realizată de Vikotriya Khaptakhanova 4 ani în urmă
740
Hofstede dimensions
The Hofstede dimensions provide a framework for comparing cultural values across different countries. This specific comparison focuses on the United Kingdom and Russia, highlighting various dimensions such as individualism, indulgence, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity, long-term orientation, and power distance.
A high score of 69 indicates that the British culture is one that is classified as Indulgent. People in societies classified by a high score in Indulgence generally exhibit a willingness to realise their impulses and desires with regard to enjoying life and having fun.
Long term orientation
With an intermediate score of 51 in this dimension, a dominant preference in British culture cannot be determined
At 35 the UK has a low score on Uncertainty Avoidance which means that as a nation they are quite happy to wake up not knowing what the day brings and they are happy to ‘make it up as they go along’ changing plans as new information comes to light.
At 66, Britain is a Masculine society – highly success oriented and driven.Critical to understanding the British is being able to ‘’read between the lines’’ What is said is not always what is meant. In comparison to Feminine cultures such as the Scandinavian countries, people in the UK live in order to work and have a clear performance ambition.
At 35 Britain sits in the lower rankings of PDI – i.e. a society that believes that inequalities amongst people should be minimized. Interestingly is that research shows PD index lower amongst the higher class in Britain than amongst the working classes
Hofstede dimensions
Recomendations
Having a low uncertainty avoidance enables you to try out new things and not be restrained by your fears of ambiguity, which could prove to be useful in your success
You could benefit more from having a higher long term orientation in the long run which will help you adapt better to the ever-changing life conditions
Power distance is relatively low compared to Russia, which means that questioning higher ranked staff members' decisions is generally tolerable and should be used