International Business Cultures
Student’s Name
Institution
Course
Professor’s Name
Date
International Business Cultures
Introduction
An American psychologist and sociologist called Graham Gibbs published his reflective cycle model back in 1988, terming it as, ‘learning by doing’. This reflective cycle encourages people, readers or learners to think systematically on their experiences handling a given situation, activity and event. Using this cycle, reflection on this experiences can be carefully structured in suitable phases. As such, it allows people to look at an activity, event or occasion in closer detail while making them fully aware of their individual actions to change or adjust their behaviour. By reviewing both the positive and negative impacts of the event or activity, they can quickly learn from it. With that in mind, this paper will consider the six steps in the Graham Gibbs cycle to analyze the international business cultures explained in the Hofstede cultural dimension. These phases include description, feelings, evaluation, analysis, conclusion, and action plan (Gibbs G., 2020, pp.1-4).
Description
This step describes the event or situation in more detail, without arriving at any given conclusion. The central questions that help in creating a clear and objective description include analyzing what happened, why and where it occurred, parties involved and what were the results of the actions. It is essential to highlight that necessary details should never be left out. For instance, in the topic under review, the cultural value dimensions represent the constructs formulated by various researchers to predict and understand human behaviour from a cultural context. Furthermore, they are meant to compare the actions of people in different cultures from more than two countries.
According to psychologist Geert Hofstede’s model, he prescribed six dimensions to be used in comparing the eastern and western cultures (Fusch GE et al., 2016). The first dimension assesses the distance power index, which focuses on the inequality and equality degree among citizens of a country or people within a given society. Next is individualism or I.D.V. which looks at societies’ degree reinforces collective, achievement, individual as well as interpersonal relationships. The third phase is masculinity or (M.A.S.), which looks at the extent to which communities reinforce or fail to strengthen control, power and the traditional model of work that encouraged male over female achievement. The fourth face is ‘Uncertainty Avoidance Index’ or U.A.I. which looks at the tolerance levels for ambiguity and uncertainty in the society. Finally, in the year 2010, Hofstede added a sixth dimension known as ‘Indulgence Vs Restraint describing how indulgent cultures place more focus on the freedom of free speech and movement while in restrained cultures people feel helpless and lack of control over their destiny.
Feelings
This stage is all about understanding the feelings triggered by the event or topic. It does not intend on discussing the comments or feelings in detail as someone’s emotions do not need to be judged or evaluated. In this phase, awareness is the most crucial factor. Because a majority of people are unable to express themselves, it helps when they are encouraged by someone asking questions such as what did you feel during and after the event or how would you review the situation.
When it comes to Hofstede’s dimensions, it is clear that he saw as essential factors in organizational management. For instance, company heads or C.E.O.s can come up with proper communication methods with their Chinese members of staff and avoid any conflict that might ‘kill’ their enthusiasm. Thus, following the previous study on international business cultures, it is evident that creating a start-up business in China requires managers to understand the people’s culture carefully. This will ensure that one can adequately engage with various individuals, along with the organization’s supply chain model (Hofstede G., 2011, pp.3-26).
Evaluation
This phase requires finding out if the experiences recorded in the description phase (step 1) were effective or ineffective. Which method worked and how did it work? It is essential to highlight here that people are often objective in a given situation. Hence, to properly conduct a practical evaluation, as a researcher, you need to evaluate both the good and bad experiences and a different look at the contributions of other people.
In Hofstede’s six dimensions model, one major weakness is that it comes from inconclusive research. This model only considers answers from a single company, thus making the sample size relatively small and overly biased. As such, the overall analysis contains low accuracy levels and validity. The other weakness in this methodological research by Hofstede is the over-reliance on questionnaires, and other scholars feel that Hofstede uses an outdated method of defining culture. Their view is that they ignore globalization effects, discrediting his overall research objectives. Furthermore, Hofstede assumes that location does not affect employee reactions which are not correct in today’s modern world. Despite these weaknesses, Hofstede’s findings can still be used in various multinational managers to boost motivation among employees and to reduce the occurrence of organizational conflicts. These are two essential components of ensuring proper and free-flowing business operational performance.
Analysis
This step is reviewing everything learned from the activity, event or situation. With this experience, it is simpler to know how to handle similar situations in the future. This also means that all negative and positive things incidents will be recorded and individually analyzed. Hence, following the challenges found in the evaluation phase, improving Hofstede’s model on internal business cultures requires a few useful methods.
First is conducting a thorough examination of advancements in technology and their effects on globalization as well as including them in Hofstede’s study. Inglehart first applied this approach in his post-modernization and modernization stage (Inglehart RF., 2005, pp.10-80). It will assist in eliminating the weaknesses of ignoring the rapid effects of globalization. Secondly, the research should use a bigger sample size that is adequately represented with survey views from across different corners of the world. This will make the study valid and more accurate.
Conclusion
This is the fifth step where you review the research conducted, event or activity to see whether you could have approached the situation differently. In this step, collecting data earlier is quite essential as it contributes significantly to arriving at useful and amicable conclusions. Despite the gaps in Hofstede’s approach, he mentions the importance of cross-cultural communication is essential in the manager to employee relationships. It is also vital for employees to interact with supplies as well as customers. Furthermore, employees should be sourced from local Chinese communities to help those of the western culture to understand and adapt to the changes.
Action Plan
Through the Hofstede’s model, managers can discuss the right management style. Looking at the western culture, less supervision is required in business management. If a new staff member is used to working in highly supervised environments, balance can be easily created to make sure no gap in performance is created. This also includes implementing cross-cultural methods of communication in training to avoid problems of stereotyping among employees to create a diverse work-force that is culturally-aware and respectful eventually.
Conclusion
The Gibbs reflective cycle can be used in different ways to understand actively changing situations like that of international business cultures. For instance, when conducting an internship project among people of diverse cultures, this reflective cycle can be an excellent tool to help interns can learn about their required actions. Most importantly, in this review, it helps in finding the weaknesses, strengths, and possible action plan within Hofstede’s model on overcoming the business cultural differences.
References
Fusch, GE, Fusch, CJ, Booker, JM & Fusch, PI 2016, ‘Why culture matters in business research’, Journal of Social Change, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 39-47.
Gibbs, G., 2020. Gibbs’ reflective cycle. my.cumbria.ac.uk, pp. 1-4.
Hofstede, G., 2011. Dimensionalizing Cultures: The Hofstede Model in Context. scholarworks.gvsu.edu, pp. 3-26.
Inglehart, R. F., 2005. Modernization, Existential Security and Cultural Change:Reshaping Human Motivations and Society. lsa.umich.edu, pp. 10-80.