# data[].attributes.body
People in individualistic cultures value individual freedom and personal independence. People perceive the world primarily from their viewpoint. They see themselves as empowered individuals, capable of making their decisions and directing the course of their own lives.

Collectivist cultures focus on the needs of the nation, community, family or group of workers.

# data[].attributes.body
What Is Individualism vs. Collectivism?

# data[].attributes.body
What Is High-Low Context?

# data[].attributes.body
"Culture hides more than it reveals, and strangely enough what it hides, it hides most effectively from its own participants.

—Edward T. Hall, American anthropologist and cross-cultural researcher

# data[].attributes.body
What Is Uncertainty Avoidance?

Charles Berger and Richard Calabrese developed uncertainty reduction theory to examine this dynamic aspect of communication. Here are seven axioms of uncertainty:

1. There is a high level of uncertainty at first. As we get to know one another, our verbal communication increases and our uncertainty begins to decrease.

2. Following verbal communication, nonverbal communication increases, uncertainty continues to decrease, and more nonverbal displays of affiliation, like nodding one’s head to indicate agreement, will start to be expressed.

3. When experiencing high levels of uncertainty, we tend to increase our information-seeking behavior, perhaps asking questions to gain more insight. As our understanding increases, uncertainty decreases, as does the information-seeking behavior.

4. When experiencing high levels of uncertainty, the communication interaction is not as personal or intimate. As uncertainty is reduced, intimacy increases.

5. When experiencing high levels of uncertainty, communication will feature more reciprocity, or displays of respect. As uncertainty decreases, reciprocity may diminish.

6. Differences between people increase uncertainty, while similarities decrease it.

7. Higher levels of uncertainty are associated with a decrease in the indication of liking the other person, while reductions in uncertainty are associated with liking the other person more.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Is The Difference Between a High-Context and Low-Context Culture?

# data[].attributes.body
Countries with High Overall Individualism

United States

Germany

India

Lebanon

New Zealand

Peru

Brazil

Taiwan

Saudi Arabia

United Kingdom

Argentina

# data[].attributes.body
Uncertaintity Avoidance

The uncertainty avoidance dimension indicates the level of comfort with unstructured situations, in which unstructured situations are "novel, unknown, surprising, and different from usual" (Hofstede 2011). The uncertainty avoidance dimension is different from "risk avoidance" (Hofstede 2011). It encompasses a culture's tolerance for ambiguity. Cultures high in uncertainty avoidance avoid unstructured situations with "strict behavior codes, laws and rules, disapproval of deviant opinions, and a belief in an absolute Truth …" (Hofstede, 2011).

# data[].attributes.body
What Is Power Distance?

Power distance refers to the extent to which less powerful members of organizations and institutions (including the family) accept and expect unequal power distributions.

This dimension is measured not only from the perspective of the leaders, who hold power, but from the followers. In regard to power distribution, Hofstede notes, "All societies are unequal, but some are more unequal than others."

In a large power distance society, parents teach children obedience, while in a small power distance society parents treat children as equals.

Subordinates expect to be consulted in small power distance societies, versus being told what to do in large power distance societies.

# data[].attributes.body
Source Link

# data[].attributes.body
Source Link

# data[].attributes.headline
The United States Is Well-Known as a Low-Power Distance Culture -- In fact, one of the lowest

# data[].attributes.subject
The United States Is Well-Known as a Low-Power Distance Culture -- In fact, one of the lowest

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The power distance concept originates from Geert Hofstede, a renowned psychologist, and professor. Before embarking on his career, he visited many places by the sea, which influenced his perception of cultural diversity and prompted him to perform a cross-country study that spanned 50 countries. After the study, he observed four cultural dimensions: power distance, masculinity/femininity, individualism/collectivism, and uncertainty avoidance. He also developed the power distance index to determine if a country has high, low, or moderate power distance. Countries with highly structured high indices are regarded as high power distance countries. Basically, they have a PDI score of 80-100. They include: Malaysia (PDI of 100), the Philippines (PDI of 94), Russia (PDI of 93), China (PDI of 80), and Indonesia (PDI of 78).

Characteristics of Countries with High PDI

Apart from having a high PDI, high power distance countries are characterized by:

High organization structure: Countries with high PDI have hierarchical organizations with a strict command and control structure

Communication: The countries also don't allow low-ranking individuals to challenge superiors

Decision making: Only leaders can make decisions, and subordinates can't challenge them

Classes: There is a large gap between the wealthy and poor

Accountability: Leaders in high power distance countries are hardly accountable for their actions

Merit: Leaders distribute power to family, friends, and allies. Conversely, low power distance countries require leaders to justify their position by merit. This means anyone can contest for a position because they believe they can lead

Independence: Low-ranking individuals are controlled and monitored closely. On the other hand, people in countries with low power distance have some degree of independence, with knowledge workers having significant freedom to practice their profession as long as they achieve a set of objectives

Paternalism: High power distance countries lead to paternalistic societies whereby governments control many aspects of an individual's life

High Power Distance Countries

With a very high score of 90, Albania is a hierarchical society. This means that people accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place and which needs no further justification. Hierarchy in an organisation is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, centralisation is popular, subordinates expect to be told what to do and the ideal boss is a benevolent autocrat.

With a score of 80, Algeria scores high on this dimension, which means that members of the society accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place, and which needs no further justification. Hierarchy is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, and the different distribution of power justifies the fact that power holders have more benefits than the less powerful in society. Status symbols of power are very important to indicate social position and "communicate" the respect that should be shown.

A high score of 83 on this dimension indicates that Angola is a hierarchical society. This means that people accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place and which needs no further justification. Hierarchy in an organisation is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, centralisation is popular, subordinates expect to be told what to do and the ideal boss is a benevolent autocrat.

With a very high score of 85, Armenia is a nation where power holders are very distant in society. People in this society accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place, and which needs no further justification. Hierarchy is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, and the different distribution of power justifies the fact that power holders have more benefits than the less powerful in society. The discrepancy between the less and the more powerful people leads to a great importance of status symbols.

With a very high score of 85, Azerbaijan is a nation where power holders are very distant in society. People in this society accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place, and which needs no further justification. Hierarchy is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, and the different distribution of power justifies the fact that power holders have more benefits than the less powerful in society. The discrepancy between the less and the more powerful people leads to a great importance of status symbols.

With a very high score of 95, Belarus is a nation where power holders are very distant in society. People in this society accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place, and which needs no further justification. Hierarchy is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, and the different distribution of power justifies the fact that power holders have more benefits than the less powerful in society. The discrepancy between the less and the more powerful people leads to a great importance of status symbols.

A very high score of 94 on this dimension indicates that Bhutan definitely has a hierarchical society. This means that people accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place and which needs no further justification. Hierarchy in an organisation is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, centralisation is popular, subordinates expect to be told what to do and the ideal boss is a benevolent autocrat.

With a very high score of 90, Bosnia and Herzegovina is a nation where power holders are very distant in society. People in this society accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place, and which needs no further justification. Hierarchy is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, and the different distribution of power justifies the fact that power holders have more benefits than the less powerful in society. The discrepancy between the less and the more powerful people leads to a great importance of status symbols.

At 95, Guatemala sits in the highest rankings of PDI - i.e. a society that believes that inequalities amongst people are simply a fact of life. This inequality is accepted in all layers of society, so a union leader will have a lot of concentrated power compared to his union management team, and they in turn will have more power than other union members. A similar phenomenon will be observed among business leaders and among the highest positions in government. The leader typically holds a considerable amount of concentrated power.

Iraq scores high on this dimension (score of 97) which means that people accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place and which needs no further justification. Hierarchy in an organization is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, centralization is popular, subordinates expect to be told what to do and the ideal boss is a benevolent autocrat.

With a very high score of 88, Kazakhstan is a nation where power holders are very distant in society. People in this society accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place, and which needs no further justification. Hierarchy is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, and the different distribution of power justifies the fact that power holders have more benefits than the less powerful in society. The discrepancy between the less and the more powerful people leads to a great importance of status symbols.

Kuwait scores high on this dimension (score of 90) which means that people accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place and which needs no further justification. Hierarchy in an organization is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, centralization is popular, subordinates expect to be told what to do and the ideal boss is a benevolent autocrat.

With a very high score of 100, Libya is a clearly hierarchical society. This means that people accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place and which needs no further justification. Hierarchy in an organisation is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, centralisation is popular, subordinates expect to be told what to do and the ideal boss is a benevolent autocrat.

Maylaysia - 100

Malaysia scores very high on this dimension (score of 100) which means that people accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place and which needs no further justification. Hierarchy in an organisation is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, centralization is popular, subordinates expect to be told what to do and the ideal boss is a benevolent autocrat. Challenges to the leadership are not well-received.

At a score of 81, Mexico is a hierarchical society. This means that people accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place and which needs no further justification. Hierarchy in an organization is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, centralization is popular, subordinates expect to be told what to do and the ideal boss is a benevolent autocrat.

With a very high score of 90, Moldova is a nation where power holders are very distant in society. People in this society accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place, and which needs no further justification. Hierarchy is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, and the different distribution of power justifies the fact that power holders have more benefits than the less powerful in society. The discrepancy between the less and the more powerful people leads to a great importance of status symbols.

Mongolia has a high Power Distance Index score of 93, indicating that the society values hierarchical relationships and respects authority figures. There is a significant power gap between those in authority and the general population, and people generally accept and expect unequal distribution of power.

With a very high score of 88, Montenegro is a nation where power holders are very distant in society. People in this society accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place, and which needs no further justification. Hierarchy is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, and the different distribution of power justifies the fact that power holders have more benefits than the less powerful in society. The discrepancy between the less and the more powerful people leads to a great importance of status symbols.

Mozambique's very high score of 85 indicates that it is a strongly hierarchical society. This means that people accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place and which needs no further justification. Hierarchy in an organisation is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, centralisation is popular, subordinates expect to be told what to do and the ideal boss is a benevolent autocrat.

With a very high score of 90, North Macedonia is a nation where power holders are very distant in society. People in this society accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place, and which needs no further justification. Hierarchy is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, and the different distribution of power justifies the fact that power holders have more benefits than the less powerful in society. The discrepancy between the less and the more powerful people leads to a great importance of status symbols.

At a very high score of 95, Panama is a hierarchical society. This means that people accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place and which needs no further justification. Hierarchy in an organization is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, centralization is popular, subordinates expect to be told what to do and the ideal boss is a benevolent autocrat.

Philippines - 94

At a score of 94, The Philippines is a hierarchical society. This means that people accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place and which needs no further justification. Hierarchy in an organization is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, centralization is popular, subordinates expect to be told what to do and the ideal boss is a benevolent autocrat.

Qatar scores high on this dimension (aggregate score of 93), which means that people accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place, and which needs no further justification. Hierarchy in an organization is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, centralization is popular, subordinates expect to be told what to do and the ideal boss is a benevolent autocrat. Power is centralized, and managers count on the obedience of their team members in return for protection from the power holders. The manager/boss is expected (and often the only authorized party) to make decisions. Titles and proximity to the Royal family play an important role and it helps the Qatari people place their colleagues or counterparts in the hierarchy, allowing them to give appropriate respect to superiors.

Romania scores high on this dimension (score of 90) which means that people accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place and which needs no further justification. Hierarchy in an organization is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, centralization is popular, subordinates expect to be told what to do and the ideal boss is a benevolent autocrat.

Russia - 93

Russia, scoring 93, is a nation where power holders are very distant in society. This is underlined by the fact that the largest country in the world is extremely centralized: 2/3 of all foreign investments go into Moscow where also 80% of all financial potential is concentrated. The huge discrepancy between the less and the more powerful people leads to a great importance of status symbols. Behaviour has to reflect and represent the status roles in all areas of business interactions: be it visits, negotiations or cooperation; the approach should be top-down and provide clear mandates for any task.

Serbia scores high on this dimension (score of 86) which means that people accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place and which needs no further justification. Hierarchy in an organization is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, centralization is popular, subordinates expect to be told what to do and the ideal boss is a benevolent autocrat.

With a score of 100 points Slovakia is at the highest end of this dimension compared to other countries. Remember that it is possible to score more than 100 points as Slovakia was not a part of the original survey. In societies scoring high on Power Distance it is perfectly accepted that some people have more power than others. It is accepted and expected that these people also use their power. Not in a negative way but to create clarity and structure for people around them. The Ideal boss can therefore be compared with a "good father" who supervises you, is highly visible and tells you what to do. Hierarchical organizations are normal. A key issue for foreigners to understand is that in spite of the very high score on PDI, a manager still has to prove him or herself in order to make people respect and accept decisions from above or the (foreign) headquarter. Visibility and showing results is key.

Suriname scores high on this dimension (score of 85) which means that people accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place and which needs no further justification. Hierarchy in an organization is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, centralization is popular, subordinates expect to be told what to do and the ideal boss is a benevolent autocrat.

Ukraine, scoring 92, is a country where power holders are very distant in society. Being the largest country entirely within Europe and being for almost a century part of the Soviet Union, Ukraine developed as a very centralized country. The discrepancy between the less and the more powerful people leads to a great importance of status symbols. Behavior has to reflect and represent the status roles in all areas of business interactions: be it visits, negotiations or cooperation; the approach should be top-down and provide clear mandates for any task.

At 81 Venezuela sits in the higher rankings of PDI - i.e. a society that believes that inequalities amongst people are simply a fact of life. This inequality is accepted in all layers of society, so a union leader will have a lot of concentrated power compared to his union management team, and they in turn will have more power than other union members. A similar phenomenon will be observed among business leaders and among the highest positions in government. This is regardless of political orientation (right-wing or left-wing) and holds true for parties which are in power or playing an opposition role in Congress. The President typically holds a considerable amount of concentrated power and this has been true for decades and even centuries. The main leader, even when democratically elected, tends to stay in power for a long period, exceeding a single mandate, and will try to avoid relinquishing power.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The power distance concept originates from Geert Hofstede, a renowned psychologist, and professor. Before embarking on his career, he visited many places by the sea, which influenced his perception of cultural diversity and prompted him to perform a cross-country study that spanned 50 countries.

# data[].attributes.body
Values affect intercultural communication because when people from different cultures interact, their messages and behavior are guided by and reflect their fundamental value orientation.

According to Schwartz, values are concepts or beliefs that pertain to outcomes and behaviors and guide the selection and evaluation of behaviors.

Although you have a unique set of values from your family, religion and many other factors, there are values that are generally representative of a particular culture.

# data[].attributes.body
American Values:

Individualism

Competition

Privacy

Equality

Informality

Future, Change, And Progress

Time

Achievement, Action, Work and Materialism

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Living in a foreign country and adjusting to a new culture can be a very rewarding experience. But, it can also be a difficult one if you do not understand the values and assumptions of the society. "Values" are ideas about what is right and wrong, desirable and undesirable, normal and abnormal, proper and improper. "Assumptions," as the term is used here, are the unquestioned standards about people, life, and "the way things are." People who grow up in a particular culture share certain values and assumptions. This means that most of them, most of the time, agree with each others' ideas about what is right and wrong, desirable and undesirable. They also agree, mostly, with each other's assumptions about human nature, social relationships. The values and assumptions of a culture shape the way people act. To help you adjust, we have compiled a brief explanation of why U.S. Americans behave the way they do. They are adapted from the first 17 pages of Gary Althen's book, American Ways: A Guide for Foreigners in the United States. Althen is an experienced and recognized international student advisor.

Individualism

The most important thing to understand about US Americans is probably their devotion to "individualism." They have been trained from early in their lives to consider themselves separate individuals who are responsible for their own situations in life and their own destinies. They have not been trained to see themselves as members of a close-knit, tightly interdependent family, religious group, tribe, nation, or other group.

Equality

US Americans also believe in the idea, as stated in their Declaration of Independence, that "all [people] are created equal." Although they sometimes violate this ideal in their daily lives, particularly in matters of interracial relationships, Americans have a deep faith that in some fundamental way all people (at least all US American people) are of equal value, that no one is born superior to anyone else. "One person, one vote," they say, conveying the idea that any person's opinion is as valid and worthy of attention as any other person's opinion. US Americans are generally quite uncomfortable when someone treats them with obvious deference. They dislike being the subjects of open displays of respect - being bowed to, being deferred to, being treated as though they could do no wrong.

In the US, men and women are considered equal under the law. While US Americans often violate the idea in practice, they do generally assume that women and men are equal, deserving the same level of respect. Women and men may be different, but they should be treated equally in all professional and social encounters.

This not to say that US Americans make no distinctions among themselves as a result of such factors as gender, age, wealth, or social position. They do, but the distinctions are acknowledged in subtle ways. Tone of voice, order of speaking, choice of words, seating arrangements-such are the means by which US Americans acknowledge status differences among themselves.

Informality

Their notion of equality leads US Americans to be quite informal in their behavior and in their relationships with other people. Store clerks and waiters, for example, may introduce themselves by their first (given) names and treat customers in a casual, friendly manner. This informal behavior can puzzle foreign visitors who hold high stations in countries where it is not assumed that "all [people] are created equal."

People from societies where general behavior is more formal than it is in the United States are struck by the informality of US American speech, dress and postures. Idiomatic speech (commonly called "slang") is heavily used on most occasions, with formal speech reserved for public events and fairly formal situations. People of almost any station in life can be seen in public wearing jeans, sandals, or other informal attire. People slouch down in chairs or lean on walls or furniture when they talk, rather than sitting or standing up straight.

The superficial friendliness for which US Americans are so well known is related to their informal, egalitarian approach to other people. "Hi!" they will say to just about anyone. "How ya doing?" (That is "How are you doing?" or "How are you?") This behavior does not reflect a special interest in the person addressed, but rather a concern for showing that one is a "regular person."

The Future, Change, and Progress

US Americans are generally less concerned about history and tradition than are people from older societies. "History doesn't matter," many will say. They look ahead. They have the idea that what happens in the future is within their control, or at least subject to their influences. They believe that people, as individuals or working cooperatively together, can change most aspects of the physical and social environment if they decide things to do and a schedule for doing them. The ideal person is punctual (that is, arrives at the scheduled time for a meeting or event) and is considerate of other people's time (that is, does not "waste people's time" with conversation or other activity that has no visible, beneficial outcome).

Achievement, Action, Work, and Materialism

"She's a hard worker," one US American might say in praise of another. Or "he gets the job done." These expressions convey the typical US American's admiration for a person who approaches a task conscientiously and persistently, and has a successful conclusion. More than that, these expressions convey an admiration for achievers, people whose lives are centered around efforts to accomplish some physical, measurable thing. Social psychologists use the term "achievement motivation" to describe what appears to be the intention underlying US American's behavior.

International visitors commonly remark that "US Americans work harder than I expected them to." What was once known as the "Protestant work ethic" may have lost some of its hold on US Americans, there is still a strong belief that the ideal person is a "hard worker." A hard worker is one who "gets right to work" on a task in a way that meets reasonably high standards of quality.

Directness and Assertiveness

US Americans generally consider themselves to be frank, open, and direct in their dealings with other people. "Let's lay our cards out on the table," they say. Or, "Let's stop playing games and get to the point." These and many other common phrases convey the US American's idea that people should explicitly state what they think and what they want from other people.

US Americans tend to assume that conflicts or disagreements are best settled by means of forthright discussions among the people involved. If I dislike something you are doing, I should tell you about it directly so you will know, clearly and from me personally, how I feel about it. Bringing other people to mediate a dispute is considered somewhat cowardly, the act of a person without enough courage to speak directly to someone else.

US Americans will often speak openly and directly to others about things they dislike. They will try to do so in a manner they call "constructive," that is, in a manner in which the other person will not find it offensive or unacceptable. If they do not speak openly about what is on their minds, they will often convey their reactions in nonverbal ways (without words, but through facial expressions, body positions, and gestures). US Americans are not taught, as people in many Asian countries are, that they should guard their emotional responses. Their words, the tone of their voices, or their facial expressions will usually reveal what they are feeling--angry, unhappy, confused, happy or content.

Time

For US Americans, time is a "resource" that can be used well or poorly. "Time is money," they say. "You only get so much time in this life; you'd better use it wisely." The future will not be better than the past or the present unless people use their time for constructive, future oriented tasks. Thus, US Americans admire a "well organized" person, one who has written lists of things to do and a schedule for doing them.

Others, especially non-Europeans, do not necessarily share the US American attitude towards time. They are more likely to think of time as something that is simply there around them, not something they can "use." One of the more difficult things many foreign business people and students must adjust to in the United States is the notion that time must be saved whenever possible and used wisely everyday.

In their efforts to use their time wisely, foreign visitors sometimes see US Americans as robots, inhuman creatures who are so tied to their clocks and their schedules that they cannot participate in or enjoy the human interactions that are the truly important things in life. "They are like little machines running around," one foreign visitor said.

Although this is a general overview of US American values and assumptions, it can be a helpful tool in understanding life in the US.

Source: PSU International Student Handbook

Resources

Adjustment tips

American Values and Assumptions

Stages of Cross-Cultural Adjustment

American Academic System & Common Terms

The Adjustment Experience

Academic Support

Health and Counseling Center

Advising Services

Contact us!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
American Values and Assumptions | University of Portland

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Living in a foreign country and adjusting to a new culture can be a very rewarding experience. But, it can also be a difficult one if you do not understand the values and assumptions of the society. “Values” are ideas about what is right and wrong, desirable and undesirable, normal and abnormal, pro…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Welcome to your information source for international business etiquette, manners, and cross cultural communication. As global business continues to expand and bring everyone closer, the critical element of a successful business outcome may be the appreciation and respect for regional, country, and cultural differences - known as cultural diversity and requiring good intercultural communication. In these pages you will find a wealth of information and resources on international business etiquette and manners to utilize during your international travels and overseas assignments. In fact, you may want to print a copy to review during your next international flight.

Etiquette, manners, and cross cultural, or intercultural communication have become critical elements required for all International and Global Business executives, managers, and employees. As international, multinational, transnational, multi domestic, and global business continues to expand and bring people closer, the most important element of successful business outcomes may be the appreciation and respect for regional, country, and cultural differences - known as cultural diversity.

Learning the skills of proper etiquette, manners, and intercultural communication contained in these pages of the International Business Etiquette and Manners website will give you a wealth of information and resources that you can immediately apply during your international business travels and overseas assignments. In fact, you may want to print a copy to review during your next international flight.

This Site is recommended and used by college professors to teach their business school students the importance of understanding the uniqueness of cultures around the world and how to apply the skills of proper business etiquette and manners to become more successful. Geert Hofstede's work on cultural dimensions has been integrated into each Country's page to help students better understand underlying cultural differences.

Introduction

Brief description of the country's population, cultural heritage, language, and religion.

Fun Facts

Special or unique notes, thoughts, or comments about the country

Geert Hofstede
Analysis

and see Having insight into the cultural dynamics of a country can be very helpful to understand why people act the way they do, and the appropriate way you should act while in that country. To assist with this understanding, each country page contains a Geert Hofstede Analysis. Geert Hofstede developed a model that identifies four primary dimensions to differentiate cultures. Hofstede Scores Explanation of Geert Hofstede Dimensions

Religion

Highlights the religious diversification within the country

Appearance

Highlights business etiquette do's and don'ts involving Dress, Clothing, Body Language, and Gestures

Behavior

Highlights business etiquette do's and don'ts involving Dining, Gifts, Meetings, and General behavioral guidelines

Communication

Highlights business etiquette do's and don'ts involving Greetings, Introductions, and Conversational guidelines

Resources

A guide is located at the bottom of each Country's Page listing Websites and reading materials applicable to that Country.

To reach an individual Country, Region, Resource, or Feedback - Click below

Thanks to the UTD Global MBA graduates who work

diligently on collecting the information for this Website

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
International Business Etiquette and Manners for Global Travelers - Understanding cultural diversity, cross cultural communication, and intercultural business relationships for success

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Etiquette, Manners, Cultural understanding for international global business relationships, using proper manners and etiquettes appropriate to each country. Learn local customs, gift giving, protocol, customs, negotiation tactics, cultural diversity, cross cultural communication with Geert Hofstede and Hofstede's analysis

# data[].attributes.body
How Do Cultures Measure and Value Time?

There are profound cultural differences in how people think about, measure, and use their time. In the US, time is money as is a common value in industrialized economies.

Workers are paid by the hour, lawyers charge by the hour/minute, and broadcast advertising is sold by the second.

Western cultures tend to view time as linear, with a definitive beginning and end. Time is viewed as limited in supply, so Western people structure their lives, especially business operations, by milestones and deadlines. Failure to meet them could be interpreted as having a poor work ethic or being incompetent.

This way of thinking about time is not universal, however. Beliefs about time remain profoundly different from culture to culture.

Other cultures perceive time as cyclical and endless. More importance is placed on doing things right and maintaining harmony, rather than worrying about getting things done “on time.” In India, for instance, deadlines are viewed as “targets” to be met in the context of competing tasks and priorities and the potential damage a delay would have on a particular relationship. (See HBR article linked below.)

# data[].attributes.body
Monochronic vs. Polychronic Cultures

Monochronic cultures view time linearly, where tasks are done sequentially, and punctuality is highly valued. Time is seen as a finite resource that can be spent, saved, or wasted. The United States, Canada and Northern European cultures (Norway, Germany, Switzerland, UK) are often cited as an example of a monochronic culture.

Polychronic cultures perceive time more fluidly, often multitasking and valuing the completion of tasks based on the importance of relationships rather than strict schedules. In these Latin American Southeast Asian cultures, such as Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador and India, Indonesia and Latin America and interruptions are more acceptable, and schedules are seen as more flexible. People are more relationship focused and do not put the same value on deadlines and punctuality.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
We all have the tendency to look at other cultures through the lens of our own. While this is natural, it can lead to misunderstandings when communicating with and managing colleagues from around the world. In my experience working and teaching across cultures, I've noticed one important area where this frequently causes conflicts: deadlines.

In order to understand how a supposedly black-and-white concept can be interpreted in different ways, you first have to understand how different cultures perceive time. Western cultures tend to view time as linear, with a definitive beginning and end. Time is viewed as limited in supply, so Western people structure their lives, especially business operations, by milestones and deadlines. Failure to meet them could be interpreted as having a poor work ethic or being incompetent.

Other cultures perceive time as cyclical and endless. More importance is placed on doing things right and maintaining harmony, rather than worrying about getting things done "on time." In India, for instance, deadlines are viewed as "targets" to be met in the context of competing tasks and priorities and the potential damage a delay would have on a particular relationship.

This isn't to say deadline-oriented cultures aren't concerned with doing a job well or nurturing relationships, but getting the job done on time is the primary capitalistic driver of being first to market. It often takes precedence over whether relationships may be negatively impacted. Time often literally equals money, in terms of costs, profit margins, and beating the competition for market share.

When these differing priorities (task/time versus relationship) are unclear or not taken into account, the result is misunderstandings among professionals that can lead to frustration, loss of trust between teams, missed targets and goals, and even financial penalties.

You and Your Team Series

Managing Across Cultures

I learned about how perception of time varies from culture to culture early in my career. I worked for a large U.S. electronics company in Amsterdam, where I was responsible for supporting customers across Europe, Africa, and the Middle East. I expected to interact with a diverse range of people and cultures, but I never realized that even within a single small European country, such as Belgium, which is not far from Amsterdam, two distinct cultures can coexist, each with a different way of thinking about time.

When I was asked to demo a broadcasting system to the Belgian government's Flemish- and French-speaking radio and television stations, I thought I would schedule a single demonstration in English that members from both services could attend; this seemed to be the most efficient and cost-effective approach. However, the aides I coordinated with strongly advised against that. Not understanding why, I took their advice and scheduled two separate demos: the Flemish delegation at 10 AM and the French delegation at 2 PM later that day.

At 9:58 AM on the day of the demos, no one had arrived. At 9:59 AM the members of the Flemish delegation entered the room almost en masse. Flemish culture, I learned, highly valued punctuality. This trait was reflected in their precise technical questions, which were primarily centered on how the equipment could improve time efficiency over their current methods. Understanding their values, I adapted my approach and the rest of the presentation accordingly.

Having successfully finished that demo, I assumed the French demo would be similar, and once again wondered why there was a need to schedule two.

At 1:58 PM there was no one in the room. "They'll all show up at two," I thought, but when 2 PM rolled around the room remained empty.

At 2:06 PM members of the French-speaking service slowly trickled in, laughing and conversing with each other. The demo didn't officially start until after 2:15 PM, and unlike their Flemish counterparts, the French delegation wasn't concerned with time efficiencies of the equipment so much as its ability to enable team synergies and creativity.

These two Belgian cultures clearly had differing views toward time. One was highly guided by it; the other approached it loosely, giving more weight to personal interactions and relationships. Both priorities are important in business, but what happens when, for example, you work in a culture that places greater importance on time and meeting deadlines and you must interact with a culture that does not?

Here are a few ways professionals can achieve greater intercultural understanding when dealing with time and deadlines:

Do your homework. You'll learn by experience, but researching the culture you'll be working with can save you a lot of potential missteps. The fastest way to do so is simply to talk to the people with whom you'll be working. Even if you work for the same parent company, different locations have different protocols and operations. People often are willing to share aspects of their culture when they see that you want to make the relationship work. In turn, they may be more inclined to be sympathetic to your cultural differences as well.

Communicate within the context of the culture. In order to get people from multiple cultures to meet an important deadline, appeal to what they value. If it's maintaining good relationships, stress how failure to meet a deadline will damage relationships and result in loss of trust.

Don't assume digital communication breaks through cultural barriers. Let's say you email someone in Japan and expect a quick response to a simple question...but then you don't hear from them until the next day or days later. Why might this be? Well, Japan's business culture prizes group consensus. The person you emailed may be consulting their team members and superiors before giving you an answer. So they are being thoughtful and respectful, rather than uncaring, but this might not come across over email. You can politely inquire about what is causing the delay and manage your expectations accordingly the next time you encounter a similar situation with someone from Japan or East Asia. Patience is key.

Perform the occasional status check. Situations change all the time. Unless you take the initiative to check in periodically, you may end up being the last to know the latest update. Do the people you work with still understand your priorities? Do you still understand theirs? Occasionally checking in on your relationships will help you adapt to changing scenarios.

There is no one-size-fits-all approach to addressing cross-cultural differences. When you work across multiple cultures, you must take on the role of a chameleon, changing colors depending on your environment. This is easier said than done, but achieving true intercultural competence comes not only from knowledge but also from continuous observation and adaptive practice. There are no shortcuts.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Different Cultures See Deadlines Differently

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We all have the tendency to look at other cultures through the lens of our own. While this is natural, it can lead to misunderstandings when communicating with and managing colleagues from around the world. In my experience working and teaching across cultures, I've noticed one important area where this frequently causes conflicts: deadlines.

# data[].attributes.headline
Individualism vs. Collectivism US Culture 

# data[].attributes.subject
Individualism vs. Collectivism US Culture 

# data[].attributes.headline
Cultural Influences Impacting Work-Life Balance 

# data[].attributes.subject
Cultural Influences Impacting Work-Life Balance 

# data[].attributes.body
One way to learn more about cultures is to examine their work versus life balance.

For this discussion we’ll consider work compensated time performing tasks and services for others that earns compensation, and life will be considered those activities, including family, church, volunteer efforts, and interactions outside of the work context that do not earn money.

In North America, a predominantly individualistic culture places emphasis on autonomy, personal achievement, and work efficiency. This often leads to long working hours and an ambitious pursuit of career goals.

Despite this, recent shifts in workplace culture have sparked discussions on remote work and flexible arrangements, aiming to provide employees with more control over their time and commitments.

Conversely, many Asian cultures, such as Japan and South Korea, exhibit a strong sense of collectivism and dedication to the organization. Long work hours and a cultural phenomenon known as “karoshi” (death by overwork) highlight the challenges of maintaining work-life balance. However, these countries have begun to address these issues through policies promoting shorter workweeks, encouraging vacation days, and supporting employee well-being.

In Europe, a diverse range of cultures yields varying approaches to work-life balance. Countries like Sweden and the Netherlands are known for their progressive policies, which prioritize shorter workdays, generous parental leave, and gender equality. Other European nations, while valuing leisure time, may still grapple with societal expectations around work intensity.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Although no country has fully adopted a 4 day work week, many countries are experimenting with one or have a short average working week. Here is the list of these countries.