Beyond Borders
An older, rusted bridge stretches across a wide space. It stands for connection and progress, encouraging thoughts of journeys beyond limits toward unity, understanding, and new chances. The soft colors of the sky, symbolize hope and the promise of the future.
Editor’s note: This post will continue to evolve as I do.
Welcome back, logistical minds, curious explorers, and cultural phenomenons to the latest chapter in the Past, Present, and Future series. Today’s spotlight is on a paper I originally wrote in March of 2015 for a Communications class. The focus? Hofstede’s Cultural Taxonomy. A fascinating framework developed by social psychologist Geert Hofstede to better understand how culture influences communication across nations. In this post, I will share the paper itself, offer reflections from my current perspective, and explore how my understanding of culture and communication has grown since then.
So, if you are ready to learn something new or up for a read that might challenge your thinking, then let us get into it. Whether you are revisting this theory or hearing about it for the first time, I hope it offers a fresh perspective and sparks some reflection of your own.
Paragraph one reads as follows:
“Geert Hofstede’s Cultural Taxonomy asserted that people carry “software of the mind,” which is developed during childhood, but is reinforced by the person’s culture. He proposed that six cultural values could be analyzed in regards to cross-cultural communication. So he developed a model, which was one of the first quantified world-wide surveys of employee values of IBM in the 1960’s and 1970’s. The six values he based his model on are: power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism vs. collectivism, masculinity vs. femininity, time orientation, and indulgence vs. restraint.”
In other words, Hofstede believed that the culture we grew up in shapes how we think, act, and communicate. He created a model with six main values to help explain how people from different countries may behave or work differently. It is a tool to better understand and respect cultural differences, especially in global workplaces.
Back then, I was just starting to realize how much culture influences how we connect. Now, I see it all the time within conversations, misunderstandings, and even quiet moments. My goal is to keep learning and growing as I get older.
As we dive into the next section of this paper, let us begin exploring Hofstede’s dimensions one by one. First up is Power Distance.
“Power distance is a reference to social hierarchy. Whereas, Hofstede concluded that the “Less powerful members of a society accept and expect that power is distributed unequally.” For instance, people in societies that have a large range of social hierarchy accept without disagreement or further explanation that everyone has a place and each place is on a different scale or social status. Yet on the flip-side, societies with a short range of power distance are in constant non-compliance and always striving to equalize their power. But the fact of the matter is, is that there are many reasons as to why someone may feel inferior or superior. It can depend on many different aspects. For example, age, gender, education, physical strength, birth order, personal achievements, family background, occupation, and so many more can be the deciding factor. After all, that is what power distance is all about.”
Looking back, I now see how power distance shapes so much of our world from workplaces to families. And how it deeply influences how we interact. Today, I am more aware of these invisible barriers. I understand that fear, insecurity, or power dynamics can keep people from stepping into a situation. But oftentimes those are the moments when someone needs support the most. It takes quiet courage and compassion to recognize what is happening and chose to offer help rather than stay on the sidelines.
My hope is that we all feel safe to express what we believe in, come together to speak out against injustices, and share experiences that need to be heard. While at the same time, also respecting and appreciating perspectives different from our own. After all, it is one of the best ways to learn. What is one way you can step in or support someone today?
By creating a culture where people feel safe to speak up, support one another, and share stories is deeply connected to how we handle uncertainty. That brings me to the next concept in Hofstede’s framework: uncertainty avoidance.
“Uncertainty avoidance is the extent to which the culture feels threatened by ambiguous, uncertain situations and tries to avoid them by establishing more structure. For instance, the following countries are not concerned about doubtfulness and have a higher tolerance for uncertainty avoidance: Denmark, Jamaica, India, and Ireland. These countries believe in accepting, as well as, encouraging each other to express their opinions, whereas countries like Greece, Guatemala, Portugal, and Uruguay avoid uncertainty as a cultural value. Instead, these countries demand agreement about societal goals and they do not tolerate opposing opinions. Whereas, low uncertainty avoidance cultures tend to live day by day, and are more accepting to change and take risks. However, uncertainty avoidance is not the only way a culture divides to follow certain similarities and differences.”
As I reflect, I notice how uncertainty avoidance shows up in both my own life and the workplaces I have been a part of. Some situations call for structure and clear expectations, while others thrive on flexibility and open-mindedness. Growing up and living in the United States, I have experienced a culture that encourages innovation, critical thinking, diverse opinions, and taking risks. In current day, I have realized I am a blend of both. I thrive with structured schedules and clear expectations, but I also value open-mindedness and varied perspectives. While I respect established processes, I believe every system can be refined to support greater efficiency and innovation.
And just as uncertainty shapes how we respond to change, our sense of identity and belonging also influences how we navigate the world. This leads into another key aspect of Hofstede’s framework of individualism vs. collectivism.
“In individualistic and collective cultures, different countries have different ways of going about things. As in individualistic cultures, which are dominant in Belgium, Hungary, the Netherlands and the United States, think that people should mainly focus on themselves and their immediate family. While in highly collectivist cultures, such as: Guatemala, Indonesia, Pakistan, and West Africa, they see it as being loyal to a group because of immediate and extended family, work group, or a social organization. As for schooling, individualistic cultures see that they should speak out during class and ask questions if they do not understand something, whereas, collectivistic cultures you should never ask a question to the teacher. But in more individualistic cultures, such as the Europe, they are familiar with the quote “The squeaky wheel gets the grease,” which means the ones that speak up get rewarded. Yet in Japan, where it is mainly collectivism, their saying is, “The nail that sticks up gets pounded.” Which is why, dealing with individualism vs. collectivism cultures can be such a huge distinction.”
At the time, I am not sure I fully grasped the argument between collectivism and individualism. Looking back, I realize I leaned more toward collectivism during my school years as I was involved in several group activities. Thus, I often considered what was best for the group as a whole rather than focusing solely on my own perspective. That being said, many of my classes were structured in a more individualistic way with emphasis on personal performance and independent thinking.
That early perspective has since evolved. Today, I recognize how these values often coexist. Even in an individualistic culture like the U.S., I have witnessed and experienced moments of strong community. And while I still value speaking up and self-expression, I have come to deeply appreciate the beauty of collective strength, quiet support, and showing up for others. It has only become more meaningful over time. As we grow in our personal and professional lives, I hope we all continue to see the value in both approaches. Such as, finding ways to honor our individuality while building communities that lift each other up.
Building on the idea of individualism and collectivism, the next cultural dimension Hofstede talks about is the male vs. female comparison. This one looks at what a culture values more. Is it traits like ambition, success, and competition, which are generally labeled “masculine”? Or is it qualities like cooperation, empathy, and work-life balance that is considered more “feminine” based? Oftentimes, it is not about gender. It is more about what a society sees as important and how that shapes the way people live and interact.
“Masculinity vs. femininity associates with what most think of when the idea of males vs. females comes to mind. Such as, the way a culture portrays their gender roles. The obligations that males and females have to uphold can be very different depending on the culture. Countries that are mainly masculine, keep sexual inequality very strict in all areas of their culture. They tend to be more individualistic and competitive like Mexico and Japan. Because they worry about individual achievement. Unlike, feminine countries, which tend to look more towards the overall caring for others and value the lives of those around them. Those countries with a feminine base are: Chile, Portugal, and Thailand. But masculinity vs. femininity vary greatly from specific differences in gender roles to the entire culture of a country. That’s why knowing this little bit of information can be beneficial in your private life, as well as, if you are constantly traveling across the globe, as Hofstede touched on in a less specific spectrum.”
Reflecting on this now, I realize how much these values show up in daily life from the way workplaces handle success and collaboration to how communities support one another. Growing up, I saw a mix of both. Some environments emphasized competition and standing out, while others encouraged empathy and team success.
Today, I notice how conversations around femininity and masculinity have become more complex and open than they were even just a decade ago. But over time, I have started to see how limiting these ideas can be. For instance, “strong” was often an adjective used for men while “nurturing” was considered more of a feminine feature.
In terms of workplaces, I have seen both men and women lead with empathy, assertiveness, and collaboration. It has taught me that strength does not look one way. It can be quiet, compassionate, or bold depending on the person and the situation. While these traits may still be labeled as more “masculine” or “feminine” in some spaces, I have come to appreciate how they can coexist in anyone.
My hope for the future is that gender roles become more like flexible guidelines rather than strict rules. Too often, it feels like we put more focus on fitting people into boxes than truly recognizing their unique individuality.
With these thoughts on gender roles in mind, it is important to also consider how cultures view and manage time. This brings us to Hofstede’s next cultural dimension: time orientation.
“Although Hofstede's time orientation doesn't have a western bias, as the previous four dimensions described and were developed by scholars in Europe or the United States. There was Michael H. Bond, who is Canadian, but has since lived in Asia the past few years. Bond assembled a large team of researchers from Hong Kong and Taiwan where he created a survey that he eventually gave to students around the globe. His findings found that time depended on whether the culture was long term or short term. Long term cultures are as listed: Germany, Japan, Russia, and South Korea, which all admire persistence, thriftiness, and humility. Persistence means continuous time or with what continues to occur or exist. Thriftiness, in this instance, means being frugal and wasting less time. While humility is being humble or modest.” In addition, long term cultures have linguistic and social distinctions between older and younger siblings. As well as, deferred gratification, which is widely accepted. Linguistic distinctions is when they are a native speaker of a language while social distinction means relating to society or to the way society is organized by time structure. But more importantly, deferred gratification is the ability to resist temptation for an immediate reward and wait for a later reward. While on the other hand, short term time orientation cultures are as followed: Australia, Columbia, Iran, and Morocco. These cultures in particular, expect quick results from one's actions. China, for instance is usually long term as in the year of the Snake. Where Europe is short term because it depends upon short term intervals like Astrology (Leo, Aquarius, Gemini).”
Back in my school years, the focus was mostly on long-term goals. Of course, there were short-term milestones along the way, but the bigger picture always took center stage. These days, I notice that long-term thinking shows up more in my personal life, such as, staying active, earning a degree, or building healthy habits. Whereas on the flip side, most of the jobs I have had have been centered around short-term goals and quick results.
Moving forward, I hope we all see the value of small, consistent steps that lead to lasting progress. Whether it is learning something new, shifting a mindset, or building a routine, every step matters. And over time, those small actions can lead to something much greater.
While Hofstede’s model offers a valuable lens for understanding time orientations it is not the only way to view cultural differences. In fact, another approach paints a more nuanced picture. In Foreign to Familiar: A Guide to Understanding Hot- and Cold- Climate Cultures, author Sarah A. Lanier introduces a different framework…
“Sarah found a different way to distinguish time orientation between cultures. Instead of, long term vs. short term, she did cold vs. hot climate cultures. The cold climate cultures are as listed: Canada, Northern U.S. states, Northern Europe (so Switzerland and above), Israel (Jewish populations primarily from Europe), white populations of South Africa, and all other heavily settled countries by Europeans (Argentina). Whose beliefs about time are time oriented, which means they follow time structure. They enjoy using time efficiently and don't like wasting time. So they plan their day out, as not to stress themselves out with last minute cancellations or plans. Plus, saving time is a treasure to them. As for an event, they expect the event to begin on time, which means that visiting and chatting occurs before or after the event.
On the other hand, Lanier's hot climate cultures are as followed: Southern U.S. states, Asia, Pacific Islands, South America (Except Argentina), Africa, Mediterranean countries (Except Jewish population of Israel), Middle East, and most of the rest of the world. These cultures though, aren't as time oriented, so they don't depend on structure by time. Instead, they prefer to be event oriented. That means they take pride in spontaneous plans and have a flexible approach. They wouldn't be the one's stressing about last minute plans. In addition, they'd rather live in the moment than consider saving time. As for the informal visiting and chatting they are welcome to the idea, so much so, that they have open arms at events. They welcome anyone and everyone to chat at any time. But just because most of the time they don’t care for time structure, doesn’t mean they don’t respect it. In some instances, time orientation is still quite important. For example, the use of the military where they value being on time. And as we move on from Hofstede’s time orientation, there is one more cultural divide that can happen.”
Looking at this now, I can see bits of both hot and cold climate tendencies in my own life. I do appreciate structure and using time efficiently, but I also love when plans flow naturally and space is made for conversation and connection. It is a balance I am still learning. But some of the most meaningful moments have happened during unexpected pauses or spontaneous detours. That kind of presence cannot always be scheduled.
My hope moving forward is that we learn to honor both. The value of being timely and prepared, and the richness of letting moments unfold. Both can coexist. Efficiency does not have to replace empathy.
As with many cultural values, there is often a balance to be found by learning to honor both structure and spontaneity can lead to a more adaptable and understanding world. That same idea of balance carries into Hofstede’s final cultural taxonomy: indulgence vs. restraint.
“Indulgence vs. restraint is the precedent that happiness is a way of life. So when you go out of the countyy on vacation and you normally seek a place that is more focused on high spirits and excitement these are indulged countries like El Salvador, Mexico, New Zealand, and Sweden. They all enjoy pleasure, spending, consumption, and general merriment. On the other side, there are cultures that emphasize restraint. They care more about self-discipline and self-control and do not think to encourage enjoyment Instead, to remain focused on the task at hand. Cultures of restraint are: Bulgaria, Italy, Morocco, and Pakistan.”
Back when I first came across this concept, I did not fully grasp the deeper meaning behind indulgence and restraint. I thought it was just about whether a culture liked to have fun or not. I did not really consider how those values shaped everyday decisions, emotional expression, or even personal habits. I also did not recognize how much our own upbringing, environment, and social norms can influence the way we view rest, joy, or discipline.
Now upon revisiting these concepts, I realize how indulgence and restraint show up in everyday life. Not only across cultures, but within ourselves. I have experienced seasons of both.
Upon revisiting these concepts now, I realize how indulgence and restraint show up in different seasons of life, especially through the structure of our daily routines. When I was working a traditional job with a set schedule (as most of my past jobs were), my days leaned heavily toward restraint. I followed a steady rhythm: I would wake up early, take a short morning stroll, occasionally grab a coffee, make breakfast, and head to work. During the workday, I usually avoided my phone and stayed focused. After work, I would either get a workout in or go for a longer, more relaxed walk, check social media, cook dinner, and wind down for bed.
Weekends had their own pattern too. Saturdays, unless I had plans, usually started with a load of laundry, a trip to the dry cleaners, breakfast, then more chores before settling into the rest of the day. It was a routine I stuck to. One that kept things running smoothly, even if it left little room for spontaneity.
Since being unemployed, however, things feel more fluid. While I am not focusing on my art and writing, and I do have some structure around those, the flexibility is refreshing. I am not bound by the same constraints, and I can adjust my schedule depending on what the day calls for. That said, I still enjoy having some sort of routine, even if it is a loose one. It helps me stay grounded, so I have created more of a rhythm of what needs to be accomplished throughout the day.
My goal going forward is that we all give ourselves (and others) the permission to rest, to laugh, to feel deeply, and to recharge without shame. Because life is not just about checking things off a list. It is also about creating moments worth remembering. As we navigate the balance between discipline and joy in our personal lives, it becomes even more clear how deeply culture shapes these experiences. Whether it is how we view rest, success, structure, or spontaneity. So much of it is influenced by the values we have grown up around and the environments we have moved through. That is what makes Hofstede’s cultural dimensions so valuable. They offer a lens to better understand not just others, but ourselves.
As we close out this paper, it is important to remember that understanding cultural dimensions is not about placing people in categories, but about gaining insight. When we take the time to understand these differences, and reflect on how they show up in our own life, we grow not just as individuals, but as members of a global community.
“But all in all, Hofstede has made great points as to how certain responsibilities come into play when dealing with someone from another country. And how it can be important to realize that not every culture has the same meaning for something. It’s usually quite the opposite. Which is why, Hofstede’s way of doing things could really improve lives if we just understand that what we do and the way we think is learned from experiences throughout our life, as well as, from those around us. So in other words, we are today based on what we did yesterday.”
When I wrote this paper as part of a group project, I was fascinated by the idea that culture could be broken down into dimensions. It helped me understand why people from different places might approach work, relationships, or conflict so differently. Back then, I viewed culture more as something we study from a set of facts, charts, and comparisons.
Now, I see culture as something we live. It is not just national or ethnic. It is personal. It shows up in how we listen, lead, connect, and adapt. While Hofstede’s model is still useful, I have come to appreciate the nuances beyond the data. Such as, our individual experiences, layered identities, and emotional realities that cannot always be measured but are deeply important nonetheless.
I hope we continue to create spaces, personally and professionally, where people feel seen, respected, and celebrated for their backgrounds. Where culture is not something to be “managed” but embraced. And where communication becomes more about understanding than assumption.
Thank you for joining me on this journey through culture, reflection, and growth. May we continue learning, not just about others, but also about ourselves, one conversation at a time. if something here resonated with you, I would love to hear your thoughts or stories. Let us keep the conversation going and grow together.
As a signature of my blog, I’d like to end this post with a suggestion to “Pass on kindness.” There’s no time like the present to Inspire Those Who Inspire You. Acts of kindness, no matter how big or small, can have a direct, positive impact on someone else. Go out there today and change someone’s life for the better!
***These are my personal opinions and may not be those of my employer.***
