Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Intercultural Communication
- Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of Intercultural Communication
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction
- Part I Introducing Intercultural Communication
- Part II Theoretical Approaches
- 5 Critical Intercultural Communication and the Digital Environment
- 6 From Shared Values to Cultural Dimensions
- 7 Towards Integrative Intercultural Communication
- 8 The Power of Literature in Intercultural Communication
- 9 Psychoanalytic Approaches to Memory and Intercultural Communication
- 10 Sociological Approaches to Intercultural Communication
- 11 Introducing Intercultural Ethics
- Part III Methods
- Part IV Application
- Part V Assessment
- Index
- References
6 - From Shared Values to Cultural Dimensions
A Comparative Review
from Part II - Theoretical Approaches
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 February 2020
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Intercultural Communication
- Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of Intercultural Communication
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction
- Part I Introducing Intercultural Communication
- Part II Theoretical Approaches
- 5 Critical Intercultural Communication and the Digital Environment
- 6 From Shared Values to Cultural Dimensions
- 7 Towards Integrative Intercultural Communication
- 8 The Power of Literature in Intercultural Communication
- 9 Psychoanalytic Approaches to Memory and Intercultural Communication
- 10 Sociological Approaches to Intercultural Communication
- 11 Introducing Intercultural Ethics
- Part III Methods
- Part IV Application
- Part V Assessment
- Index
- References
Summary
Elizabeth A. Tuleja and Michael Schachner explore a substantial number of very influential contrastive approaches, from Hofstede and the GLOBE study to work by Schwartz, Inglehart and Minkov. The chapter discusses these approaches from both a conceptual as well as a methodological point of view and points out the continued need for multiple perspectives on cross-cultural research in a polycultural world. Rather than opting for an either/or solution, the authors suggest that researchers, educators and practitioners such as communication consultants, want to choose the theory that best suits their needs in a given context.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Intercultural Communication , pp. 96 - 119Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020
References
Beugelsdijk, S., Maseland, R. and Van Hoorn, A. (2015). Are scores on Hofstede’s dimensions of national culture stable over time? A cohort analysis. Global Strategy Journal, 5(3), 223–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beugelsdijk, S. and Welzel, C. (2018). Dimensions and dynamics of national culture: synthesizing Hofstede with Inglehart. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 49(10), 1469–505.Google Scholar
Bond, M. H. (1987). Chinese values and the search for culture-free dimensions of culture: The Chinese Culture Connection. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 18(2), 143–64.Google Scholar
Bond, M. H. (2019). Traveling from the past into the future of cross-cultural psychology: a personal-scientific journey. In Hwang, D. and Hwang, H. C., eds., Oxford Handbook of Culture and Psychology, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 45–66.Google Scholar
Carraher, S. M. (2003). The father of cross-cultural research: an interview with Geert Hofstede. Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 8(2), 98.Google Scholar
Elkington, R. and Tuleja, E. A. (2017). How the communal philosophies of Ubuntu in Africa and Confucius thought in China might enrich western notions of leadership. In Chin, J. L., Trimble, J. E. and Garcia, J. E., eds., Global and Culturally Diverse Leaders and Leadership: New Dimensions and Challenges for Business, Education and Society. Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing, pp. 63–81.Google Scholar
Fischer, R. (2009). Where is culture in cross cultural research? An outline of a multilevel research process for measuring culture as a shared meaning system. International Journal of Cross-Cultural Management, 9(1), 25–49.Google Scholar
Fischer, R. and Schwartz, S. (2011). Whence differences in value priorities?: individual, cultural, or artifactual sources. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42(7), 1127–44. DOI: 10.1177/0022022110381429.Google Scholar
Heine, S. J. (2003). An exploration of cultural variation in self-enhancing and self-improving motivations. In Murphy-Berman, V. and Berman, J. J., eds., Nebraska Symposium on Motivation: Vol. 49. Cross-cultural differences in perspectives and the self. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, pp. 101–28.Google Scholar
Hills, M. D. (2002). Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck’s values orientation theory. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 4(4), 3. DOI: 10.9707/2307-0919.1040.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofstede, G. (1997). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. London: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, institutions and Organizations Across Nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Hofstede, G. (2006). What did GLOBE really measure? Researchers’ minds versus respondents’ minds. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(6), 882–96.Google Scholar
Hofstede, G. (2010). The GLOBE debate: back to relevance. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(8), 1339–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: the Hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), 9. DOI: 10.9707/2307-0919.1014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofstede, G. and Bond, M. H. (1988). The Confucius connection: from cultural roots to economic growth. Organizational Dynamics, 16(4), 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J. and Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W. and Gupta, V. (2004). Culture, Leadership, and Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and Postmodernization: Cultural, Economic, and Political Change in 43 Societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Javidan, M., House, R. J., Dorfman, P. W., Hanges, P. J. and De Luque, M. S. (2006). Conceptualizing and measuring cultures and their consequences: a comparative review of GLOBE’s and Hofstede’s approaches. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(6), 897–914.Google Scholar
Kluckhohn, C. (1951). Values and value-orientations in the theory of action: an exploration in definition and classification. In Parsons, T. and Shils, E., eds., Toward a General Theory of Action. Boston: Harvard University Press, pp. 388–433.Google Scholar
Kluckhohn, F. R. and Strodtbeck, F. L. (1961). Variations in Value Orientations. Oxford: Row, Peterson.Google Scholar
Leung, K. and Van de Vijver, F. J. (2008). Strategies for strengthening causal inferences in cross cultural research: the consilience approach. International Journal of Cross-Cultural Management, 8(2), 145–69.Google Scholar
McSweeney, B. (2013). Fashion founded on a flaw: the ecological mono-deterministic fallacy of Hofstede, GLOBE, and followers. International Marketing Review, 30(5), 483–504.Google Scholar
McSweeney, B., Brown, D. and Iliopoulou, S. (2016). Claiming too much, delivering too little: testing some of Hofstede’s generalisations. The Irish Journal of Management, 35(1), 34–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minkov, M. (2013). Cross-Cultural Analysis: The Science and Art of Comparing the World’s Modern Societies and Their Cultures. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Minkov, M. (2018). A revision of Hofstede’s model of national culture: old evidence and new data from 56 countries. Cross Cultural & Strategic Management, 25(2), 231–56.Google Scholar
Minkov, M., Bond, M. H., Dutt, P., Schachner, M., Morales, O., Sanchez, C., Jandosova, J., Khassenbekov, Y. and Mudd, B. (2018). A reconsideration of Hofstede’s fifth dimension: new flexibility versus monumentalism data from 54 countries. Cross-Cultural Research, 52(3), 309–33.Google Scholar
Minkov, M., Dutt, P., Schachner, M., Morales, O., Sanchez, C., Jandosova, J., Khassenbekov, Y. and Mudd, B. (2017). A revision of Hofstede’s individualism-collectivism dimension: a new national index from a 56-country study. Cross Cultural & Strategic Management, 24(3), 386–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minkov, M. and Hofstede, G. (2012). Is national culture a meaningful concept? Cultural values delineate homogeneous national clusters of in-country regions. Cross-Cultural Research, 46(2), 133–59.Google Scholar
Peterson, M. F. (2004). Culture, Leadership and Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies [book review]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 641–7.Google Scholar
Ralston, D. A., Egri, C. P., Reynaud, E., Srinivasan, N., Furrer, O., Brock, D., Alas, R., Wangenheim, F., Darder, F. L., Kuo, C. and Potocan, V. (2011). A twenty-first century assessment of values across the global workforce. Journal of Business Ethics, 104(1), 1–31.Google Scholar
Rokeach, M. (1979). Understanding Human Values: Individual and Societal. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Beyond individualism/collectivism: new cultural dimensions of values. In Kim, U., Triandis, H. C., Kâğitçibaşi, Ç., Choi, S. C. and Yoon, G., eds., Individualism and Collectivism: Theory, Method, and Applications (Cross-Cultural Research and Methodology 18). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 85–119.Google Scholar
Schwartz, S. H. (2006). A theory of cultural value orientations: explication and applications. Comparative Sociology, 5(2), 137–82.Google Scholar
Schwartz, S. H. (2008). Cultural Value Orientations: Nature and Implications of National Differences. Moscow: Publishing House of SU HSE.Google Scholar
Schwartz, S. H. (2012). An overview of the Schwartz theory of basic values. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), 11.Google Scholar
Smith, P. B. (2006). When elephants fight, the grass gets trampled: the GLOBE and Hofstede projects. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(6), 915–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Storo, J. and Jansen, A. (2007). The Norwegian man as father. Child Research Net. www.childresearch.net/ papers/parenting/2007_05.htlm (last accessed 2 August 2018).Google Scholar
World Values Survey. Who we are. www.worldvaluessurvey.org/WVSContents.jsp (last accessed 27 July 2018).Google Scholar
- 3
- Cited by