Volume 7 Number 3 2000 25

that our hypotheses are predicated on the

Do Feminine Cultures “culture-specific” theory - an “emic” view. But

there is an opposing theory - an “etic” view,
which posits that certain situational factors,
Really Behave More such as the economic environment, impact or-
ganisations in all societies. One is also cau-
Feminine Than tioned that a number of problems remain for
users of the UN statistical data.
Masculine Cultures? A Introduction

Comparison of 48 Many general management writers (e.g.

Schermerhorn, Jr., 1996; Lewis, Goodman, &
Countries’ Fandt, 1995) discuss quality of life in terms of
“quality-of-work-life” (QWL) programmes. Ba-
Femininity-Masculinity sically, these writers posit that programmes to
improve QWL focus on security, safety and

Ranking to Their UN health, participation in decision making,

meaningful work, protection from unfair
treatment, and/or opportunities to satisfy so-
Human Development cial needs (Lewis et al., 1995: 372). The
trends that are helping improve QWL in the
Rankings modern workplace include the change from
taller to flatter organisational structures and
from centralised top management to decen-
Carl A. Rodrigues and Harvey Blumberg tralisation with “empowerment” (Schermer-
horn, Jr., 1996: 266). Thus, as Hofstede
The Authors (1984: 389) proposed, one facet of a people’s
quality of life is their QWL.
Carl A. Rodrigues is Professor of International
Management, Department of Management, A question which managers of domestic
School of Business, Montclair State Univer- enterprises seeking to internationalise their
sity, Upper Montclair, NJ 07043, and Harvey operations might ask is: “How does the QWL
Blumberg is Professor of Quantitative Meth- concept apply across cultures?” In this re-
ods, Department of Decision Sciences, School spect, Hofstede (1984) proposed that “...one
of Business, Montclair State University. can expect the definitions of the quality of life
concept to be culturally dependent...and the
Abstract relative contribution of the quality of work
life to the quality of life is, in itself, a matter
This study reveals that, overall, feminine cul- of personal and cultural choice” (:389). In
tures do apply greater intensity in investing in other words, certain work factors are more
human development programmes, including (or less) important in some cultures than in
care-for-the-weak and gender-equity- others.
development, than masculine cultures. How-
ever, both the feminine and the masculine Hofstede (1984) attempted to describe
cultures score low on the empowerment-of- the impact of national culture on the QWL
females factor of human development. This concept using four cultural dimensions he had
may mean that the country’s power distance identified in his earlier study (Hofstede,
measure comes into play. In managerial 1980). The four dimensions, power distance,
terms, our findings suggest that managers of individualism/collectivism, uncertainty avoid-
international firms will generally encounter ance, and masculinity/femininity have been
greater demand for improved quality-of- vastly discussed in the practical and academic
work-life (QWL) programmes and for female- literature, and build on the “culture-specific”
empowerment programmes in their subsidiar- theory, which proposes that countries possess
ies located in countries measuring feminine distinct and relatively stable cultures (see
and small power distance than in their sub- Child & Kieser, 1979; Kakar, 1971; Williams,
sidiaries in countries measuring feminine and Whyte, & Green, 1966; Nath, 1968; Davis,
large power distance and in countries measur- 1971; Crozier, 1964; Glasier, 1971; Sorge &
ing masculine. And in masculine countries, Warner, 1981; Maurice, Sorge, and Warner,
high demand is likely to be government- 1980; Gallie, 1978; Laurent, 1983; Doktor,
induced. In research terms, one is cautioned 1990; Morris & Pavett, 1991). Hofstede
26 Cross Cultural Management - An International Journal

(1980, 1984) plotted a low-to-high index for structure. This is supported by Kannungo and
these four cultural dimensions for 50 coun- Wright (1983), who discovered that many
tries and three regions. managers in Britain, a weak uncertainty
avoidance culture, placed much greater im-
Basically, Hofstede (1980) found that portance on individual achievement and
many of the countries included in his study autonomy than managers in France, a strong
are characterised by a large power distance uncertainty avoidance society. The French
cultural dimension. Individuals in these cul- valued competent supervision, sound com-
tures, according to him, tend to accept cen- pany policies, fringe benefits, security, and
tralised power and depend heavily on comfortable working conditions.
superiors for structure and direction, and the
laws and rules which differ for superiors and Many countries, Hofstede (1980) found,
subordinates are accepted. Hofstede (1984) are characterised by a masculine cultural di-
suggests improved QWL for these employees mension. Societies dominated by this dimen-
includes superiors making decisions for them sion stress material success and assertiveness
(no participative management). On the other and assign different roles to males and fe-
side, Hofstede (1980) found that many na- males. Males are expected to carry out the as-
tions are characterised by a small power dis- sertive, ambitious, and competitive roles in
tance cultural dimension, in which individuals the society; females are expected to care for
do not tolerate highly centralised power, and the non-material quality of life, for children,
status differences in these countries are sus- and for the weak - to perform the society’s
pect. Improved QWL for these employees, caring roles. In such societies a male might be
Hofstede (1984) suggests, includes participa- the manager of finance, and a female might
tion or at least consultation in decision mak- be his secretary; a role reversal would be an
ing. exception to the rule. On the other side,
Hofstede concluded that some nations are
Hofstede (1980) found that many na- characterised by a feminine (low masculine)
tions are characterised by a collectivistic cul- cultural dimension. These societies stress in-
tural dimension. People in these societies are terpersonal relationships, a concern for oth-
tightly integrated and they belong to “in- ers, the overall quality of life, and define
groups” from which they cannot detach them- relatively overlapping social roles for males
selves; they think in “we,” as opposed to and females. In these cultures, neither male
“me,” terms. Improved QWL for these per- nor female need be ambitious or competitive;
sons, Hofstede (1984) proposes, includes ob- both may aspire to a life which does not as-
taining satisfaction from a job well done by sign great values to material success and re-
the group and preserving harmony. On the spects others. Male secretaries and female
other side, Hofstede (1980) concluded that truck drivers would be more acceptable in
some nations are characterised by an indi- such societies than they would be in mascu-
vidualistic cultural dimension. Individuals in line societies. According to Hofstede (1984),
these societies look primarily after their own improved QWL for individuals in masculine
interests. According to Hofstede (1984), im- societies means increased job challenge, and
proved QWL to these individuals means indi- in feminine societies it means offering oppor-
vidual success and achievement. tunities for developing relationships on the
job.
Many societies, Hofstede (1980) found,
are characterised by a strong uncertainty The intensity level of organisations in im-
avoidance cultural dimension. Individuals in plementing QWL programmes no doubt varies
these cultures feel uneasy in situations of un- from organisation to organisation in all na-
certainty and ambiguity and prefer structure tions. How about nations themselves? The in-
and dirction. Hofstede (1984: 396) proposed tensity level of nations in implementing
that improving QWL for employees in these quality-of-life improvement programmes no
societies implies offering more security and doubt varies from nation to nation as well. To
perhaps more task structure on the job. On what extent is national culture a factor con-
the other side, Hofstede (1980) found that in tributing to the variations? Are feminine cul-
countries characterised by weak uncertainty tures more intense in implementing
avoidance cultural dimension, individuals quality-of-life programmes than masculine
tend to be relatively tolerant of uncertainty cultures? This study seeks to provide an an-
and ambiguity. Hofstede (1984) suggests that swer to these questions by examining the ex-
improving QWL for people in these societies tent that the femininity-masculinity index for
includes considerable autonomy and low 48 countries included in Hofstede’s study
Volume 7 Number 3 2000 27

compares or does not compare with certain human development than

human development indices appearing in the masculine countries.
United Nations Development Programme’s
Human Development Report 1997 (henceforth Hypothesis 1b: Feminine countries will
referred to as The Report). Basically, the indi- score higher in intensity in
ces rank nations’ intensity level in implement- poverty reduction than
ing programmes dealing with human masculine countries.
development. The Report assumes that the
Hypothesis 1c: Feminine countries will
richer countries would naturally rank higher
score higher in intensity in
than the poor countries. The intensity meas-
gender inequality reduction
ure therefore tells us whether a country is at,
than masculine countries.
above, or below its investment capacity.
Hypothesis 1d: Feminine countries will
Human Development
score higher in intensity in
The Report describes the concept of human gender empowerment than
development as following: masculine countries.

The process of widening people’s choices and Method

the level of well-being they achieve are at the The Report (: 14) presents four indices: the
core of the notion of human development. human development index (HDI), the human
Such choices are neither finite nor static. But poverty index (HPI), the gender-related de-
regardless of the level of development, the velopment index (GDI), and the gender em-
three essential choices for people are to lead a powerment measure (GEM).
long and healthy life, to acquire knowledge
and to have access to the resources for a de- The HDI measures the average achieve-
cent standard of living. Human development ments in a country in three basic dimensions
does not end there, however. Other choices, of human development - longevity, knowl-
highly valued by many people, range from po- edge and a decent standard of living. A com-
litical, economic and social freedom to oppor- posite index, the HDI thus contains three
tunities for being creative and productive and variables: life expectancy, educational attain-
enjoying self-respect and guaranteed human ment (adult literacy and combined primary,
rights. Income clearly is only one option that secondary and tertiary enrolment) and real
people would like to have, though an impor- GDP per capita.
tant one. But it is not the sum total of their
lives. Income is also a means, with human de- The HPI measures deprivation in basic
velopment the end (: 13-14). human development in the same dimensions
as the HDI. The variables used are the per-
The Report posits that “if human develop- centage of people expected to die before age
ment is about enlarging choices, poverty 40, the percentage of adults who are illiterate,
means that opportunities and choices most and overall economic provisioning in terms of
basic to human development are denied...” (: the percentage of people without access to
15). The Report (: 6) also indicates that gen- health services and safe water and the per-
der equality and empowerment of women are centage of underweight children under five.
prerequisites to the reduction of poverty. In
this context, Hofstede (1980: 205, 207) de- The GDI measures achievements in the
scribes feminine societies in the following same dimensions and variables as the HDI
terms: “Quality of life and environment are does, but takes account of inequality in
important,” Sympathy for the unfortunate," achievement between women and men. The
“Men and women can both be breadwinners,” greater the gender disparity in basic human
and “Differences in sex roles should not mean development, the lower a country’s GDI com-
differences in power;” and describes mascu- pared with its HDI. The GDI is simply the HDI
line societies in the following opposite terms: discounted, or adjusted downwards, for gen-
“Performance and growth are important,” der inequality.
Sympathy for the successful achiever," “Men
are breadwinners, women are cakewinners,” The GEM indicates whether women are
and “Men should dominate in all settings.” able to actively participate in economic and
Hence: political life. It focuses on participation, meas-
uring gender inequality in key areas of eco-
Hypothesis 1a: Feminine countries will nomic and political participation and
score higher in intensity in decision-making. It thus differs from the GDI,
28 Cross Cultural Management - An International Journal

an indicator of gender inequality in basic ca- positive in intensity, whereas only 53.8% of
pabilities. the masculine countries scored positive. Hy-
pothesis 1b, the support for the less-fortunate
Hofstede and Bond (1988) plotted the factor, might also be supported. As Table 2
femininity-masculine index and rank for 50 depicts, 100% of the feminine countries
countries and three regions. The Report does scored positive, whereas only 28.6% of the
not provide data for two of the countries - masculine countries scored positive. Hypothe-
Taiwan and Yugoslavia. Hence, only 48 coun- sis 1c, the female development factor, might
tries are included in the analysis. Table 1 not be supported. Both the feminine and the
presents the femininity index and rank - Swe- masculine countries scored moderately -
den ranks number one (the most feminine) 61.1% of the feminine and 50.0% of the mas-
and Japan ranks number 48 (the most mascu- culine countries scored positives. Hypothesis
line). 1d, empowerment of females, is likely not to
be supported - both the feminine (50.0%) and
Table 1 also presents the HDI, HPI, GDI, masculine (45.5%) scored low.
and GEM intensity measures. As the footnotes
to Table 1 explain, these measures basically Discussion
tell us whether a country does better (positive
intensity) or worse (negative intensity) on Looking at the total scores on Figure 2 for the
certain measures. It is assumed, as indicated four factors measuring human development
above, that a rich country can afford to invest intensity applied by countries, one might de-
more in human development than a poor duce that, overall, the feminine countries do
country. Hence, the rich country would natu- apply greater intensity in human development
rally rank higher than the poor country. The than masculine countries. A problem, how-
intensity measure therefore tells us whether a ever, is the relatively lower score by the femi-
country is at, above, or below its investment nine countries on the empowerment of
capacity. females factor. This may mean that the coun-
try’s power distance measure comes into play.
For example, if a country ranks 10th in
The GEM-HDI factor was subsequently com-
GDP per capita and it ranks 10th in the HDI,
puted on the basis of the 48 countries’ power
it does neither better nor worse. But if, for in-
distance measure. The results show that
stance, it ranks 7th in the HDI, it would do
68.8% of the countries measuring small
better (three points positive intensity). How-
power distance score positive on intensity in
ever, if it ranks 13th in the HDI, it would do
empowering females, whereas only 39.3% of
worse (three points negative intensity). The
the countries measuring large power distance
intensity measures for HPI, GDI, and GEM are
score positive. However, this result may actu-
determined by comparing their rankings to
ally have nothing to do with gender, as man-
the HDI rank. If the HDI rank is higher, there
agers in small power distance cultures, at
is a negative intensity; if it is lower, there is a
least theoretically, would tend to practice em-
positive intensity. Assuming that developed
powerment (both males and females) more so
nations provide the factors used to compute
than managers in large power distance cul-
the HPI, UNDP computed the HPI for only 78
tures.
developing countries.

Results As far as managerial implications, the re-

sults of this study suggest that managers of
Hofstede (1984) identified the countries international firms will generally encounter
ranked 1-19 in Table 1 as feminine cultures, greater demand for improved QWL pro-
countries 20-22 (Indonesia, Israel, and Singa- grammes and for female empowerment pro-
pore) on the line dividing feminine and mas- grammes in their subsidiaries located in
culine cultures, and the countries ranked countries measuring feminine and small
23-48 as masculine cultures. Table 2 presents power distance than in their subsidiaries in
a summary of Table 1. Of course, the results countries measuring feminine and large
presented in Figures 1 and 2 need to be scien- power distance and in countries measuring
tifically tested. However, based on the results masculine. And in masculine cultures, high
presented in the Figures, one can attempt to demand is likely to be goverment-induced.
make some predictions. One finds evidence of this in the US, a society
which measures moderate-to-strong on mas-
Hypothesis 1a might be supported - as culinity, where programmes such as the Equal
Table 2 shows, on the HDI-GDP per capita Pay Act of 1963, Title VII of the Civil Rights
factor, 73.7% of the feminine countries scored Act of 1964, Affirmative Action and Equal
Volume 7 Number 3 2000 29

Employment Opportunity have been imple- ministrators and research bodies seek to up-
mented; and in Japan, which measures very date or improve their estimates using new
strong on masculinity, where the Employment sources of data, such as census and surveys.
Opportunity Law of 1986 has been imple- Third, estimates of income used in the GDP
mented. are converted to international dollars by using
purchasing power parities (PPP) established
As far as research implications, one is by the World Bank, based on the results of
cautioned that the above hypotheses are surveys by the International Comparison Pro-
predicated on the “culture-specific” theory, an gramme (ICP). Revision and updating of the
“emic” view (Segall, 1986). However, there is PPP-based income estimates lead to fluctua-
an opposing theory, labelled the “culture-free” tions across time and country series.
theory, an “etic” view (Segall, 1986). This
theory posits that certain situational factors, The fourth problem is uneven data avail-
such as the economic environment, impact or- ability across country groups. Some issues,
ganisations in all societies (see Hickson et al., such as literacy, are well documented in the
1974; Haire, Ghiselli & Porter, 1966; Heyde- developing countries but less so in the indus-
brand, 1973; Child, 1981; Dore, 1973; Hick- trial countries, or vice versa. In such cases The
son et al., 1979; Harbison & Myers, 1959; Report presents the limited data available, pri-
Bottger, Hallein & Yetton, 1985; Stephens, marily from official national reporting sys-
1981). tems and compiled by the United Nations,
with the caveat that these data may not be
For example, a decline of a nation’s eco- readily used for international comparisons.
nomic growth rate can lead its decision mak- Fifth, the quality of data also suffers in coun-
ers to cut back on the intensity level of tries in which there is war or civil strife.
investment in human development pro- Where the availability and quality of esti-
grammes. For instance, around 1980, the mates have become extremely limited, report-
United States was confronted with a declining ing of data in The Report has been
economic growth rate. In the 1980s, many of interrupted. The sixth major problem is the
the US’s social programmes were cutback un- extremely limited availability of data on such
der the concept of “Reaganomics.” And, as re- important human development issues as
ported in The Economist (August 23, 1997: crime, violence, employment, the environ-
37-39), in the early 1990s, the highly femi- ment, child labour, gender equality, income
ninistic Nordic countries, Denmark, Finland, distribution, maternal mortality, informal sec-
Norway, and Sweden, found themselves in an tor activities and non-market unpaid work.
undesirable economic situation. To deal with
the problem, these nations’ policymakers have Notwithstanding the above problems, the
begun to cut back on certain social pro- HDI has found an increasing following as a
grammes. It should be noted that The Econo- simple measure of human development. It
mist reports that Denmark began dealing with provides an alternative to GNP for assessing a
this problem years before the other Nordic country’s standing in basic human develop-
countries - this may help explain why Den- ment or its progress in human development
mark, as Table 1 shows, is the only Nordic over time (The Report: 19).
country with a negative intensity (-8) on the
GDP per capita rank minus HDI rank factor.

Thus, the proposition that countries, both

feminine and masculine, reduce intensity in
investing in human development programmes
when confronted with a declinine economic
growth rate needs to be tested. But what also
needs to be tested is if the degree of cutbacks
is more intense in masculine than in feminine
cultures.

Furthermore, The Report (: 143-144)

points out several problems that remain for
any user of the statistical data. First, limita-
tions remain in the coverage, consistency and
comparability of data across time and coun-
tries. Second, dramatic shifts and breaks in
statistical series can occur when statistical ad-
30 Cross Cultural Management - An International Journal

References ganizations alike and unlike. London:

Routledge and Keagan Paul, ch.2.
Bottger, P.C., Hallein, I.G., & Yetton, P.W.
1985. “A cross-national study of leadership: Hofstede, G. 1980. Culture’s consequences: In-
Participation as a function of problem struc- ternational differences in work-related values.
ture and leader power.” Journal of Manage- Beverley Hills, CA: Sage.
ment Studies, 22(4), pp.358-368.
Hofstede, G. 1984. “The cultural relativity of
Child, J. 1981. “Culture, contingency and the quality of life concept.” Academy of Man-
capitalism in the cross-national study of or- agement Review, 9(3).
ganizations.” Research in Organizational Be-
havior. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Hofstede, G., & Bond, M.H. 1988. “The Con-
fucius connection: From cultural roots to eco-
Child, J., & Kieser, A. 1979. “Organization nomic growth.” Organizational Dynamics,
and managerial roles in British and West Ger- Spring, pp.5-21.
man companies: An examination of the cul-
ture free thesis.” In C. Lammers and D. Kakar, S. 1971. “The theme of authority in so-
Hickson, eds., Organizations Alike and Unlike. cial relations in India.” The Journal of Social
London: Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd., Psychology, 84, pp.93-101.
pp.251-271.
Kannungo, R.N., & Wright, R.W. 1983. “A
Crozier, M. 1964. The Bureaucratic phenome- cross-cultural comparative study of manage-
non. London: Tavistock. rial job attitudes.” Journal of International
Business Studies, 14(2), pp.115-129.
Davis, S.M. 1971. Comparative management:
Cultural and organizational perspectives. Laurent, A. 1983. “The cultural diversity of
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. western conceptions of management.” Inter-
national Studies of Management and Organiza-
Doktor, R.H. 1990. “Asian and American tion, 13(1), pp.75-96.
CEOs: A comparative case study.” Organiza-
tional Dynamics, 18(3), pp.46-56. Lewis, P.S., Goodman, S.H., & Fandt, P.M.
1995. Management. Minneapolis/St. Paul,
Dore, R. 1973. British factory - Japanese fac- MN: West Publishing.
tory. London: Allen and Unwin.
Maurice, M., Sorge, A., & Warner, M. 1980.
Gallie, D. 1978. In search of the new working “Societal differences in organizing manufac-
class. London: Cambridge University Press. turing units: A comparison of France, West
Germany, and Great Britain.” Organizational
Glasier, W. 1971. “Cross-national compari- Studies, 1, pp.59-86.
sons of the factory.” Journal of comparative
administration. May. Morris, T., & Pavett, C.M. 1992. “Managing
style and productivity.” Journal of Interna-
Haire, M., Ghiselli, & Porter, R.W. 1966. tional Business Studies, 23(1), pp.169-179.
Managerial thinking: An international study.
New York: John Wiley. Nath, R. 1968. “A methodological review of
cross-cultural management research.” Interna-
Harbison, F., & Myers, C.A. 1959. Manage- tional Social Science Journal, 20(1), pp.35-62.
ment in the industrial world. New York:
McGraw-Hill. Schermerhorn, J.H. Jr. 1996. Management.
5th Edition. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Heydebrand, W. 1973. Comparative organiza- Segall, M.H. 1986. “Culture and behavior:
tion: The results of empirical research. Engle- Psychology in global perspective.” In Annual
wood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Review of Psychology Volume 37. M.R. Rosenz-
weig and L.W. Porters (Eds.), pp.523-567.
Hickson, D.J., Hinings, C.R., McMillan, C.J. & Palo Alto, CA: Annual Review.
Schwitter, J.P. 1974. “The culture free context
of organization structure: A tri-national com- Sorge, A., & Warner, M. 1981. “Culture, man-
parison.” Sociology, 8, pp.59-80. agement and manufacturing organizations: A
study of British and German firms.” Manage-
Hickson, D.J., McMillan, C.J., Azumi, A., & ment International Review, 21, pp.35-48.
Horvath, D. 1979. “Grounds for comparative
organization theory: Quicksands or hardcore? Stephens, D.B. 1981. “Cultural variation in
In C.J. Lammers and D.J. Hickson (Eds.), Or- leadership style: A methodological experi-
Volume 7 Number 3 2000 31

ment in comparing managers in the US and

Peruvian textile industry.” Management Inter-
national Review, 21(3), pp.47-55.
Williams, L., Whyte, W. & Green, C. 1966.
“Do cultural differences affect workers’
attitudes?” Industrial Relations, 5,
pp.105-117.
 32 Cross Cultural Management - An International Journal

Table 1. The Feminine and the Human Development Rankings for 48 Countries
1

Care-for-the
Femininity 2 Development-GDP Unfortunate
Factor
3 Factor
4 Equality-Between-Sexes-Factor
5

Country Index Rank HDI GDP per HPI HPI Rank GDI GDI Rank GEM GEM Rank
Rank capita Rank minus HDI Rank minus HDI Rank minus HDI
Rank minus Rank Rank Rank
HD Rank
Sweden 5 1 10 11 - - 3 6 2 7

Norway 8 2 3 6 - - 2 1 1 2

Netherlands 14 3 6 13 - - 10 -5 10 -5

Denmark 16 4 18 -8 - - 9 8 3 14

Costa Rica 21 5 33 27 5 2 31 -1 26 4

Finland 26 6 8 15 - - 6 1 4 3

Chile 28 7 30 13 3 1 38 -11 57 -30

Portugal 31 8 31 3 - - 25 3 18 10

Thailand 34 9 59 -8 11 1 34 8 52 -10

Guatemala 37 10 117 -16 46 12 69 1 29 41

Uruguay 38 11 37 15 10 6 26 5 54 -23

S. Korea 39 12 32 5 - - 30 -1 73 -44

El Salvador 40 13 112 3 36 5 62 4 44 22

Peru 42 14-15 89 5 28 6 53 2 53 2

Spain 42 14-15 11 19 - - 18 -8 21 -11

France 43 16-17 2 13 - - 5 -3 40 -38

Iran 43 16-17 70 -9 27 14 n/a n/a 81 -32

Panama 44 18 45 14 9 2 36 -2 36 2

Turkey 45 19 74 -4 - - 45 5 82 -32

Indonesia 46 20 99 -7 23 -4 57 4 59 2

Israel 47 21 23 3 - - 21 0 30 -9

Singapore 48 22 26 -15 4 3 23 1 47 -23

Brazil 49 23 68 0 - - 46 1 58 -11

Malaysia 50 24-25 60 -13 - - 39 4 48 -5

Pakistan 50 24-25 139 -19 64 14 76 5 92 -11

Canada 52 26 1 7 - - 1 0 6 -5

Belgium 54 27 13 -1 - - 13 -1 15 -3

Argentina 56 28-29 36 10 - - n/a n/a n/a n/a

India 56 28-29 138 5 47 -2 75 5 86 -6

Greece 57 30-31 20 15 - - 20 -1 56 -37

Hong Kong 57 30-31 22 -17 - - n/a n/a n/a n/a

New Zealand 58 32 9 15 - - 7 1 5 3

Australia 61 33 14 4 - - 8 5 11 2
 Volume 7 Number 3 2000 33

Table 1. The Feminine and the Human Development Rankings for 48 Countries (continued)
1

Care-for-the
Development-GDP Unfortunate
Femininity2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Equality-Between-Sexes-Factor 5

Country Index Rank HDI GDP per HPI HPI Rank GDI GDI Rank GEM GEM Rank
Rank capita Rank minus HDI Rank minus HDI Rank minus HDI
Rank minus Rank Rank Rank
HD Rank
US 62 34 4 -1 - - 4 0 7 -3

Ecuador 63 35-36 72 5 15 1 n/a n/a n/a n/a

South Africa 63 35-36 90 -10 - - 50 6 22 34

Colombia 64 37-38 51 7 6 -3 35 4 38 1

Philippines 64 37-38 98 12 19 -7 55 5 35 25

Germany 66 39-40 19 -3 - - 15 3 9 9

Great Britain 66 39-40 15 5 - - 12 2 20 -6

Ireland 68 41-42 17 8 - - 24 -8 24 -8

Jamaica 68 41-42 83 7 12 -6 n/a n/a n/a n/a

Mexico 69 43 50 0 7 -1 41 -3 31 7

Italy 70 44-45 21 -4 - - 22 -2 16 4

Switzerland 70 44-45 16 -12 - - 19 -4 12 3

Venezuela 73 46 47 1 - - 37 -1 55 -19

Austria 79 47 12 1 - - 14 -3 8 3

Japan 95 48 7 0 - - 11 -5 34 -28

1. The feminine index and rank is adopted from Geert Hofstede and Michael H. Bond (1988). “The Confucious connection: From cultural
roots to economic growth.” Organizational Dynamics. Spring; pp.12-13. The human development data are adopted from the Human De-
velopment Report 1997. Published for the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). New York: Oxford University Press, pp.146-
148, 21, and 41. Hofstede’s study included Taiwan and Yugoslavia, but the UNDP report does not provide data for them.

2. The ranking ranges from #1, the most feminine country, to #48 ranking, the most masculine. Hofstede plotted the coun-
tries ranked 1-19 as feminine cultures, countries 20-22 (Indonesia, Israel, and Singapore) on the line dividing feminine and
masculine cultures, and the countries ranked 23-48 as masculine cultures.
3. HDI = human development index. The UNDP data provide the GDP, HDI index and rank for 175 countries. The “Real GDP
per capita rank minus the HDI rank” figure tells us whether the country does better on its GDP ranking or its HDI ranking. For
example, Sweden ranks 10th on the HDI, and has a positive 11 (does better) because it ranks 21st on the real GDP index, and
Denmark ranks 18th on the HDI, and has a negative 8 (does worse) because it ranks 10th on the real GDP index.
4. HPI = human poverty index. On the premises that about all advanced countries provide the factors used to determine the
HPI, UNDP computed the HPI for only 78 developing countries and recomputed the HDI rankings (1 to 78) for those coun-
tries. Only 18 of the 78 countries are included in Hofstede’s study. The “HPI rank minus the HDI rank” figure tells us whether
the country does better on its HPI ranking or its HDI ranking. For example, Costa Rica ranks 5th on the HPI, and has a posi-
tive 2 (does better) because it ranks 7th on the HDI, and Indonesia ranks 23rd on the HPI, and has a negative 4 (does worse)
because it ranks 19th on the HDI.
5. GDI = Gender-related development index. UNDP estimated the GDI for 94 countries and recomputed the HDI ranking for
those countries. The “GDI rank minus the HDI rank” figure tells us whether the country does better on its GDI ranking or its
HDI ranking. Computed as in note #4 above. GEM = gender empowerment measure. UNDP estimated the GEM for 94 coun-
tries and recomputed the HDI ranking for those countries. The “GEM rank minus the HDI rank” figure tells us whether the
country does better on its GEM ranking or its HDI ranking. Computed as in note #4 above.
34 Cross Cultural Management - An International Journal

Table 2. Do the Numbers Support the Cultural Hypotheses?

A Summary of Table 1
Intensity Measure % of Countries % of Countries % With Even No. of Countries
in Feminine Coun- with Positive with Negative Intensity for which Data is
tries (n = 19) Intensity Intensity not Available
HDI-GDP Measure 73.7 26.3 0 0
HPI-HDI Measure 100.0 0.0 0.0 10
GDI-HDI Measure 61.1 38.9 0.0 1
GEM-HDI Measure 50.0 50.0 0.0 1

Overall Average 67.2 32.8 0.0

Intensity Measure
in Countries on
the Dividing Line
(n = 3)
HDI-GDP Measure 33.4 66.6 0.0 1
HPI-HDI Measure 50.0 50.0 0.0 1
GDI-HDI Measure 66.6 0.0 33.6 0
GEM-HDI Measure 33.4 66.6 0.0 0

Overall Average 45.5 45.5 9.0 0

Intensity Measure
in Masculine
Countries (n = 26)
HDI-GDP Measure 53.8 34.6 11.6 0
HPI-HDI Measure 28.6 71.4 0.0 19
GDI-HDI Measure 50.0 40.9 9.1 4
GEM-HDI Measure 45.5 54.5 0.0 4

Overall Average 48.1 45.5 6.4