In Hofstede’s Cultural dimensions, individualism is defined as the degree of interdependence that a society maintains among its members. In the United States, individualism is a key component of being an American. It’s the home of free speech, free thinking and the freedom to disagree or dissent from the group. There is a hierarchical culture that has propelled the U.S into being one of the leaders of the free world. Many countries try to emulate the success that the U.S has had in productivity. Due to the individualistic nature of its people, there’s never a shortage in confidence or willingness to work. The U.S relies heavily on self-sufficiency. Conversely, the American people value their independence and the ability to place their self-interest above a potential collective interest. They enjoy holding their own personal beliefs about religion, politics and any other controversial topic.
Contrastingly, in a country such as Pakistan, where the society is very collectivistic, they don’t indulge in such freedoms. They believe that the group is more important than the individual which encourages behaviors that will benefit society while discouraging behaviors that would do the contrary. For instance, it’s a cultural norm to maintain long-term relationships with their entire family. Instead of caring for your immediate family and potentially having dual income, it’s common for a few members to provide for the entire family on both sides. Aside from their family dynamic, there are established social norms in place to ensure social harmony among the group. For example, Malala being shot for trying to receive an education while speaking out about the inequality that women face in Pakistan. In the book she recounts, “We talked about how things happen for different reasons, this happened to me, and how education for females not just males is one of our Islamic rights. I was speaking up for my right as a Muslim woman to be able to go to school.” (Yousafzai, 2013, p. 141) Everyone holds each other accountable in every aspect of daily life. When someone acts in a way that doesn’t benefit the group or doesn’t align with group beliefs, they will be ostracized and possibly brought to face punishment for their crime. Therefore, when Malala dissent from the social norm where she’s supposed to remain uneducated, she had to face brutal consequences.
Power distance is the extent to which the less powerful members of an organization accept and expect that power is distributed unequally. According to Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, the United States has a low power distance culture; whereas Pakistan has a high power distance culture. Due to their masculine nature, it’s understandable that Americans have low power distance. Based on my understanding of the cultural dimensions, I assume that having low power distance can not only help maintain equality it might also cause conflicts. Americans are generally less willing to accept an unequal distribution of power because they feel entitled to a certain amount for themselves. Pakistan, on the other hand, has high power distance. There are clear social systems in place that support and help to maintain inequality. Using a business example, if a Pakistani employee wanted a promotion, they wouldn’t ask for it because they believe that if their boss wanted them to have a promotion they would offer them one. On a larger scale, a country with high power distance like Pakistan would usually only have a few leaders and many subordinates who are too afraid to critique their superiors. In cases like these, government and economic issues can get out of control. Case in point, the inequality between the genders shown in Malala’s memoir. In the book, it’s shown how poor Pakistani families ensure that the boys in the family receive an education while the girls are often forgotten. Malala recalls, “My mother had been waiting for a son and could not hide her joy when he was born. To me, he seemed very thin and small, like a reed that could snap in the wind, but he was the apple of her eye, her ladla. It seemed to me that his every wish was her command.” (Yousafzai, 2013, p. 16) As shown in that quote, men are treated with much more respect and reverence than the women. It’s even evident in the way that a woman treats her child when it’s born. If Pakistan had low power distance or higher individualism, many people wouldn’t be so accepting of the mistreatment of the women in their society. Also, having higher power distance “stalls innovation and in the long run halts economic development” (Kooyers 2015).
The Masculinity v. femininity dimension analyzes how a country views masculine versus feminine traits. Here, masculinity refers to assertiveness and high achievement while femininity is typically associated with nurturing traits such as quality of life and personal connection. A high score on this dimension indicates that a society is driven by competition and achievement. The United States, as demonstrated on the chart, scored very high on the dimension and is considered a rather masculine society that holds achievement with the highest regard. Coinciding with their individualistic nature, Americans strive to be the best no matter the cost. If we used the workplace setting as an example, the U.S would be the employee with the “can do” attitude. This employee believes that they can always perform better and is always willing to take on a challenge.
For many years, Pakistan could be described as a feminine country due to their close nit family structures but, “with the passage of time there is a masculine shift due to education and significant growth of middleclass society towards development and more global awareness,” (Latif 2015). Currently, Pakistan falls close to the middle on this dimension where masculinity and femininity seems to be of equal importance. In Pakistan, the main religion is Islam. Since Pakistan is a very collectivistic society, the social climate prohibits anyone from following opposing religions or acting in a way that is not Muslim. In the schools, students are taught to be agreeable and are explicitly shown the power structure. As they grow older and experience it for themselves, some are radicalized. Using the Islamic religion and the Quran, many spout fallacies that prevent women from excelling in any area besides motherhood or caring for the household. They grasp at any chance of gaining power while neglecting the people who help sustain their society using their nurturing capabilities. Malala is quoted saying, “Our men think earning money and ordering around others is where power lies. They don't think power is in the hands of the woman who takes care of everyone all day long and gives birth to their children. (Yousafzai, 2013, p. 116)” In a society like Pakistan, it’s difficult to advance because the only competition that exists is to gain power. A majority of the people are not competing to move up the ranks in a company but to gain power in the social hierarchy. The few that are working for the betterment of the country are met with an unwelcoming force that discourages the rest to try. Malala, raised by a relatively liberal man, believed that women could contribute a great amount to society if they were given the opportunity. She believes that, “There are two powers in the world; one is the sword and the other is the pen. There is a third power stronger than both, that of women. (Yousafzai, 2013, p. 31)” Once Pakistan is able to face that reality, they can make great steps toward improving their society both socially and economically. Ultimately, there are profound similarities and differences between the United States and Pakistan. The United States is an individualistic country with low power distance and high masculinity whereas Pakistan is a collectivistic country with high power distance and medium/low masculinity. Though they differ in culture, they share a similar goal to be a well-functioning society.