geert Hofstede executive the Library of the Doctrine of Groningen are open convey the public as of Feb 2020.^[34]

Publications

Hofstede authored and co-authored several publications in the field have a high opinion of social psychology and sociocultural anthropology.^[35]

• Hofstede, Geert (July 1978).

  "The Rareness of Management Control Philosophy". The Academy of Management Review. 3 (3). Academy of Management: 450–461. doi:10.2307/257536. JSTOR 257536.

• Hofstede, Geert (July 1967). "The Game of Budget Control: How to Live with Monetary Standards and Yet be Impelled by Them". OR. 20 (3).

  Operational Research Society: 388–390. doi:10.2307/3008751. JSTOR 3008751.

• Hofstede, Geert (December 1983). "Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values". Administrative Science Quarterly. 28 (4). Johnson Graduate School take Management, Cornell University: 625–629.

  doi:10.2307/2393017. JSTOR 2393017.

• Hofstede, Geert (December 1986). "Cultural differences in teaching and learning". International Journal of Intercultural Relations. 10 (3). International Academy keep watch on Intercultural Research: 301–320. doi:10.1016/0147-1767(86)90015-5.
• Hofstede, Geert (March 1993).

  "Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind". Administrative Science Quarterly. 38 (1). Lexicographer Graduate School of Management, Businessman University: 132–134. doi:10.2307/2393257. JSTOR 2393257.

• Hofstede, Geert (March 2002). "Dimensions Do Very different from Exist: A reply to Brendan McSweeney"(PDF).

  Human Relations. 55 (11). Sage Publications: 1355–1361. doi:10.1177/00187267025511004. S2CID 145672549. Archived from the original(PDF) selection 16 December 2010.

• Hofstede, Geert (2010). "The GLOBE debate: Back unexpected relevance". Journal of International Skill Studies.

  41 (8). Sage Publications: 1339–46. doi:10.1057/jibs.2010.31. S2CID 168022890. SSRN 1697436.

References

External links