Saturday, August 22, 2015

National Cultures of Finland and China: A Comparative Analysis

Research based on cultural interpretations are gaining severe attention and are the elements that are adding to the process of comprehending national cultures of different nations for increasing the widespread importance in the international business trends (Mooij and Hofstede, 2010). A comparative analysis between the practices of national cultures as led by Finland and China, offers an insight into the process of understanding the cultural similarities and differences of Western and Eastern worlds.
This paper notes the cultural distances and the features that bridge gap between Finland and China through analytical overview of GLOBE (Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness) Model. The notable 9 dimensions of GLOBE Model - Performance orientation, Uncertainty avoidance, In-Group collectivism, Power distance, Gender egalitarianism, Humane orientation, Institutional collectivism, Future orientation, and Assertiveness; are the basic grounds for comparing the selected national cultures as in Finland and China. 

According to the House, et al., (1997) the term culture gets defined as an approach whereby people share similar values, motives, identities, believes and typical modes of interpretations over common experiences. This is a general practice that remains effective over the social, psychological, and even organisational levels of a culture.
With the increasing impact of globalisation, the above quoted definition suits best in
considering the national cultures of different countries for developing successful organisational structure. Further illustrations are noted by House, et al., (2004) where the thematic concern of national culture depend on values scores counted from various practices. As for instance, businessmen in international trading valued or otherwise desired more status of gender egalitarianism as against their practical experiences. The research of House, et al noted that with high value score there is connectivity between low score in practice. This is in contrast to conventional wisdom of considering the behaviour of people in a determined manner as they follow some predetermined values with high esteem. However, if people accepts something with low degree, yet perceived as good, then the absence of the same can value it with more esteem, and vice versa (see Appendix 1). In this context, the nine dimensions forwarded by GLOBE model depended on values. The derivation of GLOBE model states that the idea of culture is integral to the social or organisational values (House, et al., 2004).

GLOBE (or Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness) model attempts to understand diversified cultures on the basis of the values that are noted in the national language, demographic existence, followed historical heritage and religion, of the nation. There are 9 cultural dimensions noted by GLOBE model (see Appendix 2) that conceptualise the cultural practices and values of different nations at organizational level and here, the selected nations are Finland and China.
Application of GLOBE model in case of Finland refers to the cluster of Nordic Europe, including other Nordic countries like Sweden and Denmark (Boopathi, 2014). The image of maintaining cultural values among the Nordic nations appears to remain punctual, modest, honest and comparatively high-minded (Gupta, et al., 2002). In case of China, the application of GLOBE model derives that the Chinese culture is more into the trend of economic growth. There is the developmental structure that concentrates in adding sustainability to local cultural traits along with financial stability (Garcia, et al., 2014). A comparative analysis between Finland and China will bring out more advantageous and risk-oriented points between the global approach of sharing cultures for organisational growth.    

Aspects related to the deliverance of performance under collective approaches, intend to encourage and further intends to reward members of the group in terms of performing in a developed manner and with professional excellence (Javidan, et al, 2006). Moreover, the inclination towards the idea of offering excellence to performance reflects acceptance towards innovation by the respective nation. Accumulation of higher standards and consistently developing performance improvement are the result of cultural set up of the society (Javidan, 2004:239). However, as per the GLOBE model societies scoring high in this dimension lay importance to results more than the employees or the population that are serving the organisations. The declarations add that such societies remain value assertive and highly competitiveness, with material importance. China exemplifies this trend by following working hours that exceeds 8 hours routine and creates the impression of high performance (Shi and Wang, 2011). On the other hand, the nations that score low in this dimension are more concern in developing the essence of belongingness and the maintenance of loyalty among the employees and the people participating in organisational growth. The score of Finland in this respect remains low with rigid working 8 hours with result-oriented delivery of the work. Thus, this is considered as a nation that is involved in the maintenance of environmental harmony (Boopathi, 2014). 

The context of uncertainty avoidance in a selected national culture and its association to organisational approaches, aims in alleviating various instances of unpredictability in context of future events. As illustrated by Javidan, et al (2006) this is the dimension that lay importance to the attitudes in people for orderliness, absolute structure and maintenance of consistency. Nations scoring high on uncertainty avoidance depend on formalized national procedures and policies, and further verifying communications over records of writing, like Finland. As against in societies with low score depend on informal modes of communication and norms, as in China (House et.al. 2004).
The implication of GLOBE model derives that Finland holds high score on uncertainty avoidance, whereas China prefers to remain low in scoring for this dimension. Consequently, Unilever representatives find that the aspects related to social values and the practices as observed in the societies reveals the nation of Finland as a stronger entity in avoiding uncertainty, as against Chinese approach to the same (Paine, 2010). Finnish culture appears to be less comfortable in terms of handling the instances of uncertainty in the organisational set up and for the Chinese organisations; the approach is more relaxing while dealing with various instances of business ambiguities (Javidan, et al., 2006 and House et.al. 2004).

Considerations noted under this dimension are for individual ways of expressing loyalty, the sense of pride and adequate amount of cohesiveness with the family or an organisation (Li, et al. 2010). The national cultures that hold high score in this dimension are intend to have people who can maintain integrated standpoint in terms of generating stronger forms of cohesive groups. On the other hand, the national cultures that are scored low in terms of in-group collectivism hold people who are capable of looking after themselves (House et.al, 2004). Finland with higher scores in this dimension holds greater collectivism in maintaining values, whereas China excels the Finland in maintaining societal practices. China appears to be a collectivistic society that hols people with the essence of gaining common good in-group, and the same leads to the team works in organisational formulations. Finland rather prefers to have people with more leadership qualities and strong decision-making capabilities (Javidan, et al., 2006 and House et.al. 2004). Team works in organisational set up are much appreciated, yet participation of individual team members also remains under serious scrutiny in Finland (Boopathi, 2014).

The dimension of power distance as led by GLOBE model refers to the membership degree in a national culture that accepts the scope of power and the related privileges in terms of stratifying higher levels (Li, et al., 2010). As per GLOBE model, the nations that are with high score in maintaining power distance, offers social order and adequate amount of relational harmony for attaining stability in societal and organisational frontier. On the other hand, the nations scoring low at this dimension considers the use of power as an inevitable source for coercion, dominance, and corruption (House et al 2004:536). Chinese national culture holds this dimension at a lower score and thus the elements of coercion, dominance, and corruption appear common to Chinese society and organisations. On the contrary, the society and the organisational practices maintained in Finland, score high, and remain less hierarchical, where employees are independent to offer decisions and ideas for organisational growth. It is in Chinese culture that the political dominance and misuse of hierarchical structures are common, whereas Finland is still independent enough in maintaining transparency with people involved in its developments.  

The dimension of gender egalitarianism is related to the minimised range of collective aspects in the frontier of gender equality. As per this dimension, national cultures with lower scores in GLOBE model show greater domination of the male and vice versa (Li, et al., 2010). The Finnish cultural set up as assessed under this dimension show more hold of gender egalitarianism, as against China. The societal practices in Chinese culture are male dominating, whereas the Finnish society is free for women authoritative holds. Though as noted by Shi and Wang (2011) things are changing in China and more importance to gender equality gets initiated in the organisational and societal values of China. However, as marked by Boopathi (2014), the Finnish societal way of maintaining values is still at much higher rank than any other nation in terms of gender egalitarianism. Global marketing scenarios are definitely playing a great role in modifying the societal stand of maintaining gender egalitarianism in the organisational sector. Since leaders from the western organisations remains indiscriminate about genders, the same approach gets obvious in all the nations that have western leadership traits (Posthuma, 2009). 

This dimension refers to the approach of gaining collective encouragements and relevant rewards noted among the individuals, especially for remaining caring, generous, fair, kind and altruistic to other human beings (Venaik and Brewer, 2008). The GLOBE model declares that the national cultures that follows a society with the essence of high humane oriented values, remains inclusive of love, kindness, benevolence, altruism and generosity. On the other hand, those with low score in this dimension are subject to value the essence of comfort, pleasure, and self-enjoyment (House at.al. 2004). Boopathi (2014) in this assessment noted that Finland scores low in this dimension, whereas the score of China as marked by Shi and Wang (2011 a) are slightly higher. This refers to the derivation that the organisational set up and the maintenance of cultural values in Chinese society is more concerned about the welfare of people on humanitarian grounds. In case of Finland, the aim is to offer better and comfortable lifestyles to the people, as per their efforts in contributing towards regular growth of the nation or the organisation. Though there is a similarity in considering human first in any developmental approach in both Finland and China, yet the pressure of welfare appears more positive in Chinese society than that of Finland.  

The assessment of national culture under this dimension of GLOBE model refers to a determined point, whereby the organization and the society intent to follow institutional practices. The idea is to encourage and further develop the practice of rewarding collective distribution of the accumulated resources and consequences (Javidan, et.al, 2006). This is a dimension that lay importance to individual-encouragement in order to gain integrated and wide ranged entities in maintaining harmony and adequate amount of cooperation in the social and organisational set up. This however, is attained at the expense of individual freedom or the considerations related to autonomy of the person in particular (Javidan, et al., 2005). Finland appears high with its score under the verifications initiated by the GLOBE model, whereas China is comparatively a few points away from its rank (Javidan, et al., 2006 and House et.al. 2004). In case of Finland the aspects related to institutional culture is more about having members with the assumption that they are very highly interdependent in reference to the society or the organisation wherever they dwell. National culture in Finland holds that it is fair enough to maintain societal practices that are ‘way things are’, against the follow up of social values that is the ‘way things should be’, as in Chinese national culture.

National cultures that are concerned about being future-oriented, are successful in relating their individual participation in getting engaged with future development of the society or the organisation (Javidan, et al., 2006). The societies like Finland in this respect denotes planning approaches under systematic persuasion of various projects (Javidan, et al., 2006). However, for China though the society is very much future-oriented, yet in many aspects lacks in gaining economic success (Venaik and Brewer, 2008). From the scores attained by implementing GLOBE model, it can be clearly marked that Finnish societal practices are highly rated for being future-orientated under strategic formulations, though at the same time its societal values stand against this score. China too shows contradictory scores in terms of maintaining societal values and practices. Both these nations are concerned about their future and are equally making efforts in meeting the norms of long-term growth. Thus, though the scores vary, yet the efforts cannot be ignored. 

This dimension appears common in case of both Finnish and Chinese national cultures. Both these cultures maintain high aspirations in terms of achieving assertive growth ad sustainability. As per the scores gained from GLOBE model, Finland scores low in terms of both societal practices and value maintenance. China too scores very close to Finland, though comparatively little more (Venaik and Brewer, 2008). This clarifies that the social values as noted by GLOBE model in China appears to have higher aspects of assertiveness. This relevantly values the edge of growing global competitiveness and aims in attaining success. Finland, though scores low in the dimension of assertiveness, affirms adequate amount of cooperation, maintenance of organisational transparency and positive working environment (Grove, 2004 & House, 2004). It is necessary to note here that, in both these national cultures the assertiveness is much preferred though they score differently. Offer value to competition in the periphery of globalisation is a compulsion for both these nations. The zeal and strategic implementation of successful formulations too remain integral to the process of growth and thus, are much accepted by the both these national cultures.
Eventually, from the comparative analysis of the national cultures of Finland and China, based on GLOBE model, it can be noted that the there are many points where these nations differ from each other. Their outlook towards the understanding of societal practices and values differ extensively. However, what makes these culture appreciate each other, is in getting concerned about future growth and confirming the dame with all assertion.  The contrasts are much noted in the dimensions of Uncertainty avoidance, In-Group collectivism, Power distance, Gender egalitarianism, Humane orientation, Institutional collectivism. On the other hand, when it comes to Performance orientation, Future orientation, and Assertiveness, both these cultures share similar enthusiasm. Both the cultures of Finland and China are interested in adding growth and sustainability to their developmental structures to the existence and in this pursuit, their values merge when it comes to the process of delivering performance, planning for future and adding assertions to their organisational escalation. This leads to the conclusion that business between Finnish and Chinese national cultures is possible, only of both the nations remain alert and absolute aware of their differences and act in bridging the gap for global growth.


Boopathi, S. N. (2014) A Detailed Comparison of Finland and India through Hofstede & GLOBE Study. Global Review of Research in Tourism, Hospitality and Leisure Management (GRRTHLM). An Online International Research Journal (ISSN: 2311-3189). 2014 Vol: 1 Issue 1
Garcia, F., Mendez, D., Ellis, C. & Gautney, C. (2014) Cross-cultural, values and ethics differences and similarities between the US and Asian countries. Journal of Technology Management in China. Vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 303-322.
Grove, C. N. (2005) Worldwide Differences in Business Values and Practices: Overview of GLOBE Research Findings. GROVEWELL LLC.
Gupta,V., Hanges,P.J., and Dorfman,P., 2002., Cultural clusters: methodology and findings. Journal of World Business, 37 (2002) 11-15.
House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Dorfman, P.W., Javidan, M. and Gupta, V. (2004) Culture, Leadership, and Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies. Sage.
House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Ruiz-Quintanilla, S. A., Dorfman, P.W., Javidan, M., Dickson, M. W., and Gupta, V. (1997). Cultural Influences on Leadership: Project GLOBE. In Mobley, W. (Ed.), Advances In Global Leadership, (Lead article, Vol. 1), JAI Press
Javidan, M., Dorfman,P.W., Luque,M.S.De., and House, R. J., (2006) In the eye of the beholder: Cross Cultural Lessons in Leadership from project GLOBE. Academy of Management Executives.
Javidan, M., Stahl, G.K., Brodbeck, F., and Wilderom,C.P.M., (2005) Cross-border transfer of knowledge: Cultural lessons from Project GLOBE. Academy of Management Executive, Vol 19, No 2.
Li Y., Duncan P. and Green M. (2010). A Comparison of the Cultural Impacts on Leadership Preferences between Overseas Chinese Petroleum Professionals and GLOBE Scores. International Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition in China, Beijing, China.
Mooij M., and Hofstede G.(2010). The Hofstede model Applications to global branding and advertising strategy and research. International Journal of Advertising, 29, 85-110.
Paine, L. S.  (2010) The Globe: The China Rules. International Business. Harvard Business Review. Jun 2010 Issue.
Posthuma, R. A. (2009) National Culture and Union Membership: A Cultural-Cognitive Perspective. Industrial Relations, 64(3).
Shi, X. and Wang, J. (2011 a) Cultural Distance between China and US across GLOBE Model and Hofstede Model. International Business and Management. Vol. 2, No. 1. 2011, pp. 11-17
Shi, X. and Wang, J. (2011) Interpreting Hofstede Model and GLOBE Model: Which Way to Go for Cross-Cultural Research? International Journal of Business and Management Vol. 6, No. 5; May 2011
Venaik S. and Brewer, P. A. (2008). Contradictions in national culture: Hofstede vs GLOBE. In: Cantwell, J. and Kiyak, T.. 50th Annual Meeting of the Academy of International Business (AIB), 50, 274-274. Milan, Italy

No comments: