»management theories«

Geert Hofstede: Cultural Constraints in Management Theories

[p.18]
"Verité en-deça des Pyrenées, erreur au-delà" - There are truths on this side of the Pyrenées which are falsehoods on the other [quoting Blaise Pascal].

Hofstede's point is clear: "there are no such things as universal management theories",all theories are always bound to the cultural environment of the theorist. He proves his thesis by introducing management practices as conducted in different countries and by integrating them into a historical context.

Hofstede starts off by clarifying the etymological background of the words to manage, manager and management. The eldest record is to be found in Shakespeare's "Love's Labour's lost" from 1588: "Adieu, valour! rust, papier! be still, drum! for your manager is in love; yea, he loveth." The stem is based on the latin "manus" for hand and the italian "maneggiare" for training the horses in the manege. Later this idea was transferred to skillful handling in general. Hofstede makes also a connection to the french "menage" as in running the household.
Scott Adam Smith (1776) uses the group of words to describe the process (=management) as well as the people (=manager) involved in operating joint stock companies.
In the American sense - and at this point Hofstede already emphasizes the cultural constraints of definitions - management is understood as a class of people. "This class
(1) does not own a business but sells its skills to act on behalf of the owners and
(2) does not produce personally but is indispensable for making others produce, through motivation."

In contrast to the American idea of management he gives an overview over several countries:

• Germany
• France
• Japan
• The Netherlands
• The United States
• The Overseas Chinese

Hofstede also gives an overview over Russia and China. I will leave this out since he relies his assumptions only on literature.

[p.22]
Hofstede summarizes his findings that "Local management is part of this [= the cultural] infrastructure; it cannot be imported in package form. Assuming that with so-called modern management techniques and theories outsiders can develop a country has proven a deplorable arrogance. At best, one can hope for a dialogue between equals with the locals, in which the Western partner acts as the expert in Western technology and the local partner as the expert in local culture, habits, and feelings."

[p.23]
Establishing a theory of culture in management Hofstede concludes that management has a different meaning in all cultures. To understand the idea of particular management, its processes and problems one needs "considerable historical and cultural insight into local conditions. [...] Management cannot be isolated from other processes taking place in society." Management reflects and integrates the cultural specific ideas of family, politics, religion, science, ... To reveal cultural differences Hofstede conducted several dimensions characterizing cultures:
[p.24]

• power distance: in how far do people feel to be equal
• individualism - collectivism
• masculinity - feminism: the first assembling values such as assertiveness, performance, success, competition, while the latter refers to values such as warm personal relationships, service, and solidarity)
• uncertainty avoidance: are clear rules needed, are new things anticipated openly or rejected
• long-term - short-term orientation

While I had read another paper about these dimension already before starting my thesis, I leave Hofstede's statistics out at this point. I find the dimensions rather abstract and not helpful for understanding a culture. Much prefer anecdotes and stories. But that, of course, does not match with Hofstede who at this point wants to transfer practice into theory.


in: D.C.Thomas: Readings and Cases in International Management; Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2003.