Module 2.2 – Explaining the 12 Dimensions

ObjectivesAt the end of this module, participants will be able to:

Understand the 12 dimensions of Cultural Mapping Explain the 12 dimensions and how they are interlinked Use the 12 dimensions in examples Explain a Cultural Mapping group dynamics profile

Theory

Explaining the 12 Dimensions of Cultural MappingThe 12 Dimensions of Cultural Mapping were shaped during 2001 & 2002. The initial starting point was the material of Hall, Hofstede and Trompenaars.

As we started going through the process of defining the parameters we realized in the beginning that dividing the world along the lines of nationalities was not going to be a sustainable concept. We maintained some of the dimensions that were proposed by Hofstede and Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner, but created a more complete picture based on further research. Some of the Hofstede and Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner dimensions were given new names.

It was an important decision to look at the Cultural Map from a “Self-Cultural Analysis” point of view rather than a nationality driven analysis.

We initially had more dimensions but tried to limit the number of dimensions to those that have the greatest impact on an individual’s Self-Culture. Our attempt was to create a set of dimensions that would give as holistic an overview as possible of the total impact of culture on an individual’s behavior.

We are aware of a secondary layer that can be constructed on the basis of the 12 dimensions. As an example: Geert Hofstede’s dimension of uncertainty avoidance can be constructed on the basis of the following three dimensions: Destiny, Outlook, and Accountability. If someone is directed on destiny, has a traditional outlook and a community accountability focus it is very likely this person will have strong uncertainty avoidance.

Other dimensions can be grouped to look at other cultural components. Dimensions like context, decision-making, accountability and destiny have a strong impact on a culture being open or closed.

More in depth information and research about the 12 dimensions was prepared by Beth Yoder and can be found in the appendices of this manual.

The 12 dimensions used by KnowledgeWorkx to create a Cultural Map are:

1. Growth (Material or Personal)2. Relationship (Situational or Universal)3. Outlook (Innovation or Tradition)4. Destiny (Directive or Directed)5. Context (Formal or Informal) 6. Connecting (Inclusive or Exclusive)7. Expression (Conceal or Reveal)8. Decision-Making (Rules or Relationship)9. Planning (Time or People)10. Communication (Direct or Indirect)11. Accountability (Individual or Community)12. Status (Achieved or Ascribed)

These dimensions make up the sum total of the cultural influences in an individual’s life and together with personality driven factors form the major influences on thinking, feeling, speaking and acting.

Cultural Mapping DimensionsWe will now explain each one of the dimensions in more detail:

1. Growth (Material or Personal)If you were given 100,000 USD to invest in your company what would you spend it on? Would you invest more in people or in infrastructure, systems processes, and hardware? Of course this question has quite a bit to do with the line of work you are in and the role you play in the

organization, but we are focusing here on the cultural side of this dimension. From Cultural Research it has been shown that certain cultures tend to be more people oriented and other cultures are more systems and processes focused. Consider the difference between Danish and German cultural preferences. Although they are neighboring countries the Germans tend to be more Material growth focused while the Danes

are more Personal growth focused. This dimension has a lot of influence on the allocation of resources in the company and the underlying cultural assumptions and values that drive the decisions. We need to be aware of the cultural preferences of the people around us so that we can align our expectations. We have seen people in traditional ‘people-focused’ jobs (like an HR-director) with a material growth focus. We also had IT-managers with a people-focus and this has an influence on the way they are going to lead the team and allocate their resources.

2. Relationship (Situational or Universal)The way we view relationships is based on a universal perspective or a situational perspective. The situational view of relationships establishes a relationship based on the need to spend time together. If we are on a team at work and we have a job to do we relate and even build quite a strong relationship, but outside the work I would not easily connect

with you. I might never invite you home, or into my social circle. I would not easily invite you to play a sport with me, or connect our families and friends together.

People who are universal in their approach are more holistic and once a relationship has been established at work they will soon invite you home, for an evening meal with their friends, come to a social gathering etc. For people with a universal perspective relationships are normally transferred from one ‘sphere of life’ to another ‘sphere of life’ without any difficulty. Moving from an environment with one cultural preference to

3. Outlook (Innovation or Tradition)When I am given the task to prepare a presentation about our company to a new partner or client, where do I spend my time: in the future or in the past? Would I focus on the great achievements and names of the past or would I brush past it and focus on the great things we want to achieve in the future??

A person with an innovative outlook perspective will need to come to terms with the fact that many parts of the world have a traditional outlook perspective and room needs to be created to allow the relationship to grow along those lines! People who are more from a traditional outlook perspective might need to get used to the speed at which innovative outlook people want to move into the future without much concern for the past.

4. Destiny (Directive or Directed)Through destiny we are trying to get an understanding of the way people see control. The question is: Who is in control of my destiny? Is my destiny in control of me, or am I in control of my destiny? If I believe I am in charge of my destiny I tend to be pro-active, assertive and maybe even a little bit

aggressive. I want to forge my future and believe that I can shape my surroundings to create my destiny. The Destiny dimension has an influence on our style of leadership, our beliefs related to motivation, the way we compete in the market and the way we negotiate. People with a directive destiny preference tend to have a more aggressive competition style. If you look at countries

where directive destiny is embedded in the makeup of the culture (e.g. US, Netherlands, Australia) you will see a different way of competing in the market than in countries where a directed destiny preference is the norm (e.g. most of the Arab nations, Bangladesh, Pakistan). Religion does play a role in shaping our preference in this dimension, but it is certainly not the only factor.

5. Context (Formal or Informal)Formality or informality is probably first noticed in dress and external protocol, but that is not all there is to the dimension of Context. The organization of our environment is at the core of how

much formality we are used to. The ‘context dimension’ shows up everywhere and the most difficult part to deal with is the unwritten part of what is appropriate and what is not appropriate. It involves easier things like dress code, order of seating, proper introductions, how to address a person, and the way you write emails or letters. But it gets a bit more complicated when we try to figure out why one person seems to be in higher authority than another person despite the fact that their seniority in the company is lower. Or

what do you do in a situation where corporate structures are secondary to the tribal structures built into society and you need to figure out how to use those tribal structures to find the right entry point into a new company?

What do you do if two people with a preference for a formal context actually have a totally different viewpoint on what is formally appropriate? Both might accuse one another of being impolite or too informal. Unfortunately, there is only so much related to context you can memorize. Understanding the dimension of context in a new culture requires a combination of good Inter-Cultural Intelligence and continuous study of behavior and visible or hidden structures in society.

6. Connecting (Inclusive or Exclusive)When we connect with people we have certain set cultural assumptions that will dictate how much we allow people into our private space, how much they are allowed to be part and how much

information we share with them. People with an inclusive connecting style share information quite freely, invite people to be part of conversations even if they might not need to be part, and feel that it is more important that someone is part, than being left out of the group.

For people with an exclusive style of connecting they are more discerning about who can be part of a conversation and expect the other person will have sound judgment to know when they can be part and when not. A person from an exclusive connecting background can be heard saying: “Shall I come back in half an hour, it seems you have something private to discuss.” People form an inclusive connecting background could get the impression that people with an exclusive connecting style are rude or even secretive in the way they relate and share or not share information.

7. Expression (Conceal or Reveal)The dimension of expression should not be confused with the dimension of Connecting. Expression has to do with showing or not showing emotions and feelings. Somebody with a concealing

expression style would typically not show emotions and feelings openly and will probably be of the opinion that showing feelings and emotions in the work environment are inappropriate. If a person with a concealing style of expression wants to show emotions or feelings they are normally very

calculated and have an express purpose. In the Arab world showing emotions is normally not a demonstration of how you feel, but is more a tool to advance your cause (e.g. in a trade negotiation situation, emotions might range from anger, to sadness to joy to jokes to friendly handshakes. All emotions shown are tools to get the best deal. If emotions truly start to be expressions of how one feels, it means you have lost control). On other hand people with a revealing expression

style will freely show emotions and feelings and will see the expression of this as a way to openly communicate with others. People with a revealing expression style also rely on the emotional feedback of others to give direction to their conversation and might feel ‘lost’ in an environment that is more concealing style focused.

8. Decision-Making (Rules or Relationship)The Decision-making dimension focuses on influence of rules, policies and procedures on the one and relationships on the other hand in the way we make day-to-day decisions. People who are rules oriented tend to stick to the rules no matter what and might even put relationships at risk because ‘the policy says so’. People who have a relationship focus in decision-making try to keep the relationships as healthy as possible and will break the rules, policies or procedures if necessary to maintain the relationship. It is obvious that this can cause some challenges in the workplace. Rules focused people can come across as hard and uncaring to people who have a relationship focused style of decision-making. Rule focused people on the other hand can be frustrated by people who seem to take liberty to make exceptions to the rules all the time.

One way the difference in rules versus relationship focused decision-making shows is in contractual agreements. Typically rules focused societies will have lengthy contracts with all details in place. The contract becomes a manual that governs the relationship. In societies with a more relationship focused style of decision-making a contract tends to be much shorter and is seen more as an expression of an exciting relationship. The contract is not there to govern the

relationship, but more and official expression of what has been discussed and agreed upon.

In relationship focused environments it is important to keep working on the relationship as the relationship is more important than the product that person might represent. Many times rules focused people make the mistake of entering into a relationship focused environment thinking that their product will get them ‘in the door,’ only to realize later that their product follows after a relationship has been established. The upfront investment of entering into a relationship focused environment is normally up to 3 times higher than in a rules focused environment, but in the long run this investment will always pay off.

9. Planning (Time or People)In planning our day the question is: how much time do I schedule and how much time do I leave open for the unexpected. In a highly time-oriented society this would be almost a strange question

to ask. The answer would be: “I schedule my whole day!” But for a person who is strongly people oriented in their planning they might not schedule a single meeting and only have a list in their head of the people they need to connect with. What is amazing for people from a time oriented planning background is that people from a people oriented planning background will actually be just as effective in getting

things done!People with a time oriented style of planning will plan many weeks in advance and will expect their day to run smoothly without interruptions. If the number of interruptions goes up so does their level of frustration. For a person with a people oriented planning style the time oriented people can come across as cold and rigid and it can be misunderstood if they are told: “I am sorry I don’t have time right now, but we can schedule a meeting in 2 weeks from now?” Individuals from a people oriented planning style normally view time as something they are in charge of. The Arabs have a saying: “You (westerners) have the watches, but we have the time.” Typically there is a sense of ‘plenty’ of time that goes with the people oriented style of planning. While the concept of “Time is Money” fits very well with people who have a time oriented planning style. 10. Communication (Direct or Indirect)The dimension of communication we look at our comfort Level with a Direct versus indirect communication style. A typical saying for a direct communication style person would be: “I say what I mean and I mean what I say”. Many times direct communication style people don’t want to

wait to state the facts. They also tend to come across as confrontational and inconsiderate in the eyes of people who have adopted an indirect style of communicating. In an indirect communication environment the honor of the person is many times linked to the way communication is handled. The highest good is not so much the focus on ‘saying what I mean and meaning what I say’ but more on keeping the honor of the other person in tact

while I deliver the message. This might sometimes be done by third person communication or by using an example or a parable that describes the same situation. This is done in such a way that the other person understands the meaning of the story, applies it to their current situation and draws the proper conclusions. In the eyes of somebody from a direct communication background this can be very laborious and can be a cause of frustration because things are left unsaid or communication is not 100% clear. Constructive criticism is very much a concept from a direct communication society as well as assertive communication. The art of using honorable communication styles, parables, good stories and illustrations is part of the realm of indirect communication.

People from an indirect communication background often find it hard to receive direct communication and interpret it to mean that the other person doesn’t like them, is rude, insensitive and not interested in building long-term relationships.

11. Accountability (Individual or Community)Accountability looks at how I view opinions, ideas, objections, thoughts, knowledge and my ability to contribute to the group. If I have an individual focused accountability style I will typically feel individually responsible for what I do with all the things that I have learned and gathered over the

years. People with an individual focused accountability style tend to be much more verbal as they feel they have to share their ideas, thoughts etc. Their way of looking at ‘being a good team-player’ is giving everything inside of you to the greater benefit of the group. They tend to be lively in group discussions, have no problem with objecting to somebody’s opinion and enjoy constructive brainstorming sessions.

People with a community focused accountability tend to place higher value on the opinions, ideas, objections, thoughts, knowledge of the group or community they belong to than on their own opinions, ideas, objections, thoughts, knowledge. As a result they might not feel as free to share their ideas, but rather want to verify first if their ideas are in line with the group they belong to. The community or group can be defined along tribal lines, cast, level of education, social status, family name etc. In companies with many employees that have been there for many years a community accountability sub-group might form as a result of years of working together with many unwritten protocols and behaviors that belong to the sub-group.

The Individual accountability concept of brainstorming has caused quite a number of challenges in a mixed group of community and individual accountability people. Typically, meeting facilitation in a community accountability setting will include many one on one meetings with individuals before the actual meeting takes place. This process takes time, but it ensures that the meeting facilitator will not propose things that might not be accepted by the group. It allows everyone room to ‘check’ with their community to see if the thoughts and opinions they want to put forward are in line with the general consensus. People from an individual accountability background who negotiate with a client from a community accountability background are often frustrated because things said at the negotiating table were later withdrawn or changed. This is a typical problem because if you push somebody from a community accountability background for an answer, their honor dictates they will give an answer, even if it is not the final answer.

12. Status (Achieved or Ascribed)Our last dimension is Status. Do I achieve my status or is it ascribed to me? Do I assume that hard work and investment into my career, my job or the company I work for will eventually be noticed and rewarded? Or is status acquired through years of service in the company (I just have to wait my turn), my level of education, my family name, the connections I have in the organization, my caste?

When an a person with an achieved status style enters into an ascribed status environment it often leads to confusion, frustration and disappointment when rewards are not received no matter how hard they work. Or, equally frustrating, if rewards are given, they don’t appear to be linked to individual achievement but to factors that are hidden to most people in the organization.

Ascribed focused people find achievement focused societies hard and cold with little consideration for seniority, years of faithful service and social status linked to family name.

When companies have to consider the design of appraisal, performance and reward systems, understanding the dynamics of the status dimensions is crucial in making good decisions.

In ascribed focused environments it is quite common to see a strong link between the identity of the person and the work they do. For example, if somebody questions my competence it means that that person thinks I shouldn’t be in this position. And if that is the case the person who helped me get into the position must have made a mistake. As a result constructive discussion of the performance of a person can become difficult. The link between who I am and what I do is so strong that performance discussion has to be designed in a different way than in an achieved status environment. In an achieved status environment continuous achievement is normally linked to having reached a certain level and it is normally assumed that not achieving is going be brought up in a performance evaluation. (Of course you do get situations where a person who might have achieved a certain level of status now tries to hide their lack of achievement.)

Although misunderstood by people from an achieved status background; the ascribed status style can be very effective. Many times people who are ascribed into certain positions will get all the support they need in order to also achieve the status that has been given to them. The person who has been ascribed into a position of status will typically be honor bound to also prove to society that he or she is worthy of the appointment.

Key Terms The 12 Dimensions of Cultural Mapping

ResourcesThe following table contains a list of resources that are available for this module:

Description Type LocationPresentation slides PPT 2.2 Explaining the Cultural Mapping DimensionsHandout PDF 2.2.1 The 12 Dimensions at a GlanceVideo clip explaining formal versus informal dimension

Video file DVD: Protocol FormalInformal

Video clip explaining ascribed versus achieved status

Video file DVD: School event AscribedAchieved

Video clip explaining tradition versus innovation outlook

Video file DVD: Cultural ReformRedGreenLight.vob

Video clip explain direct and indirect communication

Video file DVD: Lost In Translation Suntory Film Shoot.wmv

Video clip explaining reveal and conceal Expression

Video File DVD: Aegian London Ad With subtitles and:Aegian London Ad Without subtitles

Video clip explaining direct versus indirect communication

Video file DVD: Teach all my children

Handout 2.2.1 The 12 Dimensions at a Glance