Gender differences among public sector bank employees

Gender differences and similarities on the cultural dimension of individualism and collectivism: A study on public sector bank employees

 Shriram Venkatraman and P Govinda Reddy 

Indian Journal of Education and Information Management,

Vol.1, No.2, February, 2012

Though individualism and collectivism are bipolar concepts, Hofstede attempted to quantify the dimension based on an extensive research. This paper strives to follow Hofstede’s survey questions, explore the pattern on the cultural dimension of individualism and collectivism, and investigate if this pattern differs based on gender in a public sector bank environment. It strives to understand this cultural dimension through statistical tests conducted on the data collected from 427 public sector bank employees in Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.

The questionnaire on individualism and collectivism strives to understand the cultural

orientation of Public sector bank employees. This questionnaire contains four questions specific to traits of individualism and collectivism and has been borrowed from Hofstede’s Value Survey Model 2008. The four questions are in the form of statements with five response choices which are as follows - utmost important, very important, moderate importance, little importance and very little or no importance. The respondents were encouraged to think of an ideal profession, disregarding their present profession.  In choosing an ideal profession, they were asked to select an answer choice for each of the statements based on their perception. The statements are as follows:

a) Have sufficient time for your personal/ home life

b) Have security of employment

c) Do work that is interesting

d) Have a job respected by your family and friends

These questions were borrowed as it was felt that they were relevant for the sample used in this study.

The respondents were 427 Banking professionals belonging to a large public sector

bank. The geography was limited to Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. The survey aimed at getting an easy access to professionals and the professionals were selected through convenience sampling from the ranks of an Officer to that of a Senior Manager, within the Chennai circle of this bank. The demographic factor ‘Age’ was collected as a continuous variable and was then segmented into three categories namely ‘26 yrs to 35 yrs’, ‘36 yrs to 45 yrs’ and ‘46 yrs and above’. In order to identify the gender differences, the data were gathered from both the male and female employees of this bank. The survey was exploratory in nature.  Treating the survey responses as continuous data, statistical analyses were performed on the survey data.

It is worthwhile observing that female respondents score higher than male respondents in their responses to all statements, which makes their average score higher than that of their male counterparts and thus leads to statistical significance.

For a respondent, irrespective of gender, the results calculated through Hofstede’s Value Survey Model methodology reveals that public sector bank employees are Collectivistic in orientation. These results coincide with the results obtained by performing statistical analysis. Further, the data clearly show that females have a slightly higher likelihood of choosing collectivism over individualism. This observation of a higher proportion of females choosing collectivistic orientation over individualism is interesting and worth exploring, given the general perception that India is a collectivistic society and that Indian females are generally collectivistic in thinking compared to that of Indian males. However, as mentioned above it is also interesting to observe that females score higher than males in the statement indicating individualism. Transposing an average respondent’s profile on gender, leads one to assume that both female and male respondents want their jobs to be secured, interesting and give enough amount of personal time. However, a female respondent wants her job to be respected by people around her than her male counterpart. Though, the authors feel that these results cannot be extrapolated to represent a country, it nevertheless represents, the attitude of that particular public sector bank employees in Chennai, India. Although, scope for future research exists in terms of performing the same research on private bank employees and performing a comparative study of the attitude of the two groups, this survey can definitely be extended to several other industries as well.

Individualism and Collectivism

Individualism Vs. Collectivism: A Study on Students. 

G.Suryanarayana Reddy and P.Govinda Reddy

Management Matters, Vol.1, Issue 2, March-August 2004

A questionnaire was prepared by using seven constructs for measuring individualism and eight constructs for measuring collectivism from Oyserman et al. 2002.  Each item was given seven responses with response one indicating “not at all characteristic of me” and response seven indicating “completely characteristic of me”.  The questionnaire was administered to 100 M.B.A. students of Madras University, Chennai, India in the year 2003.

The factor analysis had given rise to six rotated factors: Group orientation, achievement orientation, in-group harmony, collectivist conscientiousness, distinctiveness of private and public spaces and autonomy.  Three represent individualistic characteristics and the other three represent collectivist orientations.  As they are orthogonal, any one of these orientations can be developed independent of others.  One type of orientation among these six factors can not assist or hinder any other orientation. 

The present study points out that a sample from Chennai based M.B.A. students showing the characteristic of individualistic cultural domains.  This study also points out that each of these concepts consists of different orthogonal domains.  As traditional societies become more and more modern, individualism and collectivism will become too broad concepts to differentiate national cultures.  Narrower domains need to be developed to differentiate national cultures and even sub-cultures within a nation.  

Sam Walton’s Rules of Business and Cultural Dimensions of Hofstede and Trompenaars

Sam Walton’s Rules of Business and Cultural Dimensions of Hofstede and Trompenaars

 

 Shriram Venkatraman, G.V. Suresh and P.Govinda Reddy

Proceedings of First International Conference on Business Anthropology which was held during May 17-20, 2012 at Sun Yat-Sen University in Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China, edited by Confeence Committee, Pp.155-171.

Several social sciences and management experts give credence to the fact that the culture of an organization is influenced to a large extent by its founder or leader, who is mostly an entrepreneur in a Business environment.  The founder/leader/entrepreneur in turn can be influenced by the society’s culture that he/she lives in. Wal-Mart Stores Inc., as a retailer tops the list of fortune 500 companies. Though, giant in size, execution and revenues, it portrays a quality that still follows the legacy and the culture built by its founder Mr. Sam Walton. His list of ten rules for a successful business is still followed religiously at Wal-Mart and is also a motivator to several developing entrepreneurs. The rules laid down by Mr. Sam Walton are Commit to your business, Share your profits, Motivate your partners, Communicate everything possible, Appreciate everything, Celebrate success and find humor in your failures, Listen to everyone, Exceed your customers’ expectations, Control your expenses and Swim upstream. Though the rules/ideas might not be conceptually new, they are appreciated because of the person from whom it flows. As Sam Walton himself says in his biography ‘Made in America’, the rules he put forth have originated from his empirical experience, where each of these rules have been personally tried and tested over time by him.

Albeit understanding a society’s culture was made simple with the introduction of Cultural Dimensions by Social Scientists like Hofstede and Trompenaars, it will be interesting to examine the business rules followed by Wal-Mart against these cultural dimensions.  However, this paper builds on the cultural model for entrepreneurship developed by Lee and Peterson (2000), which focuses on the dimensions introduced by Hofstede and those of Trompenaars.  This paper explores the ten Rules of Sam Walton and discusses these rules in the light of   the cultural dimensions of Hofstede and Trompenaars.

Lee and Peterson’s work forms the basis of the cultural dimensions of Hofstede and Trompenaars for a successful entrepreneurial environment, which is once again correlated with the Cultural dimensions of United States. The paper evidenced the correlation of Sam Walton – a very successful entrepreneur’s values and ideals with the cultural model of entrepreneurship of Lee and Peterson.

A conducive entrepreneurship environment according to Lee and Peterson’s cultural model of entrepreneurship created by the entrepreneur as a leader would be to maintain a Weak Uncertainty Avoidance, Low Power Distance, High Levels of Masculinity, Individualistic, Achievement oriented and Universalistic in approach.   

When Sam Walton’s Business Rules are fitted with both Lee and Peterson’s cultural model of entrepreneurship and a Rule by Rule approach to see its fit with the dimensions of Hofstede and Trompenaars, one gets to witness that for a conducive entrepreneurship environment created by the entrepreneur as a leader would be to maintain a Weak Uncertainty Avoidance, Low Power Distance, a balance between Masculinity and Feminity, a balance between Individualism and Collectivism, be Achievement oriented and Universalistic in approach. An undercurrent of the dimension of Internal Control that needs to be exerted by an entrepreneur is also visible.

It also becomes interesting to note that though Sam Walton exerts certain aspects to fit in with Feminity or Collectivism, it also has an undercurrent of a strategy that finally aims to outdo the competition, which can be a very Masculine characteristic. Similarly is the case with Collectivism too. His rules thus, very clearly say that one needs to have qualities of Feminity and Collectivism, but at the same time, not lose the big picture, that business is competition.

In view of this, studies such as this show that branding National Cultures as the culture of people of that specific nation, need not work always. Though, United States of America is typically called as a Masculinity oriented, Individualistic culture, Sam Walton’s moderation in these dimensions show otherwise. He is very American (even his book is called “Made in America”), however, not all his thoughts and values reflect a Masculine oriented Individualistic culture. Individual case studies of leaders with influence such as Sam Walton might reflect and repose a better understanding of National Cultures.

This exercise is an attempt at showing that individual level case studies of values and ideals of successful entrepreneurs, can throw immense light on the true nature of cultural dimensions. Further, these dimensions might change on a case by case basis. The values and the cultural dimensional fit of the values of a first generation entrepreneur, as compared to a Chief Executive or to a second generation owner of family business might be different. This is also a step towards understanding that “One Size Does Not Fit All”.

The study is a step in striving to understand analytically the values of a successful entrepreneur in terms of cultural dimensions and conducive entrepreneurial environment; however, empirical evidence might be needed to understand this further.

Such studies with entrepreneurial values of successful entrepreneurs in growing economies like India and China need to occur more often to understand the cultural systems of these countries much better. As emerging economies, attracting international attention, there is an urgent need to conduct research into the values and ideals of successful entrepreneurs belonging to these countries and quantify them through cultural dimensions in order to gauge the changes in cultural value systems and understand the effect of globalization in these economies. This can also provide an understanding of the direction that these economies are heading towards.

Individualism and Collectivism

The Study of G.Suryanarayana Reddy and P.Govinda Reddy (2000) on Individualism and Collectivism

By using Fons Trompenaars (1994) questionnaire Reddy and Reddy collected data from 120 students pursuing Master’s programmes in different subjects in the University of Madras, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India in the year 2000.  Out of the sample of 120 students, 65 (54%) have indicated individualism whereas 55 (46%) have indicated collectivism.  Majority of males (66.7%) showed tendency towards individualism whereas majority of females (66.7%) showed tendency towards collectivism. Through Chi square test they found that male students are significantly individualism oriented and female students are significantly collectivism oriented (Reddy and Reddy, 2000).

Individualism and Collectivism

 Hofstede and Triandis on the Cultural Dimension of Individualism and Collectivism:

An Overview.

Shriram Venkataraman and P.Govinda Reddy

Management Matters, Vol.1, Issue 14, 2011

 

Value preferences, attitudes and behaviors are choices made at individual level.  They are individual characteristics.  In a society, certain social processes try to give uniformity and predictability to these characteristics.  Role modeling, general socialization in the family, in the educational institutions etc. and subtle methods of social rewards and punishments can influence the formation of value system and attitudes and determine the behavioral choices.  The ensuing uniformity within a society is considered a cultural variable, as the social processes across cultures are likely to be different.  Individualism and collectivism are two variables that have attracted lot of attention in the literature.

Individualism is a general orientation in a society which emphasizes personal aspects such as personal goals, personal uniqueness and personal control and marginalizes social aspects (Hsu, 1983; Kagisticibasi, 1994; Triandis, 1995).  Individualism emphasizes creating and maintaining positive sense of self, personal success, developing unique qualities for the self and relying on abstract traits (Baumeiser, 1998; Oyserman and Markus 1993).  Individualism implies that attainment of one’s personal goal is important indicator of well being and life satisfaction (Diener and Diener 1995).  Individualism also implies that judgment, reasoning and causal inference are generally oriented toward the person rather than the situation or social context (Morris and Peng, 1994).

The core element of collectivism is the assumption that groups bind and mutually obligate individuals (Oyserman et al.2002).  In these societies the personal is a component of the social and in-group is the key unit of analysis (Triandis, 1995).  Collectivism emphasizes group membership as central aspect of identity (Hofstede, 1980 and Kim, 1994) and valued personal traits are based on goals of collectivism (Oyserman, 1993).  Collectivism implies that individual’s life satisfaction comes from the performance of social roles and obligations (Kwan and Singelis, 1988).

Studies of Hofstede on Individualism and Collectivism

Hofstede, in 1980 published a work quantifying the cultural dimensions for the first time, based on an extensive research  ( conducted twice between 1967 and 1969 and again between 1971 and 1973)  with over 116,000 questionnaire responses of over 88,000 employees of IBM in 72 countries (later reduced to 40 countries and again extended to 50 countries in three regions). With a minimum of 50 respondents in each country, the survey was conducted in 20 languages and was published as a comprehensive work in the form of a book titled “Culture’s Consequences” in 1980. Through theoretical reasoning and a country level factor analysis he introduced four factors or dimensions of culture which determine national cultures and called the first dimension as individualisma and collectivism.  According to him, the dimension of Individualism – Collectivism refers to:

“The high side of this dimension, called Individualism, can be defined as a preference for a loosely-knit social framework in which individuals are expected to take care of themselves and their immediate families only. Its opposite, Collectivism, represents a preference for a tightly-knit framework in society in which individuals can expect their relatives or members of a particular in-group to look after them in exchange for unquestioning loyalty. A society's position on this dimension is reflected in whether people’s self-image is defined in terms of ‘I’ or ‘we’.”

Hofstede (1983) mentioned that through his study he observed that poorer countries in terms of wealth were collectivistic and wealthy countries were individualistic in nature.  Hofstede (2001) is of the openion that the dimension of individualism and collectivism is affected by economic factors such as wealth or poverty. 

Studies of Triandis on Individualism and Collectivism/Communitarianism

Similarly Trompenaars (1994) introduced seven dimensions of culture. One among them is Individualism versus Communitarianism.  According to him it refers to:

“The degree to which people see themselves function more as a community or more as individuals. In a principally individualistic culture, people place the individual before the community. This means that individual happiness, fulfillment and welfare prevails and people take their own initiative and take care of themselves. In a principally communitarian culture, people place the community before the individual. Thus, it is the responsibility of the individual to act in ways which serve society. In doing so, individual needs are automatically attended”.

According to Traindis (1990) collectivists emphasize on relationships whereas the individualists emphasize on rationality. Triandis and Suh (2002) observed that the interpersonal relationships of people in collectivistic cultures were more stable than those in individualistic cultures.

Triandis (2004) states that people in collectiovistic culture pay more attenntion to how something is said (like attention to gesture and tone of voice) than to what is being said.  Further, collectivists see environment as immutable and people as mutable and indiviudlists see peole as stable no matter how the environment is.  Similarly, collectivists see behavior as due to external factors such as norms and roles than due to inernal factors such as attitudes and pesonality and the self is interdependent and changeable based on the in-group one is with, whereas, individualists see self as stable.  Also, people in colectivistic culture give more preference to in-group goals than to personal goals.

Triandis (2004) also observes tht within any culture, individuals can either be idiocentric (think, feel and behave as people in individualistic culture) or allocentric (like people in collectivistic cultures).  Similarly, collectivistic cultures have around 30 to 100 percent allocentric people and between 0 to 35 percent idiocentrics.  Individualistic cultures have between 35 to 100 percent idiocentrics and 0 to 35 percent allocentrics.

Triandis (2004) states that idiocentrics are high on expressiveness, dominance, initiation of action, logical arguments, aggressiveness, regulation of flow of communication, eye contact, tended to finish task and has strong openions.  Further, idiocentrics in collectivistic cultures tend to feel dominated by the culture and want to eacape from it.  Similary, allocentrics are high on accommodating, avoidance of argument, shifted opinions more easily than idiocentirics.  Further, allocentrics in individualistic cultures feel the need to join groups, associations, unions among others.

Triandis (2004) states that factors such as affluence, leadership role, education, international travel and social mobility, socializing in bilateral families, movement to an indiviuslistic culture after upbringing in a collectivistic culture, greater exposure to western mass media and acculturation for years to a western culure as factors that influence idiocentric tendencies.  Similarly, factors such as financial dependence on an in-group, low social class, limited education, limited travel, socialization in unilateral families, traditionally religious and acculturation to a collectivistic culture as factors that influence allocentric tendencies.

Triandis (2004) states that organizations that have indivisualistic cultures have greater individualistic human practices and people in these organizations are selected on the basis of their individual attributes.  Further, these organizations have less training as employees are seen to be less loyal and less committed to organizations and are seen to leave the organizations when better opportunities arise.  Paternalism is not common, boss does not maintain personal relationships with the employees and mangers are highly concerned about performance.  Similarly, organizations tht have collectivistic cultures have collectivistic human practices.  People in these organizations are selected on the basis of group memberships.  Organizations have more tarining as employees are seen to be loyal and highly committed to organizations and are observed to stick to organizations.  Paternalism is common, boss maintains a personal relaionship with his employees and managers are more concerned about interpersonal relationships than performance.

Triandis (2004) also observes that a national level, the wealth of nations can be correlated  to individualism and collectivism and states that countries can move from being collectivistic to being individualistic when they become more affluent, but he also states that this might require several generations.

Comparison of works of Hofstede and Triandis on Individualism and Collectivism

It is interesting to observe the contributions of Hofstede and Triandis on the same dimension of individualism and collectivism from two different perspectives.  While Hofstede explores this cultural dimension from a macro level, Triandis expands and explores this dimension at a micro level.