During my university years, I came across Geert Hofstede’s work, “Culture’s Consequences:
International Differences in Work-Related Values.” Although the study has faced criticism at
certain points, it presented significant insights for someone striving to understand different
cultures. In today’s world, where the general trend seems to lean towards transforming the
different into a diluted version rather than cherishing diversity, it is important to think about
what might be better, and criticism plays a crucial role in this process.
Of course, we can’t define this process as solely positive or negative. The interaction
between different cultures can lead to the enrichment of local cultures, the exchange of
novel ideas, and opportunities to access larger markets. It can also promote faster and easier
knowledge acquisition, which can positively impact education levels. However, the opposite
effects of such interactions have also been proposed. For instance, while cultural diversity is
valuable, the global dominance of one culture can weaken local identities, languages,
identity transmission, and result in identity challenges.
Perhaps the crucial step is not to take a stance on whether this process is positive or
negative but to strive to understand it and comprehend its underlying logic. Recognizing
where the arrow has been shot is essential, not just to aim it in the right direction but also to
hit the right target.
It is undoubtedly acknowledged that there is a rational aspect within this standardizing
tendency. However, what matters is sustaining the effort to question the system, contrary to
what it expects from us, and to seek better alternatives. Therefore, I will underline certain
points in this context.
Let’s start with the criticisms directed at Hofstede’s work:
- The Problem of Generalization: This criticism asserts that generalizing the culture of a
single country may not adequately reflect the multicultural nature of society. - Evolving Cultures: Cultural values can change and evolve over time.
- Individual Differences: It does not consider individual differences within a country (which
is similar to the first criticism regarding generalization).
Taking into account the changes happening in the world is essential. Failure to understand
the current state of affairs makes it difficult for us to distinguish what should be and/or what
should be preserved. In the context of globalization, some argue that cultural differences are
diminishing on a global scale, especially among younger generations. It’s essential to
recognize that there’s a certain logic behind the prevalence of the same brands, clothing
styles, and foods worldwide. Nevertheless, this doesn’t change the fact that every culture
still possesses unique characteristics, and cultural diversity remains a significant factor.
Companies, when entering specific markets, consider the concept of ‘localization’ and
provide products and services tailored to the market’s conditions and cultures.
However, all these efforts may eventually be viewed as a cost by companies in the medium
and long term, especially as the trend toward standardization becomes more demanding
when the pursuit of profit intensifies.
So, why should we preserve local elements, and what could be the impact of this on
management processes? That will be the topic of our next blog post.