Essay on Culture Comparison

            The cultural framework that is used to choose the cultural dimension for the current essay is Trompenaars’s cultural framework. It was developed by Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner after rigorous research of different cultures around the world for about ten years. This cultural framework has seven dimensions, which include: Universalism versus particularism, Individualism versus collectivism, Specific versus diffuse, Neutral versus emotional, Achievement versus ascription, Sequential time versus synchronous time and Internal direction versus outer direction. The purpose of this comparative analysis is to compare the Chinese culture with the culture of Saudi Arabia. This culture comparison is based on a particular dimension of the culture. Culture of Saudi Arabia and china are quite different as both culture relates to different social norms, religious norms and cultural dimensions. The cultural dimension which is used for the comparison of culture is Individualism versus collectivism. Individualism versus collectivism cultural dimension will provide the grounds to access whether China and Saudi Arabia believe in personal freedom & achievement or group work and its achievements are regarded more important. In the present work discussion is started by providing information about Chinese culture and their core cultural values. Later on culture of Saudi Arabia is presented in the discussion with detailed information about social norms and Islamic norms.

Comparative Analysis of Saudi Arabian and Chinese Culture 

a.    Chinese Culture: The culture is defined by (Hofstede, 1991) as “the mind’s state as collective programming which helps to distinguish one group’s members from the other group or the category of the people”.

            The “group-orientation” is the main feature that belongs to the working style as well as the living standards of the Chinese. They prefer to work with groups of people rather than working individually. The Chinese are of the view that the groups provide them with the desired help and safety. For an exchange value, they expect loyalty from the others. They don’t appraise the individual rewards but love to involve others in the decision making the process. According to the Chinese people, these group activities help to avoid favoritism. This collectivism is also confirmed by many previous types of research. The group-orientation example may include an example of a Chinese-majority society. The features of this society also include the element of collectivism (Hofstede G. , 1984). The major Chinese concerns are about the enhancement of in-group harmony (Leung, 1984). The Western management theories have some cultural assumptions, and these become less appropriate on Chinese due to their group-orientation.

        Mostly, the individual-collectivism debates for Chinese Culture end up with the outcomes that Chinese-majority societies are also considered as collective groups of people. Also, the work-places are a determinant for the group-orientation of Chinese people (Earley, 1994). The cultural history of China dates back to almost four thousand years. Today’s cultural values of Chinese people are still influenced by the historical-cultural values. It contains four key elements, i.e., having respect for age & position (hierarchy-wise), group-orientation, face-concept and a value for the relationships.

        It can be said that traditional cultural values have a greater impact to build the cultural norms and values for today’s Chinese people. It promotes the collectivism among the people, i.e. to work as a group.

b.    Saudi Arabia: The debates on the culture of Saudi Arabia, i.e. whether it adopts and follows individualism or collectivism show that the people of Saudi Arabia also love to work as groups rather than individuals (Hofstede G. , 1984).

        The Arab people find this group-orientation as a source for providing two-sided benefits. It includes the provision of an opportunity to participate in the decision-making and get group-appreciation for work rather than promoting favoritism. (Ford, 2005) narrated that Saudi culture tends to be a collectivist culture. The Saudi people prefer to work in the groups rather than working at own (individually). They are of the view that by working in the groups, they have a chance to get the guidance and recommendations from their seniors as well as peers. This approach better helps them inefficient work-performance, learning and growing. The discussion-platforms provide Saudi people with a chance for social interaction. These platforms promote team-work, which is the first choice for Saudi people. Saudi Arabia is an Islamic country, and it tries to follow the Islamic norms and traditions to the possible extent, i.e. collectivism. For a collectivist culture, there is more emphasis on the group’s cohesiveness, so as is the case with Saudi Arabia. The Arab culture has its basis on the reciprocity of personal-relations and group loyalties. Society rules and norms are often over-ridden due to this loyalty factor.

The Saudi Arabian society is responsible for the group-orientations. The groups’ decisions are provided with the preference in work-settings.

Conclusion on Culture Comparison

        The cultural comparison of China and Saudi Arabia against a cultural dimension, i.e. individualism v/s collectivism showed that both of the countries have the same trends in work-environment as well as in their personal life. Similar to Chinese-culture, the Saudi-culture also follows group-orientation. This approach helps them to avoid favoritism among the individuals. The group members are provided a chance in decision-making.

References of Culture Comparison

Earley, P. (1994). Self or Group? Cultural Effects of Training on Self-efficacy and Performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 89-117.

Ford, G. a. (2005). Designing usable interfaces with cultural dimensions, in Human-computer interaction. 713-726.

Hofstede, G. (1984). Cultural Consequences, International Differences in work-related values.

Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, McGraw-Hill, London.

Leung, K. (1984). The Impact of Cultural Collectivism on Reward Allocation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 793-804.