I was recently alerted to an interesting, if possibly controversial, online tool: Country Comparison by Hofstede Insights. It shows national cultural differences in graphical form. By doing so, it can help to uncover the drivers behind, and hence increase the understanding of, behaviours exhibited by different societies. The approach builds on the work of the Dutch social psychologist Geert Hofstede (1928 - 2020), who spent much of his career investigating the dynamics of cross-cultural organisations such as the UN. The Country Comparison tool ranks societies using six metrics: Individualism, Masculinity, Power Distance,
Uncertainty Avoidance, Indulgence and Long Term Orientation, each ranked out of 100.
Individualism is perhaps the easist to understand. Societies that score big for Individualism prioritise ‘number one,’ i.e.: the self, plus immediate family members. A good example is the United States, which has an Individualism score of 91. Societies that score lower on this metric take a more collectivist approach. China scores a 20 for Individualism, but this is not limited to communist systems. Free market South Korea scores just 18 for Individualism, demonstrating how concern for wider society affects individuals’ decisions.
Masculinity might appear easy to define, but for Hofstede it doesn’t mean ‘macho.’ Instead, it relates to the level of competition encouraged by society. What would you suggest as the most ‘masculine’ society by this metric? India, China or the US again? No, the most ‘masculine’ society, with a score of 93, is super polite Japan. Apparently, this is due to the fact that, while Japan has a mid-table Individualism score of 46, its society encourages fierce competition between groups from a young age. The least masculine society is found in Sweden, with a score of 5. Here, people are generally happy to do their own thing.
Then the metrics become less obvious. Power Distance concerns society’s attitude to the relationship between individuals and the state, specifically the extent to which the less powerful accept that power is distributed unequally. Russia scores 93, which Hofstede says is ‘unsurprising’ in the world’s largest country, indeed one where power is highly concentrated. At the lower end of this metric is New Zealand, scoring just 22. This indicates that this society views its politicians and business leaders as approachable. Politicians seem more like ‘ordinary people’ than they do elsewhere. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern is a case in point.
Uncertainty Avoidance concerns whether or not a society tries to shape future events and changes in attitudes. Societies that score highly here attempt to block changes, either by societal pressure, regulations or both. Examples can be found in the former Eastern bloc and Central Asia. On the low end of Uncertainty Avoidance we find societies that are ready to accept change. Denmark scores 18 here, meaning that plans - and attitudes - are flexible. People go with the flow.
Indulgence is next on the list. Societies that score highly on this metric ‘reward’ themselves more readily than those that score lowly. This may be reflected in their propensity to have fun and ‘party.’ Mexico scores highly for Indulgence, with 97. It is by no means an exception in Latin America. On the other end of the Indulgence spectrum we find Egypt, with a score of just 4. Its society places a strong emphasis on restraint, with any rewards or leisure time carefully metered out.
Finally, there’s Long Term Orientation, which concerns how societies maintain links to their own past, as well as how they prepare for the future. A low score here, as demonstrated by Nigeria’s score of 13, indicates a society with great respect for traditions. On the other end of the Long Term Orientation window, we find Germany with a score of 83. This is not surprising, as Germany is very pragmatic... It has had to reinvent itself at least twice in the past century.
Scrolling through the numbers, it is possible to see general trends in the attitudes of different societies. There are a fair few surprises and, importantly, no assessment of whether a given approach is ‘right’ or ‘wrong.’ So could such a tool really have real-world applications? Perhaps... while international relations have traditionally been honed through experience, the Country Comparison tool could help in the ‘post pandemic world,’ where meeting others in real life is less easy than in the past. It is not impossible that tools like Hofstede’s may offer the potential for greater understanding between societies and stronger, more fruitful business relationships. After all, what better way to truly immerse yourself in a foreign society than reading its six metrics? Even if you think that’s a step to far, it’s still very interesting, even if you only look up where you live! Head to: www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison.