A compression of China and India’s Individualism
When reading over Hofstede’s concept of Individualism for China and India I was not surprised to say but a little shocked to see the score of 20 and India to see 48. The scores before had been so close this was the first time no pun intended that they were more individual. Individual, in this case, means more collectivist vs. more independent cultures.
Chinas individualistic score of 20 represents a more collectivist culture. This comes as no surprise. China has been a global powerhouse for centuries dating back to their dynasties. They still are today and it’s because of this collectivist power. China is a modern day communist country, the citizens of China have little freedoms with modern luxuries like freedom on the internet being taken away daily. However at the risk of getting to political we will focus on broad subjects and comparisons.
India individualistic score of 48 puts it about the average of 45.27 lending to an ideal indecent culture. India is almost a free market economy minus power and railways. This allows people to create and sell their own goods without regulation. A vast difference from China where there is over regulation. India also has freedom of religion where the most popular religion is Hinduism, but citizens are free to practice any belief.
When researching these countries a question came to mind, with these two countries being so different how do they remain so powerful, which one is a better structure to ensure one is a global power player? One would think a hardworking collectivist culture as we see in China. But if that’s what’s best for the people? In India, individualism and freedom can also ensure power but is it too deregulated? The middle ground is the United States where many areas are regulated in the world of business but that’s it and we are still a global superpower but we are still very very young.
With all of that being said, our country still is growing and the USA is still very young. We look back on the history of these great nations to see what works best for the nation as a whole and what is best for those residing in it.
References
Country Comparison. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/india/
Zimmermann, K. A. (2017, July 20). Indian Culture: Traditions and Customs of India. Retrieved from https://www.livescience.com/28634-indian-culture.html
Chinese Culture, Tradition, and Customs. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://elements.science.psu.edu/psu-pku/student-resources/resources-for-penn-state-students/chinese-culture-tradition-and-customs
Moran, R. T., Ph. D., Abramson, N. R., Ph. D., & Moran, S. V., MA. (2014). Managing Cultural Differnces(Ninth ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
I read your blog as reference for my leadership paper and found you comparisons interesting between China and India basing both on Hofstede’s Individualism dimension. You mention that both countries have been around for centuries and each have validity on how they maintain a superpower nod. What I found interesting is the comparison of both these countries to the United States and mentioning that we are young and still retain the superpower nod.
But what is the United States doing to keep in pace with these two nations that seem to be in a superpower rise?
In Chapter 15 of “Managing Cultural Differences”, Moran, Abramson and Moran talk about the partnership that China and Africa have recently forged. China has built up African infrastructure and continues to buy oil, metals and other natural resources. And has a strong trade business with African countries, one of the reasons why their economy is steadily growing. They continue to invest and build strategic relationships with various African government, helping the Third World stigma that most of the globe see Africa as.
India has its booming information technology industry. And is a main source of global outsourcing and attracting foreign firms to set up business where high tech endeavours are situated. Predictions indicate that in the next few years many multinational companies will have 25% of their staff located in one of India’s tech communities (Moran et. al, 2014, p. 271).
Perhaps the collectivism of both countries has help to integrate China and India into the business endeavors they are pursuing . According to the definition of collectivism in the Merriam Webster dictionary it means “a political or economic theory advocating collective control especially over production and distribution”. Seems to be on point with what China and India are achieving with their tactics.
In the article “China, India and the clash of two great civilisations”, it discusses that many focus on the U.S. China relations, but actually the emerging power shift is the political and economical representation between China and India. This power struggle includes, military power, development of better infrastructure to the population growth, China is considered t have the world’s largest economy, while India has the world’s largest population.
Maybe. while these two countries continue to battle out manufacturing, technological and even educational processes, as well as how their citizens live in their respective countries, the United States, looks like it may be taking a back seat. So many experts thinks that the U.S. influence will depend largely on how the United States adapts to the changing economic landscape (Martinez-Diaz, 2007). If they can adapt, they will continue to stay in stride with China and India, but if they fail to adapt, it may mean the United States will lose its influence on the world’s economy.
So we may be young, but how intelligent are we on the global platform will be telling!
References:
Moran, R. A., Abramson, N. R., & Moran, S. V. (2014). Managing cultural differences (9th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Rachman, G. (2017, June 05). China, India and the clash of two great civilisations. Retrieved from https://www.ft.com/content/39790874-4787-11e7-8d27-59b4dd6296b8
Collectivism. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collectivism
Martinez-Diaz, L. (2016, July 28). U.S.: A Losing Superpower? Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/u-s-a-losing-superpower
I read your blog as reference for my leadership paper and found you comparisons interesting between China and India basing both on Hofstede’s Individualism dimension. You mention that both countries have been around for centuries and each have validity on how they maintain a superpower nod. What I found interesting is the comparison of both these countries to the United States and mentioning that we are young and still retain the superpower nod.
But what is the United States doing to keep in pace with these two nations that seem to be in a superpower rise?
In Chapter 15 of “Managing Cultural Differences”, Moran, Abramson and Moran talk about the partnership that China and Africa have recently forged. China has built up African infrastructure and continues to buy oil, metals and other natural resources. And has a strong trade business with African countries, one of the reasons why their economy is steadily growing. They continue to invest and build strategic relationships with various African government, helping the Third World stigma that most of the globe see Africa as.
India has its booming information technology industry. And is a main source of global outsourcing and attracting foreign firms to set up business where high tech endeavours are situated. Predictions indicate that in the next few years many multinational companies will have 25% of their staff located in one of India’s tech communities (Moran et. al, 2014, p. 271).
Perhaps the collectivism of both countries has help to integrate China and India into the business endeavors they are pursuing . According to the definition of collectivism in the Merriam Webster dictionary it means “a political or economic theory advocating collective control especially over production and distribution”. Seems to be on point with what China and India are achieving with their tactics.
In the article “China, India and the clash of two great civilisations”, it discusses that many focus on the U.S. China relations, but actually the emerging power shift is the political and economical representation between China and India. This power struggle includes, military power, development of better infrastructure to the population growth, China is considered t have the world’s largest economy, while India has the world’s largest population.
Maybe. while these two countries continue to battle out manufacturing, technological and even educational processes, as well as how their citizens live in their respective countries, the United States, looks like it may be taking a back seat. So many experts thinks that the U.S. influence will depend largely on how the United States adapts to the changing economic landscape (Martinez-Diaz, 2007). If they can adapt, they will continue to stay in stride with China and India, but if they fail to adapt, it may mean the United States will lose its influence on the world’s economy.
So we may be young, but how intelligent are we on the global platform will be telling!
References:
Moran, R. A., Abramson, N. R., & Moran, S. V. (2014). Managing cultural differences (9th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Rachman, G. (2017, June 05). China, India and the clash of two great civilisations. Retrieved from https://www.ft.com/content/39790874-4787-11e7-8d27-59b4dd6296b8
Collectivism. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collectivism
Martinez-Diaz, L. (2016, July 28). U.S.: A Losing Superpower? Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/u-s-a-losing-superpower/