Report Analyzing Hofstede Cultural Dimensions and French & Raven’s Five Bases of Power

Introduction of Analyzing Hofstede Cultural Dimensions and French & Raven’s Five Bases of Power

The use of force in change programs in any organization is presented on the basis of five perspectives on power dynamics and relationships with models of organizational change. This approach is already oriented towards the agent's fully used authority and reality (Boonstra & Gravenhorst, 1998). This tradition has its roots in a scientific tradition that has explored the foundations of power. However, if you look at it from the perspective, organizations must, therefore, demand senior management and change their change options. According to Hofstede's theory of cultural dimensions, Singapore has a much larger distance indicator as compared to various other countries. Therefore; the use of force in organizational change programs will be more effective in strategic Australia than in Singapore. This paper provides an overview of managing organizational change with the analysis of change and its relevant powers (Steenkamp, Hofstede and Wedel, 1999).

The paper begins with a comparison of Singapore and Australia, based on Hofstede's cultural dimension. Hofstede's theory of cultural dimensions represents the framework for intercultural communication. The theory describes the influence of society's culture on the value of members and presents how factors are related to the behavior of values with a structure based on factor analysis. There is debate about how national culture affects the power of French and French crows. According to French and Raven, energy has taken on five distinct forms. They call these forms a five-power base, which includes legal, special, cumbersome, profitable and expert. When organizational changes occur in Singapore and Australia, the effectiveness of electricity use in change programs is discussed in the report (Hofstede, 2011).

a) Hofstede Model of Cultural Dimension

 According to Leo, Russell-Bennett, & Cierpicki (2015), the cultural dimension of Hofstede's theory between Singapore and Australia is compared at six distances, with differences in power distance, personality, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, long term vision, and attractiveness.

Power Distance: This aspect is related to the degree to which less powerful members of domestic companies and institutions can accept and expect unequal power distribution. According to this dimension, the number of Singapore is about 74. In Singapore, organizations are experiencing a centralized power of their bosses and rule-based managers. Employees are expected to receive work orders. Manager's expected management and employment (Hofstede Insights, 2020).

Individualism vs. Collectivism: This dimension is the interdependence that society maintains among its members. Singapore is close to 20 in this dimension and has been identified as a collective society (Hofstede Insights, 2020). In Singapore, in the context of an organization, individuals are members of the organization, not individuals. Communication here is indirect, and collective harmony is maintained by avoiding open conflicts.

Masculinity vs. Femininity: This dimension identifies a fundamental problem that guarantees people's motivations by better portraying themselves through masculinity or by expressing their resemblance to a woman's condition. Singapore's score is close to 48 and it is more inclined towards women (Hofstede Insights, 2020). In the business world, humility and modesty are important qualities. There are no conflicts between private and professional life.  

Uncertainty Avoidance: It is important to understand for a society or culture how they react to the situation with unforeseen situations and uncertainty. It means how people adapt to the situation to avoid unknown circumstances and risks. In Singapore, the points in this dimension are measured at level 8. The people of Singapore follow different rules due to the high index of distance to the state. As a result, Singaporeans can avoid uncertainty. In a similar case, the intermediate score for Australia is closer to 51 as compared to Singapore (Hofstede Insights, 2020)

Long-term orientation vs. Short-term orientation: According to this dimension, society must maintain a certain contact with the past if it faces not only the present but also future challenges. In this dimension, Singapore is 72, which is close to the score that supports the cultural qualities of the country with sustained effort, vision, slow results, viability, and long-term investment (Hofstede Insights, 2020)

Indulgence vs. Restraint: This dimension reflects the degree to which people try to control their urges and desires in ways that encourage them. However, they should refer to relatively weak controls. Due to rules and regulations, Singapore has an average score of 46 (Hofstede Insights, 2020)

b) Influence of National Culture on French & Raven’s Five Bases of Power

French and Raven described the foundations of five powers: legitimate, reward, experts, repression, and enforcement. Over the next six years, an additional power base called information has been added due to the ability of individuals to control information. In this section, the essay focuses on the influence of national culture on these five power bases (Elias, 2008).

Legitimate: Legitimate authority refers to the authority that arises from the role or position of the organization. For example, the legitimacy of the boss when assigning projects, the police when arresting a citizen and the teacher when assigning qualifications. Others are happy to respond to requests from people who have accepted the legitimacy of this publication, whether someone likes it or not. Also, a person can set deadlines that can make employees consider them too ambitious (Podsakoff and Schriesheim, 1985).

Reward: Reward authority refers to the ability to reward, which includes salary increases, earnings, or work assignments. Reward power tends to be in line with legitimate power and is highest in the event of a reward deficit. This type of power can be transferred to someone in the form of public praise or something to someone in exchange for its fulfillment (Elias, 2008).

Expert: The expert power results from skills and knowledge. Employees specializing in an organization include long-term employees who have the expertise to make the most of their earnings. In this context, one can also use the example of Steve Jobs, who had the expertise to know the needs of customers before they expressed themselves. Technology-based high-end companies are characterized by their expertise. Many companies used a flat or matrix structure, which blurred clean lines of legitimate power, as they all communicated with each other regardless of the situation.

Referent: The different results of power due to the individual characteristics of the individual refer to the degree of choice or respect or desire with the same characteristics. Isolated power is also known as charisma, which refers to the ability to attract others, gain their appreciation, and spell them out. For example, Steve Jobs is an example of a different power.

Repression: Force of coercion refers to the ability to punish someone for snatching or failing to obey. The force of coercion often works through the process of fear, forcing people to accept things that would otherwise be unacceptable. A fine example of coercion represents a government dictator who causes noncompliance with physical harm (Blois and Hopkinson, 2013).

 Information: Information power is similar to experts, but the source is different. Experts work differently from accessing certain information. For example, the availability of pricing information allows you to obtain information during negotiations. However, within an organization, an individual social network plays a role in differentiating or forming information networks (Blois and Hopkinson, 2013).

c) Applying the Hofstede’s Model to Change Management

            It is vital to understand that every organization has to change its culture and dynamics after some time so that they can remain on course to compete with other organizations. But the organization has to face a variety of challenges when they try to bring change in their business processes in any given terms. So, organizations use a variety of models or concepts to smoothly continue with the change management process. One of the considerable models in this regard is the Hofstede Model of Cultural Dimension. There are four considerable elements to analyze the process of change management as per the Hofstede Model. The first one is power distance. In countries, where power distance scores high, then the culture of such a country will not allow any kind of power-sharing amongst people working in an organization. A common business model is that top management gives an order, and lower-level staff has to obey it. Keeping power distance in mind, it can be said that when change management process is adopted, it should understand that high level of power distance will also create distance amongst top management and lower-level staff, which is not a good sign for an organization (Rarick, 2008)

            The other important element to be analyzed as per the Hofstede Model for change management is uncertainty avoidance. This element explains how a culture reacts to various kinds of ambiguity and uncertainties, where the future is unknown. If an organization will have a culture, where uncertainty avoidance is low, then it is good news, as people with such behavior will welcome the change process, whereas if uncertainty avoidance is high, then people will be fearful to adopt any kind of change. The third element of the Hofstede Model is individualism vs. collectivism. In some of the cultures, groups are considered better, whereas, in some other cultures, the individuals are given more importance. An organization should understand if they want their change management process to be successful, then they will have to use the essence of collectivism. However, they can deal with issues and concerns of individuals (Walumbwa, Lawler, & Avolio, 2007). So, organizations should always go for collectivism instead of individualism. The last important element is called masculinity vs. femininity. The masculine cultures are linked with aspects such as competition, aggression, and materialism, whereas a feminine culture is associated with human development, cooperation, and collaboration. The organizations should focus on the elements of femininity in their change management process (Rarick, 2008)

            It is vital to know that sources of power have great influence in implementing the change. For instance, informational power has the capability to lead to a change, which is socially independent. If a manager asks his employee to adopt certain changes, as it will benefit him and the organization, then an employee will get this information to adopt change and will continue to do so without the reinforcement of his manager. The other power which is important for a change process is reward power. If a manager asks his employees to achieve something and they will get a reward, and employees change their behavior and process to get the reward, then it means that a socially dependent change has happened. If legitimate power is taken as a change agent, then it is important to understand that an employee will have to obey the orders of his supervisors due to the legitimate powers given by the organization so the employee will have no other choices, except going with the required change. Expert power can also be instrumental in the implementation of change. For instance, if an IT expert asks employees to adopt a changed process, which will increase their productivity by saving their time, then employees will go with the advice of an expert, because they believe that experts have the required knowledge. Referent power will always affect and inspire a target to act upon the footsteps of his agent being a model for him (Raven, 2008)

Conclusion of Analyzing Hofstede Cultural Dimensions and French & Raven’s Five Bases of Power

            After looking at all the aspects associated with the Hofstede Model of Cultural Dimension, and sources of power, it can be said that things are not that easy to understand when it comes to exercising the power of any kind. Moreover, when there are so many cultural dimensions to look at for a country, then organizations should understand those dimensions with a clear vision because these cultural dimensions will affect an organization in so many ways. If cultural dimensions are not understood well with their respective elements, then it will always be hard for organizations to handle their change management process. If each element is understood with the required attributes, the organizations can use them for a better future strategy to manage change in an effective manner. The role of sources of power is also critical for organizations because they can use these sources to look at different dynamics of change. If each power is taken with the change process in an appropriate manner, then each power will help to implement change with less number of issues.

That’s why; the organizations both in Singapore and Australia should realize the fact that if they would look at the aspects of cultural dimensions and sources of power, their management of change process will be better in so many ways, giving great results for a better future. As far as Singapore is concerned in particular, it can be said that they also need to improve on different terms as per their score in the Hofstede Model. For instance, high power distance is keeping the power in a centralized hand, and this kind of culture can be an obstacle in the way of innovation and creativity. It was good to see that Singapore is scoring low in individualism, and people believe in a collective lifestyle, and this essence should be encouraged in the category of power distance as well. The high score in femininity is good to have, but people should also realize the importance of competition to get ahead in the right direction. Singapore’s score for uncertainty avoidance is too low in so many ways. They need to increase this score by preparing their people by developing a social structure, where people are stronger to face any kind of uncertainties.

References of Analyzing Hofstede Cultural Dimensions and French & Raven’s Five Bases of Power

Blois, and Hopkinson, , (2013) 'The use and abuse of French and Raven in the channels literature', Journal of Marketing Management, vol. 29, no. 9-10, pp. 1143-1162.

Boonstra, J., and Gravenhorst, M.B. (1998) 'Power Dynamics and Organizational Change: A Comparison of Perspectives', EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF WORK AND ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY, vol. 7, no. 2.

Elias, (2008) 'Fifty years of influence in the workplace: The evolution of the French and Raven power taxonomy', Journal of Management History, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 267-283.

Hofstede, (2011) 'Dimensionalizing Cultures: The Hofstede Model in Context', Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, vol. 2, no. 1.

Hofstede Insights (2020) Hofstede Insights, [Online], Available: https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country/singapore/ [27 March 2020].

Leo, , Russell-Bennett, and Cierpicki, (2005) 'A Comparison of Australian and Singaporean Consumer Decision-Making Styles', Journal of Customer Behaviour, vol. 4, no. 1.

Podsakoff, , and Schriesheim, , (1985) 'Field Studies of French and Raven's Bases of Power: Critique, Reanalysis, and Suggestions for Future Research', Psychological Bulletin, vol. 97, no. 3, pp. 387-411.

Rarick, C., (2008) 'Cross-Cultural Adaptability of Organizational Change Interventions', SSRN.

Raven, B., (2008) 'The Bases of Power and the Power/Interaction Model of Interpersonal Influence', Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1--22.

Steenkamp, J.-B., Hofstede, F., and Wedel, (1999) 'A Cross-National Investigation into the Individual and National Cultural Antecedents of Consumer Innovativeness', Journal of Marketing, vol. 63, no. 2.

Walumbwa, , , Lawler, , and Avolio, B., (2007) 'Leadership, Individual Differences, and Work‐related Attitudes: A Cross‐Culture Investigation', Applied Psychology, vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 212 - 230.

Xiao Han, N.K.D.B. (2018) 'Deception Techniques in Computer Security: A Research Perspective'.