The dimension of masculinity (MAS) elaborated by Hofstede refers to the level of importance of traditionally male values such as assertiveness, ambition, intention to have power, and materialism, and feminine values, including relationships and modesty. Cultures with more pronounced masculinity typically present more distinct differences between the sexes and are prone to rivalry and achievement of goals. The smaller index of the mentioned dimension means that the culture is characterized by less significant differences between the sexes and a higher value of the relationships.
The case study focusing on the merger between two companies such as Upjohn and Pharmacia is a vivid example of how feminine and masculine cultures interact, and what challenges they encounter. In particular, the former is an American company, while the latter is composed of Italian and Swedes employees. The given case reveals a misunderstanding between these cultures that occurred because of different MAS index. For example, Americans have pronounced masculinity since they are quick and resolute in their decisions and have strict rules in a business area. In their turn, Italians and Swedes belong to a feminine culture, which is expressed in modesty, focus on relationships and family, and comfort at a workplace. For example, the fact that in the US, all employees should pass alcohol and drug abuse tests, while people may gather to drink at work in Italy causes confusion. At the same time, even though both Italy and Sweden demonstrate a low MAS index and belong to a feminine societal culture, they also have differences and difficulties in communication. As an example, one may note the situation with the organizational structure. If Swedes prefer to treat each other as equal at work, then Italians value hierarchy, which is largely affected by power distance in the given cultures. In particular, Sweden is characterized as a culture with low power distance, and Italy has medium indicators. In general, Hofstede’s dimensions should be considered in combination to understand relations between cultures appropriately.
The second case relates to the experience of Steve Austensen in Norway as an area manager working for the United Cinema. Norway as a culture with a feminine fashion and the US culture with a high MAS index belongs to two diverse poles. The regions that are geographically isolated from other communities are psychologically-oriented to permanent norms of thinking and behavior, which generally contribute to the formation and cultivation of traditions in society at the local level manifesting in family and intergroup relations. Such communities have inherent features of autonomy and self-sufficiency, on the one hand, and feelings of social involvement in the national-corporate spirit, on the other hand. As can be observed from the case, the representatives of such communities tend to rely on their own strength, but with the obligatory consideration of group thought, morality, and values. In general, Norwegians are known for their modesty in behavior even though they may be rude to some extent from the point of Americans. The latter and Steve, in particular, tend to illustrate social dynamics against the background of expansiveness as a manifestation of decisiveness, while the active social position is associated with individualistic intentions.
Taking into account the dimension of masculinity with the one regarding collectivism-individualism, one may note that they are closely connected. For instance, Norway is a collectivist culture, and America is an individualistic one. This is clearly observed in the case, when Norwegians are more prone to support unions organized at their workplaces compared to Americans as the latter consider it something unusual and leading to increased costs. For Norwegians, family, and society take the first place on their value continuum. On the contrary, value orientations of masculine cultures are distinguished by a high evaluation of personal achievements, when a high social status is considered a proof of personal success. For instance, even if a Norwegian employee knows more than others, he or she would never show it so that they would not think of him or her as an aggressive person. This demonstrates care about others.
Considering the given case from the perspective of core differences between Norwegian and American cultures as of feminine and masculine nature, respectively, it is possible to pinpoint several issues. The most significant aspect is associated with the management style. While Norwegians prefer to come to the compromise through negotiations, and the final decision may change several times, it may seem to be non-productive to Americans, as in the case of Steve. On the contrary, the collaboration between the American manager and Norwegian employees shows that decisions taken rapidly are unacceptable in the local context. The statement of Steve who declared that employees would be charged 6.5 percent instead of 2.5 accompanied by the immediate claim of signing the contract caused a violent reaction that can be characterized as a cross-cultural conflict as cinema licensees also belong to the Norwegian culture. The above statement and the one regarding uniform policies were shocking for the local population. In order to eliminate such cases in the future, it seems critical to explore the Norwegian culture and values and prepare a candidate to understand them and react properly, thus avoiding cross-cultural conflicts and making business more effective.