Nathaniel Yohannes, Masculinity vs. Femininity

Hofstede's cultural dimensions can help us understand both masculinity and femininity behaviors. Masculinity and femininity are two different behaviors that society divides with different roles. Males usually take on the more dominant roles while females take on more nuturing or caring roles. Hofstede explained that cultures with high masucline traits tend to value supremacy, wealth, and succesful occupience, while cultures with high feminime traits tend to overlap on values like relationships, supportiveness, and quality of life. Which means if one culture values masculine traits then both genders in that region would follow the cultural values, same applies with feminime cultures. The dimension of culture is applied by the factors based on Hofstede's data. One factor is geography, his studies shows that for some reason masculine cultures are more likely in warmer climates than colder climates. Which can be seen in countries like Japan, Venezuela, and Mexico where they were on the near-top of the list in Hofstede's rankings of fifty countries and three regions on masculinity. Another factor is birth rates, where in feminime cultures females have more say in how many children she wants. Where on the other end men have more say on determining the family size in masculinity valued regions. Homosexuals can also assume roles as the opposite sex, which mean females can also take masculine roles or vice-versa. On Hofstede's rankings, the US was placed ranked 15th. It can be seen here in this country that it isn't uncommon for females here to achieve male-oriented goals, one example is females being in the armed forces. That's one good example on how over time females began to intergrate in the armed forces. Overrall, it's good to have a balance in society on male and female roles, because at the end it just makes up a better enviorment for everyone.

David Harmon, Uncertainty Avoidance

According to Hofstede, Uncertainty Avoidance is an individual's fear of the unknown or unexplainable and the extents to which they go to avoid them. The biggest example I see of this is religion itself. All forms of religion, and therefore this is not limited to one culture. People are afraid of the possibility that there is no divine Creator or that there is no afterlife or that there is no reason for life and there is no point to living. Now, I don’t mean to say that religion is a farce, nor do I mean to express my own beliefs on the matter, but if you look into the history books, you find that all religion can be traced back to man. Religion is a human’s way of assuring themselves that the questions they fear the answers to, are answered in the way they see fit and acceptable. Specifically in (most forms of) Christianity, there is a belief that when someone dies, as long as they have kept pure and good and lived life as God wills it, then they will be rewarded in the afterlife with heaven and pure happiness. This is the avoidance that alleviates the fear of the divine creator, the afterlife, and the reason for living.

Mercedes Talvitie, Uncertainty Avoidance

Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions can help the public understand Uncertainty Avoidance, which can either be strong or weak. Uncertainty avoidance is defined as “The degree to which people are threatened by the unknown or ambiguous situations and have developed beliefs, institutions, or rivals to avoid them.” If one were to have strong uncertainty avoidance then one would prefer to have defined laws and a high amount of control and regulations on its people. While if one has weak uncertainty avoidance then one prefers implicit and flexible rules and is keen on experimentation.

Many cultures can be seen exhibiting uncertainty avoidance. If it’s strong or weak it is usually correlated with religion. Protestant countries and ones with Chinese authority usually have low uncertainty avoidance, meaning they are willing to take risks and are not as concerned with ambiguous situations. Those countries that are said to have a low uncertainty avoidance rate could be said to be countries that have a shorter history since they have less of a risk when experimenting. Also these countries could have less of an uncertainty avoidance level if there are many cultures living there. Diversity is what could inspire change and they would embrace it. While countries that have high uncertainty avoidance levels are very calculated with their actions. This is why diversity would be low in that area because of the concern with being uncomfortable. Having many rules is what helps stop a country from having to low of an uncertainty avoidance rate. It helps them with a sense of security with their country and to be sure of their beliefs. Hofstede’s cultural dimension about uncertainty avoidance shows which countries are more tolerant to other cultures and which ones like to have premeditated actions.

Rudra Shevlikar, Long-Term Orientation

Long-Term Orientation is the fifth dimension of Hofstede. Long-Term Orientation means the dimension of culture that refers to values people hold that emphasize the future, as opposed to short-term values focusing on the present and the past. Long-Term Orientation was added after the original four to try to distinguish the difference in thinking between the East and West. Hofstede created a Chinese value survey, a questionnaire designed by Chinese scholars, which was distributed across twenty-three countries. It can be said to deal with Virtue regardless of Truth. From these results, and with an understanding of the influence of the teaching of Confucius, who was a Chinese philosopher whose ideas about the importance of practical moral values collected by his disciples in the Analects formed the basis of the philosophy known as Confucianism, on the East and long term vs. short term orientation became the fifth cultural dimension. Values associated with Long Term Orientation are thrift and perseverance and the ordering relationships by status and observing this order and has a sense of shame. And values associated with Short Term Orientation are respect for tradition, fulfilling social obligations, protecting one's 'face', respect or tradition and has the reciprocation of greetings, favors, and gifts. Both the positively and the negatively rated values of this dimension are found in the teachings of Confucius, the most influential Chinese philosopher. The U.S mostly focuses on short-term orientation while Asian countries focus on long-term orientation. So long term orientation focuses on the future rather than short-term orientation which focuses on the present.

Leah Michetti Individualism v. Collectivism

One of Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions is Individualism v. Collectivism. Individualism is “the degree to which cultures expect individuals to look after themselves and their immediate family,” and Collectivism is “the degree to which cultures expect individuals to belong to groups that are supposed to look after its members in exchange for loyalty”. This Cultural Dimension can explain the relationships between people of the same culture and how they interact with each other. The US is an example of a country with a highly Individualistic culture. On the other hand, Japan has a very Collectivistic culture. These two types of cultures differ greatly from each other. One attribute of Individualism is personal achievement. In the US, students who get good grades in school usually credit their own hard work and effort. In contrast, Japanese students do not take credit for their efforts; they give credit to their teachers and family. This is a prominent example of the differences between the behavior of Individualistic and Collectivistic societies.

In Individualistic cultures, individuals are expected to be responsible for their own actions, and take the blame when they have done something wrong. This differs from a Collectivistic culture because the members of the group or extended family are expected to be loyal to one another. The group or family takes responsibility for the mistakes of a single member. In exchange for this loyalty, the group offers protection for individuals. In this sense, Collectivism can be compared to a gang, but with good intentions. Individualism revolves around only looking out for yourself and your immediate family. The saying “it’s a dog-eat-dog world,” is a good way of explaining the roles of individuals in this type of culture. When everyone is looking out for their best interests, competition arises, and many individuals will do whatever it takes to succeed. This ambition isn’t as aggressive in Collectivistic cultures because people are always looking out for each other. This demonstrates how different the relationships are in Individualistic and Collectivistic cultures.

Conner Eveker, Aggressiveness

Culture is a distinctly human factor that plays a role in aggression. A person's beliefs about the social acceptability of an aggressive act are major predictors of their behavior. According to Hostede's cultural dimensions there is a gender gap, and women's values are said to be more similar across cultures. Women are thought of as being gentle and caring. In cultures where there is a low aggressiveness value these values are shared with the men as well. However, other cultures have more distinctive values for men such as competition, assertiveness, and "looking out for Number One." In such cultures, the values of women also move somewhat towards the Aggressiveness end of the spectrum, although not as much as men's do. This is where the Aggressiveness trait shows. Men are set out to be the alpha male and take control of the group to lead it. When having this stature there is the constant need to show you masculinity which leads to the aggression. Some scholars believe that behaviors like aggression may be partially learned by watching and imitating the behavior of others. This is mostly due to the makings of the culture you associate with. A good example would be the presentation we were showed in psychology class the other day. In the Asian culture we see that they focus more on their faults and what they needed to work on to be better contributors to their society as a whole. But in the American culture they focused on the positive actions and the accomplishments they have overcome; as well as illustrating that they could preform tasks on their own without the help of others.

Kaushal Sedhai, Individualism vs. Collectivism

Individualism and collectivism were one of the five cultural dimensions founded by Geert Hofstede. On one side, individualism explains how the societies' individuals are concerned about only themselves and their own family. On the other side we have collectivism where the individuals in a society are part of a group and are concerned not only about themselves but others in their group. Their group might consists of their whole family like grandparents, uncles, and their friends. Individuals who practice individualism only have to worry about their small family including themselves and might be independent and self-progress minded. One of the examples of where they practice individualism is United States. Though people do have communication with others in their society, they're only concerned about their own success. Also usually, Americans main goal is a better quality and higher standard of living than their parents. On the other hand we have countries like Guatemala where the individuals depend on their society and their society depends on them. The individuals feel like they have a duty to do not only for themselves but for their whole society. These people are usually dependent and have a close relationship with everyone in their society. Their society's success to them is like their own.

Connor Higgins, Indulgences vs. Restraint

Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory of indulgences says that societies that have a higher ratio of indulgence are more free to satisfy themselves. So could you say that the more indulgence there is in a society- the less culture, the less civility there is? I say no... the most cultured of societies, for example Spain, drink wine and partake in other sources of alchohle and drugs even before lunch or commonly start having sex at the young age of sixteen, but still have somehow managed the ability to build Huge Cathedrals or be the ones to revoulutionize the art of warfare in building great castles. Spain has somehow made a culture by still fullfilling their indulgences.
Culture or the lack thereof does not affect social restraint either. As an example China is completly defined by culture, their very social restraint has been developed by their culture. This society has built a world wonder and is the current largest resource supplier in the world, but has one of the strictists societies seen in any culture. Can it be said then, that if Spain, a soceity of with a high ratio of indulgence, and China, a socitey with a lot of social restraint both have culture to spare that neither the social acceptance of Indulgences or Restraint effect culture, only the behavior of those individuals in the society.

Mark Dionisio, Long and short term Orientation

Long-term and Short-term Orientation is the fifth dimension that Hofstede added after adding the first four Culture Dimensions. Long-term Orientation can be identified with having persistence being defined as a "firm or obstinate continuance in a course of action in spite of difficulty or opposition." It can also be identified by having a sense of shame, thrift which is defined as "the quality of using money and other resources carefully and not wastefully." Finally ordering relationships by status and observing this order. Meanwhile, Short-term Orientation can be associated with personal steadiness and stability, such as trying to get a good education or a good job, protecting your "face" or reputation, and giving the reciprocation of greetings, favors and gifts. In the studies of Hofstede it shows that the Asian countries particularly China, has more of a Long-term Orientation base then elsewhere in the world. Some examples of this would be a chinese student going to school and that child fails a test, that student would feel more shame then someone from the United States because they have different Orientation. Another example would be an Asian family shopping just for the needed objects while a Caucasian family may get something unneeded such as a flat screen television or tickets to a football game. Short-term Orientations examples would be people in the United States trying to get money any means possible for money and their financial stability. Another example of Short-term Orientation would be schools in the United States, students would say hello to fellow students or teachers and if a special event comes give presents to others that seems fit. Just like how both Long-term and Short-term Orientation differ from each other, different cultures differ from each other, so each culture has their own different way of Orientation.

Maria Sueng, Collectivism

Hofstede's cultural dimensions can help us understand collectivism, state in which members of a group look after each other member in order to progress equally, at the same rate, rather than individually grow in society. This typical cultural dimension purposely eliminates "Ego" and identity , to impose benefits for the community instead of the well-being of an individual or the minority group; in other words, collectivism has the power to sacrifice a body for the advantage of the majority of its population. Some goals that they are submitted to accomplish are the best for them, and seek and secure: health, justice, peace, and prosperity, equally distributed in their group. Hofstede explain that in a collective society, members of a group might face worries and express behavior that are extreme due to the fact that they have each other to depend and rely on. They focus on working together to pull the group up. Another singular behavior of a collective mind is imposing fairness for an entire group or nationality through laws rather than supporting independence and democratic views. They also are focus on mundane issues that negatively or positively affects the earth like global warming. Cuba, for instance, abolishes rights in favor of private property, therefore, any resource obtained within the country is the property of everyone as well as of no one. Everyone has the right to use it and no one has the right to preserve it. This concept lowers "Self", therefore, giving the group the idea to demonstrate concern and charity for each other. In comparison to the ideals of collectivism, they establish equality for everyone. Progressing equally together throughout the other surrounding societies and cultures. These collective minds are also exposed to sacrifice themselves, as a way to show loyalty to make the group grow.