In “Figuring Foreigners Out”, the authors write about how each culture is unique based around five fundamental metrices. It is noted that people/groups within cultures will have some variations around the spectrum based on circumstances and the individual but overall, there will be similarities in perception and behavior between groups of people from the same culture. These five metrices include our sense of personal identity (Individualist vs Collectivist), non-verbal communication, perception of time (Monochronic vs Polychronic), degree to which we can shape our destiny (Internal vs External), and directness of our communication (Direct vs Indirect). Geert Hofstede also has his own framework for evaluating cultures and his work provides us with a simplistic tool that helps us easily analyze and compare different cultures based on Hofstede’s metrices. Hofstede used six dimensions to analyze cultures. They are power distance index (PDI), individualism (IDV), masculinity (MAS), uncertainty avoidance (UAI), long-term orientation (LTO), and indulgence (IDL). Hofstede’s individualism measure is similar to the individualism vs collectivism metric from “Figuring Foreigners Out.” But other than that, the two works provide us with a good framework and several tools to further understand different cultures and subsequently different languages. Yes, I pre-dominantly agree with these assessments. One aspect of the reading that I found a little confusing was that on the first article on Hofstede, it mentioned five aspects of culture but in the second article there was a sixth aspect of Hofstede’s framework called Indulgence. To be precise, were there five or six measures as defined by Hofstede’s research?
Using Hofstede’s comparative culture tool, I found that my home country of Bangladesh scores 80, 20, 55, 60, 47, and 20 on power distance, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, long-term orientation, and indulgence respectively. Our society is based around hierarchy and structure where there is a clear distinction between those at or near the top and the rest of society. The majority of those born into villages move to the capital seeking job opportunities and work most of their lives serving in different capacities such as home maids, cooks, drivers, and guards. There is a clear hierarchal order between these groups as shown by the nature of their interactions. However, we as a society tend to be more collectivist as the village, the extended family, or just the needs of the immediate family are prioritized over self. This has both advantages in the sense that we are always looking out for one another, but drawbacks include a lack of privacy, or the control to shape your own future as the needs of the family must come before the needs of the individual. Our religious beliefs and way of living prohibit the consumption of any mind-altering substances such as alcohol or other drugs. While some people do consume such products, the majority of the population does not which is why our indulgence score is as low as our individualism score. The language that I am studying is ASL so that would make my target culture the United States. Compared to Bangladesh, the US ranks higher on individualism, masculinity, and indulgence. I am not at all surprised by the US’s score on individualism and indulgence—a random walk along the UofR fraternity houses on a Thursday night is enough to back those scores. I am however surprised that women overall play a greater role in society in Bangladesh despite the inherent sexism that is rooted in our culture.
Replies