Gender egalitarian values

For division of work in a certain profession, cultural variable at national level recognized as

explanatory variable, is considered as major contribution. According to Charles (1998), Omar

and Davidson (2001) and Charles and Bradley (2002), cultural theories are explained as cross-

country variant in the gendered work division with the predominance of thoughts regarding the

women role in society. Generally imparted assumptions of ordinary women' qualities and

standards for adequate conduct inside a societal setting impact the progression of women to

intense positions. Certain assumptions are considered which involves in how women,

specifically skills, abilities and preferences, differ from those of men and which roles women

play in the society. It also includes what status should be appropriate for women and which role

and status are not appropriate for them. Kelly and Dobbin (1998) And Dobbin and Sutton (1998)

identifies that HR policies of different organizations are based on cultural ideas. According to

Major and Schmader (2001) cultural theories also affect the decision making process and

appointment of roles for women. In a distinctive societal context, the perception of labor on

gender basis by individuals is termed as Universalism. In different studies including Ramirez,

(1997), Reskin and McBrier (2000) , Ramirez and Wotipka (2001) and Charles and Bradley

(2002) p. 576 have identified that people have strongly rejected the traditionally attributed

gender roles. Under the cultural modernization in national context, normative standards

implementation provides equal opportunity within the organizations.

According to Ramirez and Wotipka (2001), in the presence of these gender-egalitarian values,

male-dominated domains are open to all women. These domains include positions of HR director

which includes strategic planning and functional responsibilities in an organization.

Uncertainty Avoidance

"A society's tolerance for uncertainty and ambiguity" is known as Uncertainty Avoidance. It

mirrors the weight of individuals from local people attempt to get used to nervousness by

reducing uncertainty. With a sense of vulnerability and uncertainty, uncertainty avoidance

dimension is expressed by the comfort level of women in society. The central problem is the

response of society to the future prediction. The control over the future is still un-answered and

mystery. In countries where Uncertainty avoidance index or UAI is high are more flexible to

code of conduct while on the other hand control of UAI is contrary. In societies where UAI is

weak numbers are preferred over standards. In societies where UAI is high people are more

enthusiastic. The events in these societies are more controlled and regulated. On the other hand

in societies where UAI is low the events are unstructured and less regulated. In these societies

individuals are more realistic and resistant to change.

Strong social norms, risk avoiding and preference of formal rules are usually followed by people

who prefer High uncertainty avoidance. On Contrary fluid, informal and unstructured behaviors

are preference for those who follow low uncertainty avoidance. In uncertainty avoidance, these

characteristics were perceived on the basis of risky personalities and behaviors.

Hofstede work on Uncertainty avoidance is the major contribution towards the basic concepts.

His “cultural dimensions theory” identifies dimensions of national culture considering,

Uncertainty Avoidance, Manliness versus Femininity, Power Distance, Short-term versus Long-

term orientation and Collectivism versus Individualism.

Assess the instability evasion among field deals work force was presented by David S. Cook and

Kerry D. Carson. Sample size of 155 was taken from U.K, USA, New Zealand, Australia and
Canada. They analyzed communicating individual vulnerability evasion by connection and

shirking. Their investigation highlighted towards those people who are interested to gain both

connection and evasion to bring down their vulnerability shirking in the work environment. In

retail markets, UAI also affects the consumer response to less recognized brands. In determining

UAI for individuals, cultural differences, Brand awareness and celebrity’s affect cannot be

ignored. Eliane Karsaklian study also identifies the effect of brand recognition of UAI in markets

including France and USA. She also identifies the impact of uncertainty avoidance in developing

attitude of consumer's towards different brands.

Individuals who were high on vulnerability shirking and those low on it acted in an unexpected

way. That business work force which carries low uncertainty avoidance has to adjust their

working according to the surroundings settings. On the other hand, business work force having

high uncertainty avoidance utilized evasion and connection to manage circumstances. The

individuals who reported moderate levels on vulnerability evasion wanted to utilize adjustment

as opposed to connection when required. It is likewise accepted that of new brands the

Uncertainty Avoidance Index significantly affect buyer's acknowledgement in the retail

advertise. Product nature, celebrities support and social contrasts all have an impact on deciding

individual UAI. Eliane Karsaklian in her studies showed that UAI reflects the trend of customer

towards brands. She infers that UAI has a significant role in changing customer behavior towards

brands.

The uncertainty avoidance has impact on women work decision in most of the countries. In the

cultures where UAI is high would be more easy for women to work in new horizons and increase

the trend of women for new business and developing entrepreneurs. With the rule of law the
business environment is more stable and provides more secure opportunities for women. The

workers will be more enthusiastic towards innovation and development of new industries both

locally and internationally. The fear of failure for entrepreneur will be less due to stable

conditions. On the other hand in societies where UAI has low impact will be less result oriented

for women working in the industries and businesses.

Humane orientation

In 2004 House et al. introduced Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness

Research Program or also known as GLOBE is formally humane orientation. It refers that

society “encourages and rewards individuals for being fair, altruistic, friendly, generous, caring,

and kind to others” (House & Javidan, 2004, p. 13). The evidence for these concepts is

contradictory. Kabasakal and Bodur (2004) identify positive relationship among in-group and

institutional collectivism and negative relation with assertiveness. This result was obtained after

exploring the relation among different dimensions of culture within GLOBE. In order to justify

unethical behaviors, willingness is negatively related to humane orientation (Parboteeah,

Bronson, & Cullen, 2005).

Kabasakal and Bodur (2004) identifies that right-wing orientation has a positive correlation with

humane orientation. Gupta et al. (2004) discussed the result from World Value Survey in which

the relationship between xenophobia and racism with humane orientation were discussed. There

is no such relation of Humane-orientation with well-being or societal tolerance. Low humane

orientation societies are more educated, urbanized and rich as compared to high degree of

humane orientation societies (Kabasakal & Bodur, 2004). Therefore these societies have more

relaxation for the individuals working especially women. In rich and more urbanized countries,
high standards of livings will give more respect and worthy status to women. Cultures will be

more women oriented and will neglect the male dominancy affect. Humane-oriented societies are

concentrated with high superstitious beliefs and more religious according to Bond et al. (2004).

GLOBE research findings are more complicated and vague towards humane orientation. In

humane-oriented behavior the unique products contains vague images, e.g., “In this society,

people are generally very concerned about others.” This statement can be interpreted in different

ways. The perceptions from this statement may include minorities or family or friends. The

dimension of humane-orientation is ambiguous.