Hofstede Culture Theory Essay

Introduction
Geert Hofstede performed the most lauded research on The Dimensions of Culture theory. His findings and the model that he created were outlined in his 1980 book “Cultures Consequences.” The work was met with both acclaim and disregard from fellow academics. Hofstede’s work is generally quoted and cited without any hesitation even today and his model is still widely used the main guideline for dealing with human resources from a cultural perspective.
His theory and model is still practised today and in this section of the paper we will discuss the criticisms of the work and whether or not Hofstede’s models still apply in the current generation.
Brendan McSweeney’s criticisms of Hofstede’s model of cultural differences and their consequences.
In Brendan McSweeney’s paper on the criticisms of Hofstede’s research, five key elements of critique.
Of those critiques, the first states that surveys are not a very good way to measure the cultural differences in an organisation. The point made begs the question: “How many people actually answer questionnaires honestly?” Generally when a person is asked to participate in a survey, one would tend to answer the questions as soon as possible and continue with their previous task. So it’s definitely understandable that the surveys skewed the results slightly which allowed Hofstede to come to the findings that he made.
Secondly, he said that nations are not the best units to study cultural differences (McSweeney, 2000). This is a key criticism as it guides you to the fact that people in a nation tend to have similar cultural beliefs and traditions. This is a point clearly seen in South Africa where people from all reaches of life and all different areas of the country and completely ...

... middle of paper ...

...n. Hofstede responded stating that he did not intend to create an absolute measure and that he was merely noting the versatility between cultures. (Hofstede, 1998). Additionally, Hofstede
Conclusion
From the information presented above, it is clear that the four dimensions that Hofstede mentions, namely
• Power Distance
• Individualism vs. Collectivism
• Masculinity vs. Femininity
• Uncertainty Avoidance
Are all both heavily praised and heavily criticised. This section also shows that Hofstede was able to respond to the critical academics in a dignified and professional manner. Responses that were made are also clear and concise while answering the questions posed by other academics relating to the nature and findings of Hofstede’s work. It also shows that Hofstede’s work is still extremely relevant, even in today’s times with several academics proving its worth.