Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions and Tourist Behaviors: A ... - Esan
Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions and Tourist Behaviors: A ... - Esan Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions and Tourist Behaviors: A ... - Esan
26 Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative ScienceDecember 2011FIGURE-1A Conceptual Framework for Analyzing Tourist Behaviors in the Before-, During-, and After- Travel StagesCollectivity OrientationDriven Travel BehaviorsUncertaintyAvoidance• Preference Formation• Dominant Cultural Values:Individualism/CollectivismUncertainty Avoidance• Mostly Before-Travel• Process: IC and UA actindependently and/orsequentially with IC UARisk Tendencies DrivenTravel BehaviorsIndividualism/CollectivismMasculinity/FemininitySocial Interaction DrivenTravel Behaviors• Experience Evaluation• Dominant Cultural Values:Individualism/CollectivismMasculinity/FemininityPower Distance• Mostly After-Travel• Process: PD, IC, and MFact either independently orin pairs or all three together• Product Consumption• Dominant Cultural Values:Uncertainty AvoidanceIndividualism/Collectivism• Mostly During-Travel• Process: UA and IC actindependently and/orsequentially with UA ICPowerDistanceFigure 1. A Conceptual Framework for Analyzing Tourist Behaviors in the Before-, During-,and After- Travel Stagesframework and the final section identifies directions forfuture research.HOFSTEDE’S CULTURAL DIMENSIONSGeert Hofstede is the most well-known name in the fieldof cross-cultural psychology and business. He startedin 1979 with 40 countries and in 1980 published hislandmark study of work-related values of employees in50 countries and three world regions (Hofstede 1979,1980). The database for this unprecedented researchstudy comprised of questionnaires completed by 100,000employees of IBM, a large multinational corporation.Based on factor analysis of the data, Hofstede extractedfour dimensions on which the different countries/cultures varied. The validity of these four dimensionswas tested using a variety of constructs and theories insocial sciences.Hofstede (1980) labeled these four dimensionsas “Power Distance,” “Uncertainty Avoidance,” “Individualismversus Collectivism” and “Masculinityversus Femininity” respectively. He defined these fourdimensions as follows:• Power Distance:The extent to which the less powerful membersof institutions and organizations accept thatpower is distributed unequally.• Uncertainty Avoidance:The extent to which people feel threatened by ambiguoussituations, and have created beliefs andinstitutions that try to avoid in such situations.• Individualism versus Collectivism:A situation in which people are supposed to lookafter themselves and their immediate family only(Individualism).J. econ. finance adm. sci., 16(31), 2011
Vol. 16, Nº 31Manrai & Manrai: Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions and Tourist Behaviors 27A situation in which people belong to in-groupor collectivities, which are supposed to lookafter them, in exchange for loyalty (Collectivism).• Masculinity versus Femininity:A situation in which the dominant values ofsociety are success, money, and things (Masculinity).A situation in which the dominant values of asociety are caring for others and quality of life(Femininity).Hofstede and Bond (1984) discuss the basic anthropologicaland societal issues to which the abovefour dimensions relate. These authors suggest that thepower distance dimension is related to social inequalityand the amount of authority of one person over others.The uncertainty avoidance dimension is consideredrelated to the way a society deals with conflicts andaggressions and as the last resort with life and death.The third dimension, individualism versus collectivism,is portrayed as being related to the individual’sdependence on the group; his or her self-concept as‘I’ or ‘We’. Lastly, the fourth dimension, masculinityversus femininity, is portrayed as being related to thechoice of social sex roles and its effects on people’sself-concepts.Hofstede subsequently added a fifth cultural dimension,which he called “Confucian Dynamism” (referredin the literature also as “Long Term versus Short TermOrientation”). This fifth dimension was added becausenone of the original four cultural dimensions was relatedto national economic growth as demonstrated in caseof several East Asian countries. A second cross-culturalvalue measurement project called “Chinese ValuesSurvey (CVS)” was undertaken to identify valuesmore typical to Asian cultures. CVS comprised of a40-item questionnaire (Bond and the Chinese CulturalConnection 1987) on typical Chinese values and wasadministered in 22 countries, 20 of which overlappedwith IBM study.A comparison of the values identified in the twosurveys, on IBM and CVS provided some very usefulinsights. The results of each of the two surveysexhibited four cultural dimensions but only three ofthem were similar: “Power Distance,” “Individualismversus Collectivism,” and “Masculinity versusFemininity.” The cultural dimensions of “UncertaintyAvoidance” found in the IBM study was missing inCVS and instead the fourth dimension found in CVSstudy comprised of unique items associated with thethinking and philosophy of Confucius. Thus, thisdimension was labeled as “Confucian Dynamism.”Further, the Confucian values included in this dimensionwere both future or long-term oriented as wellas present and past or short-term oriented. Therefore,this fifth dimension is also referred in the literature aslong versus short term orientation.Hofstede and Bond (1988) characterize the threedimensions common to both IBM and CVS studies as“Expected Social Behaviors.” The “Power Distance”dimension captures behaviors toward juniors or seniors;the “Individualism versus Collectivism” dimensioncaptures behavior toward the group and the “Masculinityversus Femininity” dimension captures behavioras a function of one’s social sex roles. The dimensionunique to the IBM study, “Uncertainty Avoidance”,is portrayed as search for “truth,” a typical Westernvalue, whereas the dimension unique to the CVS study(Confucian Dynamism) is portrayed as the search for“virtue,” a typical Eastern value (Hofstede & Bond,1988). The contrast of Eastern versus Western culturalvalues is very powerfully summed up by Hofstede andBond (1988), where Confucius was a teacher of practicalethics, without any religious content. He dealt withVirtue but left the question of Truth open.An overall examination of the cultural average scoresand rankings of the various countries included in theIBM and CVS studies suggests that broadly speakingthe Western countries tend to be low on power distance,low on uncertainty avoidance, high on individualism,mixed on masculinity – femininity and are short-termoriented. In comparison, Eastern countries tend to behigh on power distance, high on uncertainty avoidance,high on collectivism, mixed on masculinity – femininity,and are long-term oriented.J. econ. finance adm. sci., 16(31), 2011
- Page 1 and 2: Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions an
- Page 3: Vol. 16, Nº 31Manrai & Manrai: Hof
- Page 7 and 8: Vol. 16, Nº 31Manrai & Manrai: Hof
- Page 9 and 10: Vol. 16, Nº 31Manrai & Manrai: Hof
- Page 11 and 12: Vol. 16, Nº 31Manrai & Manrai: Hof
- Page 13 and 14: Vol. 16, Nº 31Manrai & Manrai: Hof
- Page 15 and 16: Vol. 16, Nº 31Manrai & Manrai: Hof
- Page 17 and 18: Vol. 16, Nº 31Manrai & Manrai: Hof
- Page 19 and 20: Vol. 16, Nº 31Manrai & Manrai: Hof
- Page 21 and 22: Vol. 16, Nº 31Manrai & Manrai: Hof
- Page 23 and 24: Vol. 16, Nº 31Manrai & Manrai: Hof
- Page 25 and 26: Vol. 16, Nº 31Manrai & Manrai: Hof
26 Journal of Economics, Finance <strong>and</strong> Administrative ScienceDecember 2011FIGURE-1A Conceptual Framework for Analyzing <strong>Tourist</strong> <strong>Behaviors</strong> in the Before-, During-, <strong>and</strong> After- Travel StagesCollectivity OrientationDriven Travel <strong>Behaviors</strong>UncertaintyAvoidance• Preference Formation• Dominant <strong>Cultural</strong> Values:Individualism/CollectivismUncertainty Avoidance• Mostly Before-Travel• Process: IC <strong>and</strong> UA actindependently <strong>and</strong>/orsequentially with IC UARisk Tendencies DrivenTravel <strong>Behaviors</strong>Individualism/CollectivismMasculinity/FemininitySocial Interaction DrivenTravel <strong>Behaviors</strong>• Experience Evaluation• Dominant <strong>Cultural</strong> Values:Individualism/CollectivismMasculinity/FemininityPower Distance• Mostly After-Travel• Process: PD, IC, <strong>and</strong> MFact either independently orin pairs or all three together• Product Consumption• Dominant <strong>Cultural</strong> Values:Uncertainty AvoidanceIndividualism/Collectivism• Mostly During-Travel• Process: UA <strong>and</strong> IC actindependently <strong>and</strong>/orsequentially with UA ICPowerDistanceFigure 1. A Conceptual Framework for Analyzing <strong>Tourist</strong> <strong>Behaviors</strong> in the Before-, During-,<strong>and</strong> After- Travel Stagesframework <strong>and</strong> the final section identifies directions forfuture research.HOFSTEDE’S CULTURAL DIMENSIONSGeert Hofstede is the most well-known name in the fieldof cross-cultural psychology <strong>and</strong> business. He startedin 1979 with 40 countries <strong>and</strong> in 1980 published hisl<strong>and</strong>mark study of work-related values of employees in50 countries <strong>and</strong> three world regions (Hofstede 1979,1980). The database for this unprecedented researchstudy comprised of questionnaires completed by 100,000employees of IBM, a large multinational corporation.Based on factor analysis of the data, Hofstede extractedfour dimensions on which the different countries/cultures varied. The validity of these four dimensionswas tested using a variety of constructs <strong>and</strong> theories insocial sciences.Hofstede (1980) labeled these four dimensionsas “Power Distance,” “Uncertainty Avoidance,” “Individualismversus Collectivism” <strong>and</strong> “Masculinityversus Femininity” respectively. He defined these fourdimensions as follows:• Power Distance:The extent to which the less powerful membersof institutions <strong>and</strong> organizations accept thatpower is distributed unequally.• Uncertainty Avoidance:The extent to which people feel threatened by ambiguoussituations, <strong>and</strong> have created beliefs <strong>and</strong>institutions that try to avoid in such situations.• Individualism versus Collectivism:A situation in which people are supposed to lookafter themselves <strong>and</strong> their immediate family only(Individualism).J. econ. finance adm. sci., 16(31), 2011
Change language