Based on the data listed above, the two countries scored similarly in:

Power distance - "This dimension expresses the degree to which the weaker members of
society accept and expect an unequal distribution of power."[3]

Both countries accept social hierarchies and do not question the distribution of power. For
example, in China and India, the words of elders or superiors are often accepted without
question. These characteristics are also reflected in the institutional structures of the two
countries. All institutions, whether public or private, have clearly defined ranks and positions.

Masculinity - "This dimension represents society's preference for achievement and material
rewards. Society as a whole is more competitive."[4]

A Wall Street Journal article claims that millennials in India and China work 52 and 48 hours
a week, respectively, higher than most countries in the world[5]. Therefore, the accumulation
of wealth and prestige in both countries is more important than leisure and quality of life.
According to Hofstede, countries that score high in masculinity also have strict roles for
different genders [6]. This could also explain why women still do not make up 33% of India's
parliamentary seats. Again, this applies to the fact that even today there are very few women
in the Chinese Politburo.

· Uncertainty Avoidance - "The Uncertainty Avoidance dimension expresses the degree of

discomfort of members of society under uncertainty and ambiguity" [7]

The scores in the table show that both India and China are comfortable with broad abstract
ideas and are happy to operate without codifying all the rules and regulations into law. The
score becomes especially important in international relations, especially in relation to projects
such as the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which are often abstract and less codified. Often
in Western countries with high scores in this section, it is often difficult to understand these
items due to a lack of paperwork and a proper institutional structure.

· Indulgence: "Indulgence signifies a society that allows relative freedom to satisfy the basic
and natural human dynamics associated with the enjoyment of life and recreation."[8]
In other words, the freedom to express one's inner feelings is unchecked in a society that
scores high on this trait. Success and achievement are also attributed to personal factors, not
external ones.

This component also measures the degree to which norms and rules control individuals in a
society. India and China, being restricted societies, scored almost the same. A high focus on
achievement and low scores on indulgence can lead to a culture that places more value on
work than leisure and not succumbing to personal entertainment.

There are many similarities between the two cultures. However, cultural differences are more
noteworthy.

Individualism: This study busts the myth that India and China are classified in the same
"collectivist society" box. “Individualism can be defined as a preference for a loose social
framework in which individuals are expected to look after themselves and their immediate
family members.”[9]

This feature of individualism also measures the emphasis on creativity and individuality,
rather than conformity and interdependence [10]. China scores very low in this regard,
implying a greater emphasis on adherence to established norms and values. In a society that is
highly monitored and controlled, the emphasis on innovation and creativity may seem ironic.
While not scoring highly in the top quartile of this trait, India undoubtedly has a mix of
individualism and collectivism in its culture. Although part of social groups such as
individuals, families, religions and communities, the actions of individuals (often called
karma) are very individualistic [11] and determine whether a person is redeemed or not.
Many in India and China have come to realize that such a high level of consistency affects
creativity and innovation. Hopefully, Indians are emphasizing not only creativity and
innovation, but frugal innovation that benefits the masses.

Hofstede also believes that Western economic theory (Adam Smith's laissez-faire) or
psychology (Maslow's hierarchy of needs) is based on the individual as the primary focus
[12]. These models or theories will be perfectly suited to Western societies, but it is important
to also build indigenous models and theories that are appropriate for indigenous populations
and cultures.

Long Term Orientation (LTO): “Long Term Orientation represents cultivating practical
virtues in society that are oriented towards future rewards.” [13]
Countries that score high on this scale generally tend to look to the future, while countries
that score low on this ratio tend to look back and focus on the present [14]. Among countries
with lower scores on this dimension, societies with higher LTO scores focus on qualities such
as persistence and adaptability, while qualities such as tradition and social obligation do the
opposite.

The differences between China and India in this regard can be attributed to the differences in
the political systems of the two countries. In a democratic political system like India's,
governments tend to have many short-term goals, with a focus on upcoming elections.
Instead, China's political system gives leaders a broader view of China.

Societies with higher LTO scores generally have more flexible norms and rules than
countries with lower LTO scores. In China, the rules are more "grey" and are constructed to
accommodate "convenience" [15]. In this regard, China, with a score of 87, is one of the
highest scoring countries. In contrast, India's rules are both rigid and flexible, so the score is
51.

These scores are only a description of the culture, not an assessment of how good or bad it is.
It is a mistake to rate cultures and rate national cultures because each culture is unique and
serves a specific purpose to society.

In conclusion, we found similarities between Chinese and Indian cultures in terms of force
distance, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, and indulgence. While some of these traits can
be generalized as "Asian" traits, oversimplification puts us at risk of stereotyped culture. For
example, we noticed that in the individualism and LTO components, there was a large
difference in the scores of Indian and Chinese cultures. In addition, Asians have also evolved
over time and have become more mobile and more interactive with people from other
cultures and nationalities. Although the culture is so vibrant, getting to know another
country's culture before entering a negotiation or business can help strengthen
communication between the two parties and avoid bumping into each other.