Scientific criticism to Geert Hofstede’s research
Cross-cultural issues in European Human Resource Management

Contents

Abstract 2
Introduction 2
Hofstede’s findings 2
Hofstede’s Framework of Cultures 3
Power Distance (PD) 3
Individualism - Collectivism (IC) 3
Masculinity - Femininity (MF) 4
Uncertainty Avoidance (UA) 4
Long/short term orientation (LTO) 5
Some aspects of Hofstede’s model having provoked scientific criticism 5
Methodological issues 6
Cultural Homogeneity 7
National Divisions 7
Number and bipolarity of dimensions 7
Out-dated concept 8
Political Influences 9
Conclusion 9
References 10

Abstract
The high level of multiculturalism in the field of business indicates to raise awareness about cultural understanding. Researches in that line major refer to Greert Hofstede, who analyzes dynamics of cross-cultural groups and organizations. Undoubtedly, his model is as widely cited as criticized, because it is well-known pioneering research of national culture differences and their consequences.
In this short paper, I am going to examine Hofstede’s findings and the reason why his work faces criticism.

Introduction
Culture in business has been of utmost interest for the last two decades, and with increasing national diversity in nowadays business environment, culture itself is regarded as an important dimension. The beginning of a pilot study in that sphere refers to the Dutch social psychologist Greert Hofstede and his outgoing research of IBM Organization (Hofstede 1980).
Since the first publishing of The consequences of culture (Hofstede 1980; 2001) and Cultures and organizations: software of the mind (Hofstede 1991), cross-cultural widespread researches have revived, looming four and later five dimensions on the cultural horizon. He does these derivatives in order to examine work values in employees.