Prof. Manikutty (and other interested parties):
Yes it will, because what we conceive as 'culture' resides in individuals. Culture is essentially measured as responses to certain questions at the individual level and then aggregated/reduced/statisticized as normative databases at certain social levels (group/organization/society/nation/region/etc.) to provide new social meaning, whatever this 'meaning' means.
Similar to any anthropic parameter sets, one could use these normative databases to either characterize social units or individual differences and this goes back to Quetelet, Galton, Pearson, and Spearman. In this sense, cultural databases, if properly deviced, are much like normative databases of, say, national nutritional intake or physiological vitals. All those databases are aggregates of individual data stratified by meaningful groups (e.g., Bone Mass Density of females at a national level either as one group or stratified to a couple groups by age) that enable saying something about the social group in terms of descriptive statistics (e.g., peak bone mass of U.S. females or average bone mass of U.S. females of the age range 40-45) and as a reference to measure individual differences (e.g., t-score in reference to one's national peak bone mass and z-score in reference to one's national average bone mass per the appropriate age group).
Saying that the Hofstede Dimensional Measurement is not appropriate for the individual level is somewhat an ontological contradiction and might indicate that it is inappropriate normative database. Getting back to the original question, it might be more appropriate to measure individual differences (i.e., 'cultural distance' in reference to certain social database) using other tools such as Schwartz's or Rokeach's.
Respectfully,
Ronnen
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
-----Original Message-----
From: "Prof. S. Manikutty" <
manikuti@IIMAHD.ERNET.IN>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 11:40:11
To:
IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
Subject: Re: Cultural distance - more confused than before: FYI!
Wont this still require measurement at an individual level? What instrument will one use for doing that?
Manikutty
On 4/22/08,
rpaytan@gmail.com <mailto:
rpaytan@gmail.com> <
rpaytan@gmail.com <mailto:
rpaytan@gmail.com> > wrote: Prof. Manikutty (and other esteemed division members), here is a layman question: Say that we've got a few national normative databases indicating the national scores of certain nations across the same set of dimensions (e.g., Hofstedeian/Schwartzean/Rokeachean/Trompenaarsean/etc.). Now, say that we want to measure how an individual person scores on one or more normative databases (in terms of, say, z-scores). The outcome is a vector of numbers that expresses the distance in standard deviations of this individual from each national average. One could use this vector to find individual differences relative to one or more databases. In this case we are not interested in absolute scores but in relative ones. What is the problem with this approach? Ronnen
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
-----Original Message-----
From: "Prof. S. Manikutty" <
manikuti@IIMAHD.ERNET.IN <mailto:
manikuti@IIMAHD.ERNET.IN> >
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 11:40:14
To:
IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu <mailto:To%
3AIMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu>
Subject: Re: Cultural distance - more confused than before: FYI!
Hello all:
I, as a part of a team, had used Hofstede as well as Globe indicators in a study involving students from different countries and from different areas within a country itself. We had also the same kinds of doubts about the validity of these indicators at a group level rather than at the aggregate national level.
First, I am of the view that Hofstede's or Globe indicators are not to be used at an individual level; they give the broad aggregate cultural characteristics at a national or even a group of nations level. As has been pointed out, to assume that a particular individual from China is more collectivistic than one form USA can be quite misleading. Even for non representative groups, such as MBAs, I think just applying these indicators may not be correct. For example, a group of MBAs from a premier management institute from India may be more individualistic than a group of US fire fighters.
In our study, what we did was to apply the culture measuring scales to the chosen groups of graduate and undergraduate students. WE did find that with w fairly large sample size, the indicators did correspond to Hofstede and Globe indicators; certainly the relativistic parameters were as predicted. But still I feel that such a validation is desirable in any study involving sub groups within a country.
Prof. S. Manikutty
Indian Institute of Management
Ahmedabad, India
On 4/21/08, Sheila Christina Gowans <
gowanssc@unimelb.edu.au <mailto:
gowanssc@unimelb.edu.au> <mailto:
gowanssc@unimelb.edu.au <mailto:
gowanssc@unimelb.edu.au> > > wrote:
Hi Peter,
My second go at this issue - realised I wrote Hofstede's dimensions were developed at org. level - they were developed at org. level (IBM) but for clarity - are cross-cultural dimensions so 'societal' or 'cultural' level is correct. However, this too is problematic because it assumes one metric for a particular culture (eg. Indonesia has a power distance of 78). This does not take into account the cultural hybridisation which is an inevitable consequence of globalisation. Consider whether an Indonesian with an MBA from an Ivy League university, working in a US-based multinational, will have the same view of authority as his colleague in Djakarta, with a local degree, who has only worked for the Indonesian government.
Regards
Sheila Gowans
Department of Management and Marketing
University of Melbourne
VICTORIA 3010 AUSTRALIA
Tel: +61 3 8344 0180 Mobile: 0419 192265
http://www.managementmarketing.unimelb.edu.au/staff/staffPage.cfm?StaffId=76 <http://www.managementmarketing.unimelb.edu.au/staff/staffPage.cfm?StaffId=76> <http://www.managementmarketing.unimelb.edu.au/staff/staffPage.cfm?StaffId=76 <http://www.managementmarketing.unimelb.edu.au/staff/staffPage.cfm?StaffId=76> > -----------------------------------------------------------
"email-body" was scanned and certified Virus-Free.
-----------------------------------------------------------
VirusScanned by Trend Micro InterScan VirusWall (http://www.antivirus.com <http://www.antivirus.com> <http://www.antivirus.com/ <http://www.antivirus.com/> > ).
IT Support Unit, Department of Economics, The University of Melbourne.
Disclaimer:
http://www.economics.unimelb.edu.au/Email_Disclaimer.html <http://www.economics.unimelb.edu.au/Email_Disclaimer.html> <http://www.economics.unimelb.edu.au/Email_Disclaimer.html <http://www.economics.unimelb.edu.au/Email_Disclaimer.html> > -----------------------------------------------------------
----------------
From: International Management Division Discussion [mailto:
IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu <mailto:
IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu> <mailto:
IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu <mailto:
IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu> > ] On Behalf Of Lou Carrier
Sent: Sunday, 20 April 2008 1:54 PM
To:
IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu <mailto:
IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu> <mailto:
IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu <mailto:
IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu> >
Subject: Re: Cultural distance - more confused than before: FYI!
This (unpublished?) article may be of use to you!
http://www.victoria.ac.nz/psyc/staff/ronald-fischer/files/Fischeretal2.doc <http://www.victoria.ac.nz/psyc/staff/ronald-fischer/files/Fischeretal2.doc> <http://www.victoria.ac.nz/psyc/staff/ronald-fischer/files/Fischeretal2.doc <http://www.victoria.ac.nz/psyc/staff/ronald-fischer/files/Fischeretal2.doc> >
I have used cultural dimensions (Hofstede & GLOBE), metaphors and paradoxes to assess at national, organizational and individual levels.
(:>)
Lou Carrier
----------------
From: International Management Division Discussion [mailto:
IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu <mailto:
IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu> <mailto:
IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu <mailto:
IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu> > ] On Behalf Of Peter Paul
Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 3:59 PM
To:
IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu <mailto:
IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu> <mailto:
IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu <mailto:
IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu> >
Subject: Cultural distance - more confused than before
All,
I recently asked a question about calculating cultural distance at the individual level – I received several conflicting suggestions. I am new to this field and, now, more confused than before.
Can we or can we not use Hofstede's dimensions at the individual level? If not, how do we calculate 'cultural distance' at the individual level?
Any help will be appreciated.
Peter
----------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51733/*http:/mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ%20 <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51733/*http:/mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ%20> >
--
Chairman, Management Development Programmes
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Prof. S. Manikutty
Business Policy Area
Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, India 380015.
Phones: (O) +91 79 66324807
(Res) +91 79 26306503; +91 79 6632 5304
(Mobile): 9898123115
****************************************************
--
Chairman, Management Development Programmes
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Prof. S. Manikutty
Business Policy Area
Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, India 380015.
Phones: (O) +91 79 66324807
(Res) +91 79 26306503; +91 79 6632 5304
(Mobile): 9898123115
****************************************************