Powered By Blogger

Thursday, November 5, 2015

Homework: Russia by Geert-Hofstede Standards

My Interpretation of the Geert-Hofstede Model of Russia.
It is probably completely wrong, and I am sorry to all the Russians if it is, but I had to pick a country for this homework assignment. So here is what I wrote:

Cultural Analysis Based on the Geert-Hofstede Dimensions:  Russia
                I have a very limited knowledge of Russia. I am also unfamiliar with the Geert-Hofstede Cultural Analysis. In my simple little life, I have never considered learning about either of these things, much less combining the knowledge of the two… until now. The first step was to find Russia in the Hofstede Cultural Analysis tool online, where the dimensions graph shows a wide range in the dimensions spectrum. Russia scores quite high in Power Distance, Uncertainty Avoidance, and Long Term Orientation. However, they score very low in Individualism, Masculinity, and Indulgence. I am already intrigued that there doesn’t seem to be a middle ground in this country.
                By 1991, the Communist Party governments had collapsed, opening up the countries that were formally Communistic to free market economies and introducing them to democratic politics. While these countries, including Russia, offer a variety of opportunities for exports and investments, they remain largely underdeveloped even today. Russia is, literally, the largest country in the world at 17,075,200 square kilometers (that is over 7 million more square kilometers than the second largest, Canada). Yet, despite its size, the majority of foreign investments are concentrated in the capital city of Moscow. Because the majority of the power lies in one city, Russia scores a 93 on the “Power Distance” scale of cultural dimension. Moscow also controls the majority of the financial potential. It is easy to understand then why the income distribution in the Russian society is extremely uneven. In a country with a high score in power distance, subordinates are expected to do as they are told, and to be obedient, so it is important for parents to teach their children how to obey and respect authority and elders.                 One would expect, when visiting the country, to see both well-behaved children, and well-behaved adults.
                In a society where the power distance is so large, it would not be ideal to stand out from the crowd as an individual, which is why Russia scores a low 39 in Individualism. Something that I found extremely interesting in the information provided by Geert-Hofstede.com’s analysis of Russia, is that their collectivism is even evident in their language. “If Russians plan to go out with their friends they would literally say ‘We with friends’ instead of ‘I am my friends’.” There is a benefit to this frame of mind, in that, developing authentic relationships with others aids in open communication and successful negotiations.
                In the subject of Masculinity vs Feminism, Russia is driven by quality of life, and caring for others, thus leaning toward the feminist side of the scale. I was quite surprised by this result shown in their score of 36. With the large number on the Power Distance scale, and the majority of financial control being centered around one city, I would have guessed that ‘caring for others’ would not have been a priority. However, because of their collectivism, and desire for authentic relationships, I can see how they would place a high importance on caring for others, and having a more equality type behavior amongst peers.
                Uncertainty Avoidance is a must in Mother Russia. There is no one person, or one country that can predict the future, and Russia is uncomfortable with that. The highest score that Russia holds in the Hofstede model is in Uncertainty Avoidance, with a score of 95. Perplexing and unknown situations are threats to Russians. In business, Russians prefer to have “context and background information” (Hofstede online analysis) in a presentation or negotiation. This score comes as less of a surprise to me because it seems to be a reflection of the combined mentality of the previous three categories; power distance (obedience), collectivism (relationship building), and feminism (caring for others). Russians, apparently, prefer to have set rules and boundaries, as well as and a sense of group safety.
                Continuing in this thought pattern, Russia scores its lowest score in the category of Indulgence. With a score of 20, I am beginning to see that Russians would feel that indulging themselves would not be a good thing.  They are restrained by the accepted ‘norms’ of their society, and feel a need to have rules, and leaders with dominance, therefore, indulging yourself in leisurely activities or giving in to your desires would be frowned upon. Not to mention that you would stand out from the crowd, which is a no-no in a collective society.
                Finally, in the category of Long-term vs. Short-term Orientation, Russia lands on the higher side of the middle ground. At 81, Russians have the ability to adapt and adjust their traditions with the passing of time. My opinion is that they would need to be both practical and sensible in their society, since the past twenty or so years have caused them to redevelop their governmental and political standards.  I also see that, with their desire to avoid risk, they would place a high importance on perseverance and frugality, also known as low-indulgence.

I am excited to learn more about the Russian community and culture. 

Go here for more info:   http://geert-hofstede.com/russia.html 

No comments:

Post a Comment