Bangladesh, a small green speckle overshadowed by India, if looked for in the south Asian region of globe. Yet when looked deep into its root and core, one can find an origin full of history rich with culture and tradition. Majority of Bangladeshis are still holding on to their simple and authentic traditions. Hofstede (1997, p. 5) define culture as “culture (two) is always a collective phenomenon, because it is at least partly shared with people who live or lived within the same social environment, which is where it was learned.” Hofstede expands the concept of ‘collective programming’ by suggesting that culture could therefore be situated between human nature, which is not programmed, nor programmable on the one side – and the individual’s personality on the other side. There is a significant debate about what level of analysis is desirable for the concept of ‘culture’ to be a viable tool. As culture is been shared, it is not necessarily directly connected to the individual, also it is problematic to establish how many individuals who share a ‘culture’ make up any one culture (Dahl 2004, p. 7). In everyday language words like ‘Latin culture’ suggest that countries as diverse as Italy, Spain and Brazil share a common culture. Equally, the notion of ‘European culture’ can frequently be heard, again suggesting that a large number of people share a common culture across political and language boundaries. On the other hand, there are notions of small cultural units, probably more correctly referred to as sub-cultures, such as ‘Afro-American culture’ or ‘Bavarian culture’. It is therefore quite difficult to set a distinct level of resolution which is justified by the definition of Culture (Dahl 2004, p. 7).
Hofstede empirically found four dimensions of culture in research across more than 50 countries. The dimensions are: power distance, collectivism versus individualism, masculinity versus femininity and uncertainty avoidance. Bangladesh was not within his first survey IBM studies. Hofstede later adds a new dimension, long- versus short term orientation, based on the student sample of 23 countries around 1985 (Hofstede 2001, p. 351). Bangladesh was included in this new survey. In Hofstede’s first survey many other Asian countries like India and Pakistan were included. Since Pakistan and India are the countries nearer to Bangladesh and Bangladesh was a part of Pakistan until 1971 and as these countries have the same nature of history since the British rule and having the same socio-economic, political and cultural features – we can say that Bangladesh would have been placed in relatively same position if it were included in Hofstede’s survey (Ehsan 2002). Also Jeannette Littlemore (2003) of University of Birmingham did a study on eighteen Bangladeshi Civil Servants attending a six-week course in public service administration at the University of Birmingham, and seven of the lecturers who taught on the course. In order to identify areas of disparity between the (working) cultures of the Bangladeshi students and their British lecturers, Hofstede’s (1980) cultural values questionnaire was administered.
Major other cultural studies like Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner (1997), Edward Hall () Shalom Schwartz (1992, 1994) does not cover Bangladesh specifically. Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner identify seven value orientations. Some of these value orientations can be regarded as nearly identical to Hofstede’s dimensions (Dahl 2004, p. 14). Dalh (2004, p. 14-15) also added that Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner’s communitarianism/individualism value orientation seems to be virtually identical to Hofstede’s Collectivism/Individualism.Their achievement/ascription value orientation, which describes how status is accorded, appears to be linked to Hofstede’s power distance index, at least if one accepts that status is accorded by nature rather than achievement, and that this reflects a greater willingness to accept power distances.
Bangladesg rank 11 with 40 score in Hofstede’s Long Term Orientation index (Hofstede 2001, p. 356). Hostede define "Long Term Orientation stands for the fostering of virtues oriented towards future rewards, in particular perseverance and thrift. It’s opposite pole, Short Term Orientation, stands for the fostering of virtues related to the past and present, in particular, respect for tradition, preservation of ‘face’ and fulfilling social obligations” (Hofstede 2001, p. 359). Long-term orientation cultures tend to respect thrift, perseverance, status, order, sense of shame, and have a high savings rate. Their members tend to make an investment in lifelong personal networks, what the Chinese call "guanxi." There is a willingness to make sacrifices now in order to be rewarded in the future (Barki 2009 p.16).
Individualism versus collectivism is one of the important aspects of culture’s ‘unstated assumptions’. The assumption that we are bound together into tight groups of interdependent individuals is fundamental to collectivism. The assumptions that we are independent entitles, different and distant from our groups, is fundamental to individualism (Triandis 1995, p. 4). Hofstede describe Collectivist as the vast majority of people in our world live in societies in which the interest of the group prevails over the interest of the individual and Individualist as a minority of people in our world live in societies in which the interests of the individual prevail over the interest of group (Hofstede 1997, p. 50). His Individualism Index (IDV) score measures the level of individualism and collectivism in a particular culture. Countries scored low in the IDV are characterised as collectivist. One thing can immediately recognised by looking at Hofseted’s Individual Index (IDV) is that nearly all wealthy countries score high on IDV while nearly all poor countries score low. Hofstede mentioned that there is a strong relationship between a country’s national wealth and the degree of individualism in its culture. India and Pakistan are referred as collectivist having 48 and 14. The position of Bangladesh will be the average of these two countries which referred it as a collectivist country (Ehsan 2002). Bengali society (including the Civil Service) has traditionally relied on a system of networks and personal contacts (Lewis, Wood & Gregory, 1996), implying a more collectivist system, On the other hand, more recent research has shown that there is an increasing trend towards individualism amongst the middle classes of Bangladeshi society ( Wood, 1999) (Littlemore 2003). Littlemore found the lecturers seemed to have a slightly more collectivist outlook than the students (students’ mean rank: 11.4; lecturers’ mean rank: 14)
Power distance is defined as ‘the extent to which the less powerful members of institutions and organizations within a country expect and accept that power is distributed unequally’ (Hofstede, 1997:28). Most of the Asian countries under the survey of Hofstede are found having large power distance. The PDI scores found in India and Pakistan are 77, 55 respectively. The position of Bangladesh would be the average of these two scores (Ehsan 2002). Also Littlemore (2003, p. 7) suggested “the rigid hierarchical nature of Bengali society, and of its Civil Service (Kramsjo & Wood, 1992; McGregor, 1991) suggested that the Bangladeshi students would be more inclined towards a high power distance than their British lecturers.) Large power distance is characterised as highly hierarchical and centralised management, inequalities among employees, top-down communication, and wide salary gap between top and bottom of organization. Administrators are highly respected and benevolent autocratic type. Elders are highly respected because of their age and position. Bosses deserve same level of workplace respect even outside the work. Elderly people are viewed as wise and therefore, granted respect. Most of the major decisions are made by the most senior male, based on age or position. Littlemore (2003, p. 9) found the survey students were significantly more likely than the lecturers to favour high power distance (students’ mean rank: 13.6; lecturers’ mean rank: 6.4, p < 0.05) Refer Appendix. This is also the case in family-owned/managed businesses. Regardless of what the relationship is between an employee and a Bangladeshi boss, the relationship most of the time considered as extended family member. Most of the decisions in the civil service of Bangladesh are actually made at the highest level although the powers to make decisions are delegated within the hierarchy (Ehsan 2002). Middle and junior level officers use their delegated power within a narrow limit.
Munem and Kim ( p. 11) Lack of political will and bureaucratic resistance to change continued to frustrate all efforts to break away from a highly centralized administrative system, inherited from the colonial era. P17 The rigid, hierarchical bureaucratic form of civil service which has predominated for last few decades after independence
“hierarchical, centralized, and bureaucratic” (UNDP 2007)
This is because of the fear of contravening the decision higher up as well as for lack of self-confidence and hesitancy to assume responsibility (MoE, 1989, p. 12). As a result, civil servants in Bangladesh prefer to push decisions to ever-higher levels, even when rules allow decisions at lower levels. The centralisation syndrome is pervasive (World Bank, 1996: 106).
Hofstede (1997, p. 82) define masculinity as “pertains to societies in which social gender roles are clearly distinct i.e., men are supposed to be assertive, tough, and focus on material success whereas women are supposed to be more modest, tender, and concerned with the quality of life, femininity pertains to societies in which social gender roles overlap i.e., both men and women are supposed to be modest, tender and concerned with the quality of life.” India and Pakistan scores 56 and 50 and fall within the masculine category. Considering this and other related matters Bangladesh would falls in the masculine category (Ehsan 2002). Unlike individualism, masculinity which was related to the country’s degree of economic development, Hofstede found both rich and poor masculine and rich and poor feminine countries.
Andaleeb (2004) in their research found that there is a change going on in Bangladesh organisation culture. With the higher ratings on female participation, organisational climate, and communication environment seem to suggest that organisations in Bangladesh today are perhaps better disposed to use the different capabilities, strengths, and perspectives that both genders, especially women, bring to their work environment.
Though most of the analysis of Bangladesh culture based on Hofstede’s research finding in South Asian countries but , despite the many studies that have employed Hofstede’s framework, it has not been subjected to rigorous tests of reliability and validity (as per Churchill 1979 and Schwab 1980). Perhaps it is because Hofstede’s cultural framework is so appealing from a conceptual standpoint that its psychometric properties have received little scrutiny. Several studies been done to validate Hofstede’s framework and almost two-thirds of these studies found little or no support for Hofstede’s cultural framework (Blodgett, Rose ,Horton, Bakir- ‘A Test of the Validity of Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions’ ). Some have found significant overlap among the various dimensions of culture (e.g., Bakir et al. 2000), and others have found the reliability of some of the dimensions to be low (Kagitcibasi 1994). The data from only 40 countries out of 66 were used in characterising national cultures and in only six of the countries were the number of respondents more than 1,000 in both surveys. These are Belgium, France, Great Britain, Germany, Japan, and Sweden. In fifteen countries the number was less than 200. The first survey in Pakistan, which is a base country to define Bangladesh culture based on Hofstede’s finding was of 37 IBM employees, the second of 70 employees (Hofstede, 1980a: 73). Those surveyed were similar in every respect other than nationality. As the respondents all worked for IBM they shared a single monopolistic ‘organizational culture’ common between and within every IBM subsidiary. As they were matched on an ‘occupational’ basis, each matched group also shared a common ‘occupational culture’ (Blodgett, Rose ,Horton, Bakir- ‘A Test of the Validity of Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions’ ). For instance, during the time the survey(s) were undertaken, working for a non-family owned firm or the public sector would have been much more unusual in Ireland or Taiwan for example than, in, say, Britain, or the USA and working for high-technology business would have been more unusual in Third World nations such as El Salvador and Bangladesh than in industrialized nations such as West Germany and the United States (Whitley, 1992; Lytle et al., 1995). As Lytle et al., state: ‘Hofstede’s (1980) data … was representative of a very limited segment of the overall national population’ (1995: 197).
After graduation I started my career as a management trainee in a local bank. The recruitment criteria were very lengthy and competitive including two interviews and a written test. So when eight months of job fighting was over and I was selected, I was over the moon. My manager who was also the branch manager was well known in the city for his active work nature, as a chairman of a prestigious Rotary club etc. I meet him couple of time at various social functions and found him quite charming and enthusiastic about young people. So I was expecting a very friendly and supportive leader as my superior at my work. But in reality I discovered him as an autocratic leader. Autocratic leadership is an extreme form of transactional leadership, where leaders have absolute power over their workers or team (McCann and Pigeau 2000, p. 178). Staff and team members have little opportunity to make suggestions, even if these would be in the team’s or the organization’s best interest. (http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newLDR_84.htm accessed on 31/03/10)
The Manager used to transfer all the work to his subordinates and expect these work will done in high a standard. If there is any silly mistake he used to criticise the person in a ‘sharp’ way-asking about his college or university and his or her quality of education. But if someone done a job properly he or she hardly gets any recognition, that perfect piece job was taken as granted. When a customer enters into the bank, even for a regular inquiry, the manager himself will deal with him. Even when I was attending the inquiry, he will interfere in the middle and briefly ask the customer about the problem and then tell me to help the customer. It was exactly as McCann and Pigeau (2000, p. 177-178) mentioned that autocratic leaders feel the subordinate should be told exactly what to do and how to do it. So the customer most of the time get the idea that it is the manager himself who is the most dynamic worker in the bank and they hardly find it necessary to give thanks to other official for their work. The manager will never reach me or anyone I knew in that bank to reach the Esteem of Marslow’s hierarchy (1954). The Esteem refers to self Esteem, achievement, respect of others and respect by others. There was no feedback system from the subordinate for the branch manager. As the branch was doing well financially he was enjoying the substantial power given by the higher authority. He was using this power in an autocratic way. Even in general he was charming and seeming respectful but he hardly consider the feelings or views of his colleagues. Though sometimes he pretended listening others opinion, but at the end it was always in his way. The Autocratic Leadership Style was first described by Lewin, Lippitt, and White in 1938 along with the democratic leadership (Antonakis J et all p. 7). 658.4092/ nat
In the late evenings the manager used to attend his friends and members of the social club with hot drinks in his office. When the workers were busy closing the transactions for that day he was planning how he could more highlight him in various social events. Though there was a shift ending time for every position, but no one could go home without asking him. I found him as a Self-protector leader. In the PROJECT GLOBE the Self-protector leader describe as- self-centred, status-conscious, conflictual, procedural and face-saver (r). Also I was not feeling motivated at work. Though there was an opportunity to take the banking career into the next level, most of the employees including me were looking for other better opportunity. It was not a very long term oriented thinking as Hofstede () found Bangladesh in general. I could go and discuss about my situation and how I feel about my workplace with my manager. It was not any culture or norm; instead it was the good reference factor which stopped me doing that.
I was involved with our family business which is run by my father who is the Proprietor of the business. The nature of the business is retail and I was working as ‘Duty Manager’ position. When I first started with him, I was very much enthusiastic. I got a business degree and was looking forward to develop a new improved system which will increase the efficiency. But my father was a huge resistance for any sort of change . Eventually after a short period of time I had to give up these plans and just followed the existing system which was developed and overlooked by my father. O’Connor (1993, p. 15) divide change into three basic kind: routine, improvement and innovative. My father could only accept the routine changes in the business, even in a conservative way. These changes were regular and periodic. Employee feel anxiety if these changes do not occur. For example, staff rotation, seasonal order changes etc. But i wanted some innovative change to get the competitive advantages in the market. These changes would help to address future business needs and potential problems rather than immediate ones (O’Connor (1993, p. 16). One of the changes I wanted was computerised the inventory process so we would precisely know how much inventory we have and the re-ordering would be more efficient. But he did not see any need of changing the paper based system and thought the machine is unnecessary and will make the whole system more complicated. Also when I raised the work efficiency of a department manager who was not punctual, hardly meeting the target and always busy with his personal matters, he replied to me he is aware of the matter and gave him couple of warnings. As there were more qualified people available in the job market, I suggest him to change that department manager. But he said this person is working for a long time and though he is not efficient but he is honest and we are paying him just a bit less than the market price. Comparing with opportunity cost I tried to justify the how it was harming the business. But he was rigid in his decision. I should have aware that resistance to this kind of change is likely to be much higher than for either improvement or routine change.
Considering Herzberg’s (1959) theory of job satisfaction, my father was proving me only the Hygiene Factors. I was comparatively well paid, can get some extra money whenever I need, the job security was extremely high and working condition was great. But there was no ‘Motivation Factors’ which means hardly any achievement, recognition or promotion. I found him as a ‘Theory X’ manager. He always thinks at work that all employees are inherently lazy and will avoid work if they can and that they inherently dislike work. As a result of this, he believes that workers need to be closely supervised and comprehensive systems of controls developed. He used to get intelligence from one or two his reliable employee about everyone’s work. I found out later that most these reports were biased.
Conclusion:
As all countries are gradually exposed to the products of the same scientific discoveries in the form of modern technology, as these play an important role in culture change, some sociologists have concluded that all socities will become more and more similar (Hofstede 2001, p. 34).