Trompenaars’s articles resume

Universalism and Particularism

The universalist attaches great importance to following the rules. Behaviour tends to be abstract. In
universalist rule-based societies, there are certain absolutes that apply everywhere. They apply
regardless of circumstances or specific situations. What is right is always true in every situation and
for everyone. The universalist tries to apply the same rules in all situations. To remain fair, the
universalist will not distinguish between people in a small environment, such as family, friends, or
members of a so-called inner group, and the wider community, such as strangers and out-group
members. Whenever possible, personal feelings and emotions are discarded, and the universalist
prefers to look at the situation objectively. To always be fair, everyone is equal, because there is no
difference. Finally, rule-based behaviour refers to the tendency that exceptions in the design of a rule
5 can lead to weaknesses. There are concerns that once the exceptions are approved, this could be
the door to the system (French et al., 2001).

The French show a particularistic view of things when faced with conflicts. This is especially true
when those about whom a decision is to be made are in close relationship with the decision maker.
This relationship burdens decision-makers with responsibilities towards those with whom they are
close. This obligation extends to those who are bound by hierarchical relationships in the workplace,
as well as egalitarian social relationships. When dealing with their employees, the French are
breaking the rules by making decisions with context (ibid.). Quoting Henri Fayol's managerial style,
Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner (1993, p. 335) point out that for the French, "Principles are
flexible and can be adapted to any need."

Individualism versus Communitarism The second dimension in their model (Trompenaars

and Hampden-Turner, 1998, p. 68) concerns individual and group orientation in business decisions. •
In individualistic cultures, power may well belong to the negotiator. In community cultures, a
negotiator is only a delegate who reports to the group that approves the final decision. • In
individualistic cultures, the decision-maker takes on personal responsibility. In communitarian
cultures, shared responsibility is the norm. • Individualists believe that their achievements are
primarily the result of their own efforts (French et al., 2001). Communitarians believe they succeed in
groups. France is a communitarian society. The community is, first of all, the family and those with
whom a person constantly communicates. The French tend to view the employment situation as a
group of interdependent people who work together and participate in social relationships with each
other. In the workplace, the team takes responsibility for a person's actions. Decisions at work are
made based on their efforts to continue the relationship. The French find that less individualistic
approaches are more effective in building lasting relationships. French managers are less distant from
their subordinates (Hampden-Turner and Trompenaars, 1993, p. 364)

Achievement versus Ascription Consumers in achievement-oriented national cultures are

more likely to emphasize personal consequences, such as the success of good choices, while
ascription-oriented national cultures may emphasize personal consequences, such as entertainment.
Since success and fun are different subsets of personal consequences, their effects can be
contradictory, which does not lead to a difference in the 7 perceived importance of personal
consequences per se between achievement and attribution cultures (Overby, 2004)

NEUTRAL VERSUS EMOTIONAL

In neutral cultures, people believe that they must always control their emotions, let their actions to
be influenced by reason rather than sentiment and do not let others know what they are feeling.
Here, people are expected to (1) manage their emotions rigorously; (2) do not let body language to
convey emotions; (3) do not let feelings interfere in professional relations (3) watch and interpret
carefully other people’s emotional reactions. In emotional cultures, on the other hand, people are
allowed to express spontaneously their feelings at work, and let them influence (at least partially)
their decisions. They are expected to (1) open up emotionally to others (2) use emotional means to
communicate to each other (3) use body language effectively; (4) manage conflicts before they
became personal. Typical neutral cultures include: Sweden, the Netherlands, Finland, and Germany.
Typical emotional cultures are Poland, Italy, France, Spain (Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner, 1997,
pp. 70-80).

SPECIFIC VERSUS DIFFUSE (THE DEGREE OF INVOLVEMENT)

This dichotomy concerns the degree to which responsibility is specifically assigned or is diffusely
accepted. In a specific oriented culture, people think that their lives are a sum of parts that is best to
remain separate, so the professional and personal aspects must be kept distinct, whereas interactions
between people must be very well-defined. Keeping personal relations with others separate from
professional relations means that people believe that they can very well work together without
necessarily having a good personal relationship. In a diffusely oriented culture, people are more
holistic, viewing the various aspects of their lives as parts that derive their meaning from the
perspective of the whole, each element being related to all others, because those relationships are
believed to be more important than individual elements. Here, peoples’ personal and professional
lives overlap, while they believe that having good personal connections with their business partners is
an essential condition for success in this field. There is no clear limit between relations in the
workplace and other types of social relations.

ACHIEVEMENT VERSUS ASCRIPTION (HOW STATUS IS VIEWED AND

ACCORDED)
In an achievement-oriented culture, peoples’ worth is evaluated on the basis of their actions and
performances, and derive their social and professional status from what they have accomplished, so
achieved status must be proven time and again. People tend to recognize, value, and reward good
performance appropriately, and use titles only when relevant

In a culture where status is ascribed, people derive it from birth, age, gender or wealth. Here status is
not based on what a person did or does, but on who that person is. Since here people believe that
you should be valued for who you are, titles and credentials matter the most, so they tend to use
titles frequently, and to show respect to people with formal authority. Typical achievement cultures
are: U.S.A., Canada, Australia, and Scandinavian countries. Typical ascription cultures are: France,
Italy, Japan (Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner, 1997, pp. 101-119).
SEQUENTIAL TIME VERSUS SYNCHRONOUS TIME ORIENTATION (HOW PEOPLE
UNDERSTAND AND MANAGE THE PASSAGE OF TIME)
In a sequential time culture, people tend to understand the structure of time as being sequential,
inflexible and to assign different importance to past, present and future. For them, the order of
events happening is important, the value of time is high (“time is money”) and the value of
punctuality, planning, and respecting a schedule is accordingly high. Typical sequential-time cultures
are: Germany, the U.K., and the U.S.A. In a synchronic time culture, people see the past, present, and
future as interlocked periods so they tend to work on several projects at once, and view plans and
commitments as flexible, because they think time itself is a flexible frame. Typical synchronous-time
cultures include Japan, Argentina, and Mexico (Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner, 1997, pp. 119-138).
The test we used for our students is the following dilemma: “Some managers are arguing about the
best ways of improving cycle time and getting products to market when they are needed. There were
four possible views: (1) It is crucial to speed up operations and shorten time to market. Time is
money. Enemies of tighter schedules and faster deliveries are too much talking and relating to each
other. (2) It is crucial to speed up operations and shorten time to market. The faster jobs are done the
sooner you can “pass the baton” to colleagues/customers in the relay race. (3) Just-in-time
synchronization of processes and with customers is the key to shorter cycle times. The more
processes overlap and run simultaneously the more time saved. (4) Just-in-time synchronization of
processes and with customers is the key to shorter cycle times. Doing things faster results in
exhaustion and rushed work.”

INTERNAL DIRECTION VERSUS OUTER DIRECTION

Here we talk about the degree to which people believe they control their environment, or are
controlled by it. In an inner-directed culture, people think of nature as a complex mechanism that is
immense, but can be controlled if they have the right expertise (“knowledge is power”). They believe
that humans can and have the right to dominate nature, if they make the effort. This way of thinking
however, refers not only to natural environment, but also to the social one, namely the way ow
individuals work with teams and within organizations. The way we treat other people will be the
same as the way we treat nature.

In an outer-directed culture, people have an organic (as opposed to the previous mechanistic one)
view of nature. It is again a holistic perspective, where man is viewed as only one of nature’s forces
and should therefore live in harmony with the others and the environment. People therefore believe
that they must rather adapt themselves to external circumstances and have to work together with
their environment to achieve goals. In the context of their relation with the social environment, such
s in the workplace or in relationships, they should focus their actions on others, and avoid conflict
where possible.
 Philippe d’Iribarne

Philippe d'Iribarne, a French sociologist, is known for his work on cultural

dimensions and their impact on organizations. He has conducted extensive
research on cross-cultural management, particularly focusing on the cultural
aspects of work and organizations in different societies. D'Iribarne's research
often emphasizes the influence of culture on organizational practices,
communication, and management styles.

One of his notable works is the book "Cultures and Organizations: Software of
the Mind," which he co-authored with Geert Hofstede and others. While this
work builds on Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory, it also incorporates
d'Iribarne's own insights and research findings. In this book, the authors discuss
cultural differences in various aspects of organizations, including management
practices, decision-making processes, and workplace dynamics.

D'Iribarne's research typically focuses on understanding how cultural values

and norms shape the behavior of individuals and groups within organizations.
While his specific cultural dimensions may not be as widely recognized as
Hofstede's, his contributions to the field of cross-cultural management have
provided valuable insights into the complexities of managing diverse workforces
and navigating cultural differences in the global business environment.
For a comprehensive understanding of Philippe d'Iribarne's cultural dimensions
and their implications for organizations, it would be beneficial to explore his
published works, including books, research papers, and articles, which delve
into the intricacies of cultural influences on organizational behavior and
management practices.

Philippe d'Iribarne's work does not prescribe a fixed set of dimensions similar to
those outlined by Geert Hofstede. Instead, his research typically focuses on the
complexities of cultural influences on organizational behavior and management
practices, with an emphasis on the interplay between culture and work
dynamics. Therefore, he does not propose a specific number of dimensions in
the same manner as Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory.
Hofstede’s articles resume :
I will summarize the content of each dimension of hofstede opposing cultures with low and high scores. These
oppositions are based on correlations with studies by others, and because the relationship is statistical, not every
line applies equally strongly to every country.

Power Distance (PDI)

Power Distance has been defined as 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. All societies are unequal, but some are more unequal than others.

Uncertainty Avoidance (UAI)

Uncertainty Avoidance is not the same as risk avoidance; it deals with a society's tolerance for 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, and different from usual. Uncertainty avoiding
cultures try to minimize the possibility of such situations by strict behavioral codes, laws and rules, disapproval of
deviant opinions, and a belief in absolute Truth; 'there can only be one Truth and we have it'.
Individualism (IDV)

Individualism on the one side versus its opposite, Collectivism, as a societal, not an individual characteristic, is the
degree to which people in a society are integrated into groups. On the individualist side we find cultures in which the
ties between individuals are loose: everyone is expected to look after him/herself and his/her immediate family. On
the collectivist side we find cultures in which people from birth onwards are integrated into strong, cohesive in-
groups, often extended families (with uncles, aunts and grandparents) that continue protecting them in exchange for
unquestioning loyalty, and oppose other in groups. Again, the issue addressed by this dimension is an extremely
fundamental one, regarding all societies in the world. Table 3 lists a selection of differences between societies that
validation research showed to be associated with this dimension.

Masculinity – Femininity (MAS)

Masculinity versus its opposite, Femininity, again as a societal, not as an individual characteristic, refers to the
distribution of values between the genders which is another fundamental issue for any society, to which a range of
solutions can be found. The IBM studies revealed that (a) women's values differ less among societies than men's
values; (b) men's values from one country to another contain a dimension from very assertive and competitive and
maximally different from women's values on the one side, to modest and caring and similar to women's values on
the other. The assertive pole has been called 'masculine' and the modest, caring pole 'feminine'. The women in
feminine countries have the same modest, caring values as the men; in the masculine countries they are somewhat
assertive and competitive, but not as much as the men, so that these countries show a gap between men's values
and women's values. In masculine cultures there is often a taboo around this dimension (Hofstede et al., 1998).
Long-Term vs. Short-Term Orientation (LTO)

This dimension was originally described as "Pragmatic Versus Normative (PRA)." It refers to the time horizon people
in a society display. Countries with a long-term orientation tend to be pragmatic, modest, and more thrifty. In short-
term oriented countries, people tend to place more emphasis on principles, consistency and truth, and are typically
religious and nationalistic.

Indulgence versus Restraint

The sixth and new dimension, added in our 2010 book, uses Minkov’s label Indulgence versus Restraint. It was also
based on recent World Values Survey items and is more or less complementary to Long-versus Short-Term
Orientation; in fact it is weakly negatively correlated with it. It focuses on aspects not covered by the other five
dimensions, but known from literature on “happiness research”. Indulgence stands for a society that allows
relatively free gratification of basic and natural human desires related to enjoying life and having fun. Restraint
stands for a society that controls gratification of needs and regulates it by means of strict social norms. Scores on
this dimension are also available for 93 countries and regions.
 Nancy J.Adler
Nancy J. Adler is a Canadian-American author and scholar known for her work in the fields of
international management, cross-cultural management, and global leadership. She is
particularly well-known for her research and publications on the topics of international
human resource management, cross-cultural communication, and the challenges and
opportunities of managing in a global context.

Cross-Cultural Interaction

Nancy J. Adler is a renowned scholar in the field of cross-cultural interaction research. Her
work has made significant contributions to our understanding of how culture impacts various
aspects of international business and management. Here is a summary of her key
contributions and areas of expertise in cross-cultural interaction research:

Cross-Cultural Leadership:
cultural interaction research: Nancy J. Adler's research has focused on the complexities of
leadership in a global context. She has explored how cultural differences influence leadership
styles, emphasizing the importance of adapting leadership approaches to effectively manage
multicultural teams and organizations.

Cultural Intelligence (CQ):

Adler is known for her pioneering research on Cultural Intelligence (CQ). She has examined
the development and practical applications of CQ, which involves the ability to navigate and
succeed in culturally diverse environments. Her work underscores the significance of CQ in
fostering successful cross-cultural interactions.

Cross-Cultural Communication:
Her research has delved into the intricacies of cross-cultural communication. She highlights
the role of language, non-verbal communication, and cultural norms in shaping effective
communication across borders and cultures.

International Human Resource Management:

Adler's work extends to international human resource management. She has investigated
topics like expatriate assignments, cross-cultural training, and talent management, offering
insights into the challenges and best practices for managing a global workforce.

Global Mindset:
Nancy J. Adler has contributed to the concept of a "global mindset." Her research has
explored how individuals and organizations can develop a global mindset, characterized by
an openness to diverse perspectives and the ability to think and act globally.
Diversity and Inclusion:
Her research has addressed diversity and inclusion in the workplace, emphasizing the
importance of creating inclusive environments that harness the potential of diverse teams to
drive better business outcomes.

Cultural Differences in Business Practices:

She has examined how cultural differences shape business practices, negotiation strategies,
and decision-making processes in the international business arena.
 Edward Hall
Edward T. Hall (1914-2009) was a prominent American anthropologist known for his
groundbreaking work in the field of intercultural communication and cross-cultural studies.
His research and writings have had a lasting impact on our understanding of how culture
influences human behavior and communication. Some key aspects of Edward T. Hall's work
and contributions include:

Understanding cultural differences :

Edward T. Hall's work, particularly his book "Understanding Cultural Differences," provides
valuable insights into how cultural differences influence human behavior and
communication. Here is a summary of some key ideas and concepts from his book:

High-Context vs. Low-Context Cultures:

Hall introduces the concept of high-context and low-context cultures. High-context cultures
(e.g., Asian cultures) rely heavily on contextual information, non-verbal cues, and shared
knowledge in communication. In contrast, low-context cultures (e.g., Western cultures) rely
more on explicit verbal communication. This distinction helps explain differences in
communication styles and the importance of context in understanding messages.

Proxemics:
Hall's work on proxemics explores how people use and perceive space in communication. He
identifies various "proxemic zones," from intimate to public space, and discusses how the use
of space varies across cultures. This concept sheds light on personal space preferences and
the significance of physical distance in interactions.

Time Perception:
Hall introduces the idea of monochronic and polychronic time orientations. Monochronic
cultures emphasize linear time, punctuality, and scheduling, while polychronic cultures have
a more fluid approach to time. Understanding these different time orientations is crucial for
effective cross-cultural communication and collaboration.

Communication Codes and Non-Verbal Cues:

The book emphasizes that communication involves more than just spoken language. Non-
verbal cues, such as body language, facial expressions, and gestures, are significant in
conveying meaning. Different cultures have varying codes and interpretations for non-verbal
communication, leading to potential misunderstandings.
Silent Language:
Hall refers to non-verbal communication as the "silent language." It plays a crucial role in
conveying emotions, attitudes, and cultural norms. Awareness of the silent language is
essential for understanding cross-cultural interactions.

Culture Shock:
Hall discusses the concept of culture shock, the disorientation and discomfort that
individuals may experience when encountering a new culture. He explains the stages of
culture shock and offers insights into how to adapt to and navigate a foreign culture.

Adaptation and Flexibility:

The book emphasizes the importance of adaptability and flexibility when interacting with
individuals from different cultures. Adapting to cultural norms, while respecting one's own
cultural identity, is crucial for effective cross-cultural interactions.

The Impact on Business and Diplomacy:

Hall's work has practical applications in business, diplomacy, and international relations.
Understanding and respecting cultural differences can improve cross-cultural negotiations,
collaborations, and diplomacy efforts.
 Schwartz resume :
Shalom Schwartz, an Israeli sociologist, identifies seven cultural values in three pairs, usually arranged in a circle.
Here is a brief discussion of these dimensions.

Autonomy vs. Embeddedness: The problem of defining the optimal relations and boundaries between the
person and the group translates into the question: To what extent should people be treated as autonomous versus
as embedded in their groups? ‘Autonomy’ cultures treat people as autonomous, bounded entities. They encourage
people to cultivate and express their own preferences, feelings, ideas, and abilities, and to find meaning in their own
uniqueness. There are two types of autonomy: Intellectual autonomy encourages individuals to pursue their own
ideas and intellectual directions independently. Examples of important values in such cultures include
broadmindedness, curiosity, and creativity. Affective autonomy encourages individuals to pursue arousing,
affectively positive personal experience. Important values include pleasure, exciting life, and varied life.

‘Embeddedness’ cultures treat people as entities embedded in the collectivity. Meaning in life is expected to
come largely through in-group social relationships, through identifying with the group, participating in its shared way
of life, and striving toward its shared goals. Embedded cultures emphasize maintaining the status quo and
restraining actions that might disrupt in-group solidarity or the traditional order. Important values in such cultures
are social order, respect for tradition, security, obedience, and wisdom.1

Egalitarianism vs. Hierarchy: The problem of ensuring coordination among people to produce goods and
services in ways that preserve the social fabric translates into the question: How can human interdependencies be
managed in a way that elicits coordinated, productive activity rather than disruptive behavior or withholding of
effort? ‘Egalitarian’ cultures urge people to recognize one another as moral equals who share basic interests as
human beings. They socialize people to internalize a commitment to cooperate, to feel concern for the welfare of all,
and to act voluntarily to benefit others. Important values in such cultures include equality, social justice,
responsibility, help, and honesty.

‘Hierarchy’ cultures rely on hierarchical systems of ascribed roles to insure responsible, productive behavior.
They define the unequal distribution of power, roles, and resources as legitimate and even desirable. People are
socialized to take a hierarchical distribution of roles for granted, to comply with the obligations and rules attached to
their roles, to show deference to superiors and expect deference from subordinates. Values of social power,
authority, humility, and wealth are highly important in hierarchical cultures.

Harmony vs. Mastery: The problem of regulating the utilization of human and natural resources translates
into the question: To what extent should individuals and groups control and change their social and natural
environment vs. leaving it undisturbed and unchanged? ‘Harmony’ cultures emphasize fitting into rather than
exploiting the social and natural world, accepting, preserving, and appreciating the way things are rather than trying
to change them. Harmony cultures discourage efforts to bring about change and encourage maintaining smooth
relations and avoiding conflict. Important values in harmony cultures include world at peace, unity with nature,
protecting the environment, and accepting one’s portion.

‘Mastery’ cultures encourage active self-assertion by individuals or groups in order to master, direct, and
change the natural and social environment and thereby to attain group or personal goals. They emphasize the
desirability of active, pragmatic problem-solving that can produce ‘progress’. Values such as ambition, success,
daring, self-sufficiency, and competence are especially important in mastery cultures.

In sum, the theory specifies three bipolar dimensions of culture that represent alternative resolutions to
each of three problems that confront all societies: autonomy versus embeddedness, egalitarianism versus
hierarchy, and harmony versus mastery (see Figure 1). A societal emphasis on the cultural orientation at one pole of
a dimension typically accompanies a de-emphasis on the polar type, with which it tends to conflict. For example,
Russian culture tends to emphasizes hierarchy but not the opposing orientation of egalitarianism. American and
Israeli culture tend to emphasize mastery and to give little emphasis to harmony. The cultures of Iran and China
emphasize hierarchy and embeddedness but not egalitarianism and intellectual autonomy.

1
This dimension shares some elements with the individualism-collectivism construct. I contrast them below.