Cross

Cultural
Management
Country: Russia

Assignment 3

Abhijeet Sarkar(150), Atul

Maurya(128), Varun Gulati(107),
Sushil Thasari(134), Paul
Alapatt(139)
 Cross Cultural Management Russia
Analyzing Russian culture using Hofstede’s model of cultural dimensions

Hofstede developed a model that identifies four primary Dimensions to assist in

differentiating cultures: Power Distance - PDI, Individualism - IDV, Masculinity - MAS, and
Uncertainty Avoidance - UAI. Geert Hofstede added a fifth Dimension after conducting an
additional international study with a survey instrument developed with Chinese employees
and managers.
Power Distance Index (PDI) that is the extent to which the less powerful members of
organizations and institutions (like the family) accept and expect that power is distributed
unequally.
Empirical studies show that the power distance is shifting in Russian culture from
high to moderate. Traditionally, Russia had autocratic system which gives her a character of
high power distance country. It had been high before perestroika (economic restructuring)
but had declined after that time. The score declined to 46 in Naumov and Puffer study done
in 2000. This is reflection of reforms leading to economic and political decentralisation and
possibly the separation of economic power wielded by private business from political power
of federal and local authorities.

Individualism (IDV) on the one side versus its opposite, collectivism, that is the degree to
which individuals are integrated into groups. On the individualist side we find societies in
which the ties between individuals are loose: everyone is expected to look after him/herself
and his/her immediate family. On the collectivist side, we find societies in which people from
birth onwards are integrated into strong, cohesive in-groups, often extended families (with
uncles, aunts and grandparents) which continue protecting them in exchange for
unquestioning loyalty.
The transformation of Russian society into market oriented economy and more civil
society gave rise to greater uncertainty and forced decision making to individuals. The study
confirmed that the individualism is on rise during perestroika period. The Russians compared
with other countries were found to be less individualistic than developed countries but more
individualistic than developing countries. The Russian communal collective started to
disintegrate in the latter half of the nineteenth century led to the individual approach to a
communist system. In soviet system, the main role of a factory director consists of looking
after the worker situation, building housing, managing shops, organising children’s
playground, looking after the medical centres. Managing a business is based on loyalty and
a sense of duty. A Russian proverb sums up this core factor of social life in Russia “It is
better to have 100 friends than 100 roubles”.

Masculinity (MAS) versus its opposite femininity refers to the distribution of roles between
the genders. The assertive pole has been called 'masculine' and the modest, caring pole
'feminine'.
Traditionally, Russians were low on masculinity. Centuries of serfdom followed by 60
years of dictatorship have prevented men from developing sense of initiative. However
successive wars forced widows to take their destinies into their own hands in order to
survive. Hofstede estimated a score of 40. But the current studies have shown a higher
value (59). This could be due to the sample taken which consists of Managers and Business
school students and faculty.

K. J. SOMAIYA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES AND RESEARCH 2|

Page
 Cross Cultural Management Russia

Scores on Hofstede's cultural Dimensions

Uncertainty Individualism Power Masculinity
Study / Country Avoidance Collectivism Distance Paternalism Femininity
Naumov&Puffer/Russia 68 41 40 59 55
Bollinger/Russia 92 26 76 -- 28
Hofstede's / Russia 90 50 95 10 40
USA 46 91 40 29 62
China 60 20 80 100 50
Germany 65 67 35 21 66
France 86 71 68 30 43
Japan 92 46 54 80 95

Source: Naumov and Puffer (2000), Measuring Russian culture using Hofstede’s Dimensions

Uncertainty Avoidance Index (UAI) deals with a society's tolerance for uncertainty and
ambiguity. It indicates to what extent a culture programs its members to feel either
uncomfortable or comfortable in unstructured situations. Uncertainty avoiding cultures try to
minimize the possibility of such situations by strict laws and rules, safety and security
measures, and on the philosophical and religious level by a belief in absolute Truth.
Uncertainty accepting cultures are more tolerant of opinions different from what they are
used to; they try to have as few rules as possible, and on the philosophical and religious
level they are relativist and allow many currents to flow side by side.
Empirical studies of Naumov and Puffer (68 points) as well as Bollinger (92 points)
show that Russia is high on uncertainty avoidance. High point in Bollinger study reflects the
economic and political stagnation in 1980s. Centuries of tsar history and egalitarianism
where decisions and equality has been handed out through a set organizational layout has
brought about preference for social order and authoritative hierarchy. There would be a
greater level of preference for tried and tested methods than experimenting with the
unknown.

Long-Term Orientation (LTO) versus short-term orientation: Values associated with Long
Term Orientation are thrift and perseverance; values associated with Short Term Orientation
are respect for tradition, fulfilling social obligations, and protecting one's 'face'.

The Russians do not have a definite time orientation; instead, they have periods of
long-term and short-term time orientation. Russians can work slowly and patiently on a
project, but if they judge it highly important, they may switch modes and work tirelessly to
complete a task. During the early years when Russia’s city and states where ruled by
Princess and Tsars, during the Russian empire and finally under communism. Russians
gave the state practically unlimited power over the whole society in industrial, agriculture and
social spheres.

Conclusion

Russian culture appears to be moderate in individualism, masculinity, and power distance

and fairly high on paternalism and uncertainty avoidance. All the five dimensions showed

K. J. SOMAIYA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES AND RESEARCH 3|

Page
 Cross Cultural Management Russia
transition. Younger and less experienced people showed high level of masculinity and lowest
level of paternalism.

K. J. SOMAIYA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES AND RESEARCH 4|

Page
 Cross Cultural Management Russia
References

Naumov and Puffer (2000). Measuring Russian culture using Hofstede’s Dimensions,
Applied psychology: An international review, 49 (4), 709 – 718.

Bollinger (1994). The four cornerstones and three pillars in the 'House of Russia”
management system, The Journal of Management Development, pg 49 – 54.

Geert Hofstede™ Cultural Dimensions, http://www.geert-hofstede.com/.

K. J. SOMAIYA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES AND RESEARCH 5|

Page