Summary

-Culture is difficult to measure and to discuss because it involves shared ways of perceiving the world that members of a group take for granted.
-Culture is learned, and can be considered only relative to other cultures. There is no absolute right or wrong in cultural preferences.
-National culture gives people their basic assumptions and values, i.e. their ways of viewing the world
-Other levels of programming are more about practices or ways of doing things.
-National cultural values are much more difficult to change than other level of culture.
-Hofstede and Trompenaars have proposed the most expressive and popular categories of culture.
-Their dimensions help to clarify some of the most important ways in which cultures differ and how those differences affect organisations generally

1. 
   Managers can more successfully manage differences in culture if they
   •understand their own capital biases and assumptions
   •consider the reasons why different cultures´ways of doing things make sense in the light of their cultural assumptions
   •view cultural assumptions and ways of doing things not as irreconcilable differences, but rather as different starting points that can be integrated to develop uniquely competitive solutions.
   •knowing national cultures means learning about potential threats but also about opportunities

Achievement vs ascription

lDeals with how status and power in a society are determined
lStatus can be based either on what someone does, or what someone is. Cultures differ in the way they have solved this dilemma.

Specific vs diffuse relationships

lIt deals with the degree of involvement individuals are comfortable with in dealing with other people.
lEvery individual has various levels to their personality, from a more public level to the inner, more private level.
-There can be cultural differences in the relative size of people´s public and private „spaces“ and also in the degree to which they feel comfortable sharing those parts of their personality with other people.
-In more specific cultures people tend to have a larger public areas and a smaller private area.
-They prefer to keep their private life separate, guarding it very closely
-While diffuse cultures may come across as cool initially, once in the more closely guarded public space, the private space is more accessible than in specific cultures, i.e. the whole individual tends to be involved in relationships in diffuse cultures

1. Specific
   •More „open“ public space, more „closed“ private space
   •Appears direct, open and extrovert
   •„To the point“ and often appears abrasive
   •Highly mobile
   •Separates work and private life
   •Varies approaches to fit circumstances, esp. With use of titles)
2. Diffuse
   •More „closed“ public spac, but, once in, more „open private space
   •Appears indirect, closed and introvert
   •Often evades issues and „beats about the bush“
   •Low mobility
   •Work and private life are closely linked
   •Consistent in approach, esp. with use of titles
   

Neutral vs affective relationships

-Should emotion be exhibited in business relations?
-Is emotion a corrupting influence on objectivity and reason?
-In Hofstede´s model, the willingness to express emotion is seen as part of uncertainty avoidance.
-It concerns the different contexts and ways that cultures choose to express emotions. In affective cultures, expressing emotions openly is more „natural“, whereas in more neutral cultures people believe that emotions should be held in check so as not to cloud issues or give the appearance of being out of control.

1. Neutral
   •Opaque emotional state
   •Do not readily express what they think or feel
   •Embarrassed or awkward at public displays of emotion
   •Discomfort with physical contact outside „private“ circle
   •Subtle in verbal and non-verbal expressions
2. Affective
   •Show immediate reactions either verbally or non-verbally
   •Expressive face and body signals
   •At ease with physical contact
   •Raise voice readily

Individualism vs collectivism

•see Hofstede
•essentially it concerns how groups have resolved the problem: does a person regard himself or herself primarily as an individual or primarily as part of a group?
•Should society focus on individuals so that they can contribute to society as and if they wish, or is it more important to consider the collectivity first since it is shared by many individuals?

1. Individualism
   •More frequent use of „I“ and „me“
   •In negotiations, decisions typically made on the spot by a representative
   •People ideally achieve alone and assume personal responsibility
   •Holidays taken in pairs, or even alone
2. Collectivism
   •More frequent use of „we“
   •Decisions typically referred back by delegate to the organisation
   •People ideally achieve in groups which assume joint responsibility
   •Holidays taken in organised groups or with extended family

1. 
   

Universalism vs. Particularism

•Universalism applies where people believe that what is true and good can be discovered, defined and „applied“ everywhere.
•Particularism is said to prevail where the unique circumstances and relationships are more important considerations in determining what is right and good than abstract rules.

1. Universalism
   •Focus is more on rules than on relationships
   •Legal contracts are readily drawn up
   •A trustworthy person is the one who honours their word or contract
   •There is only one truth or reality, that which has been agreed to
   •A deal is a deal
   
2. Particularism
   •Focus is more on relationships than on rules
   •Legal contracts are readily modified
   •A trusworthy person is the one who honours changing circumstances
   •There are several perspectives on reality relative to each participant
   •Relationships evolve