Background
Human beings are spread across the world, but they engage closely in small groups through which they exhibit distinct behaviors. The interaction is enabled by a range of factors, including shared values, beliefs, attitudes, relationships, and motivations, among others. These elements constitute a group’s culture, which further cascades down to how they speak/language, religion, traditions, art, music, and customs.
Culture further manifests through people’s ideas, practices, standards, and mannerisms, which influence their thinking patterns and, in turn, shape personal identities and societal functioning. The broad distribution of people across different parts of the world results in a rich, culturally diverse environment, characterized by the wide variations in culture that exist between regions and groups. The current global context is characterized by heightened interactions among people from different regions and groups as the world becomes increasingly globalized.
Globalization and internationalization have primarily been driven by business interests and the pursuit of opportunities, and in the process, the influence of culture has become evident. This paper aims to describe the cultural profile of Vietnam based on Erin Meyer’s culture map and Hofstede’s six dimensions, and with further reference to other supporting frameworks. Vietnam is located in Southeast Asia, and the region is attractive to foreign businesses due to favorable business conditions, including a skilled labor force.
The comprehensive analysis sheds light on the cultural nuances that significantly influence business practices, communication styles, organizational dynamics, and the rules/customs for conducting business in Vietnam. The cultural dimensions offer valuable insights for international businesses seeking to engage effectively in the country’s market, as it exhibits distinctive cultural traits. Hofstede’s model provides the primary basis for understanding Vietnamese culture, which is characterized by high individualism, low power distance, moderate uncertainty avoidance, and a balanced blend of masculinity and femininity.
Cultural Dimensions in International Business in Vietnam
Apart from enhanced business growth and economic development, globalization and internationalization have facilitated a broader cultural interaction. Multinational corporations have enabled people to exchange their cultural values to the extent that cultural understanding has emerged as a key enabler for business success. Furxhi (126) suggests that culture fosters business growth and innovation by facilitating effective communication and collaboration. Companies that lack a good understanding of the culture in their diverse locations may encounter significant challenges in business dealings.
The key reason is that they may not be able to create an effective platform to facilitate interactions with the many business stakeholders, including local employees, customers, suppliers, creditors, and the government, among many others. Additionally, businesses must engage in face-to-face interactions with individuals from diverse cultural backgrounds, habits, values, and perceptions that may impact key business undertakings. For instance, businesses may struggle to understand customer behavior, develop trust, conduct successful business negotiations, motivate employees, maintain discipline, evaluate performance, create effective advertising, manage sales and service, conduct interviews, and make informed decisions.
Therefore, culture can either facilitate or impede international business success. It is based on this background that several researchers have undertaken deep research to understand the cultures across the different parts of the world and describe their impact on organizations. Geert Hofstede, a renowned Dutch management researcher, pioneered the work.
Geert Hofstede’s Framework
Hofstede conducted an extensive survey from the 1960s to 1970s that involved evaluating the value differences among different divisions of International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) (Leonaviciene and Burinskiene 1524). He used a questionnaire to collect views on work-related values from the company’s employees, spread across more than 50 countries and territories. The research yielded four cultural value dimensions, including power distance, individualism/collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, and masculinity/femininity. Hofstede later led a team of independent researchers from Asia, which identified a fifth dimension: orientation (long-term or short-term).
A sixth dimension, indulgence versus restraint, was added about a decade ago through a repeated study conducted by Hofstede along with other researchers. The study, which covered 93 different countries, also confirmed the existence of the five initial cultural dimensions. A similar study was conducted in the 1990s as part of the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) project. The study, which involved 170 researchers and spanned over 60 countries, identified nine cultural dimensions, most of which were similar to those proposed by Hofstede (Srivastava et al., 2010).
The similar dimensions include power distance, uncertainty avoidance, future orientation, assertiveness orientation (also known as masculinity), gender egalitarianism (also known as femininity), and institutional and societal collectivism (individualism versus collectivism). The only two cultural dimensions unique to the GLOBE project are performance orientation (the degree to which societies emphasize performance and achievement) and humane orientation (the extent to which societies place importance on fairness, altruism, and caring).
Erin Meyer’s Framework
A different framework for understanding culture was developed by Erin Meyer, an American professor who teaches in Paris, France. The researcher published a book in 2014, through which she developed the concept of the cultural map, which provides a framework for understanding and navigating cultural differences in the global business environment (Leonaviciene and Burinskiene, 1524). Her mapping of culture involves the disintegration of interpersonal behaviors into eight scales, allowing cultures to be placed on a spectrum based on how they tend to interact with others. Meyer’s model was designed to help managers execute their management functions. Each of her eight dimensions of cultural understanding has two extreme levels between which different countries can be ranked, such as high or low.
Communicating
The first cultural dimension proposed by Meyer is communicating, which has two extremes that are founded on Hall’s dimension of high versus low context. Figure 1 above illustrates that Vietnam is characterized by high-context communication, which is nuanced, sophisticated, and layered (Srivastava et al., 2017). The Vietnamese people prefer that the messaging be implied but not explicitly stated, and it should be understood and interpreted between the lines.
Evaluating
The second dimension, evaluating, is marked by either direct or indirect negative feedback. Vietnamese culture is more inclined toward indirect negative feedback, which must be delivered in a subtle, gentle, and diplomatic manner. This means that the feedback must be provided privately and should include both positive and constructive remarks. Mike indicates that this dimension is closely tied to Hofstede’s dimension on femininity/masculinity and assertiveness, as identified by the GLOBE project.
Hofstede’s model defines the cultural dimension based on what drives people, which entails competing to be the greatest (masculine) or enjoying what you do (feminine). As shown in Figure 2 above, Vietnam scores a low 40 on this metric (Hofstede Insights), indicating that it is a feminine society. Hofstede defines a feminine society as one where people predominantly care for others, and the quality of life is reflected in this. However, the Vietnamese people do not admire people who tend to stand out from the crowd.
In business, a feminine society comprises managers who have to seek consensus. Employees seek fairness, camaraderie, and the opportunity to excel in the workplace. According to Says, people work to live, and conflicts are resolved through compromise and negotiation. The working population prefers to be rewarded through flexible schedules and free time. A manager would appear to be supportive based on the decisions made, and the quality of decision-making is enhanced by involving others.
Leading
The third cultural dimension proposed by Meyer is called leading, and its two extremes are egalitarian and hierarchical. Figure 1 shows that Vietnamese people prefer to be led under a hierarchical structure that involves a high separation between a boss and a subordinate. The boss must lead from the front and have a high level of authority.
Business entities must create multi-layered and static organizational structures that facilitate effective communication. This dimension is similar to power distance as proposed by Hofstede and the GLOBE project. It also shares similarities with the egalitarian versus hierarchical dimension proposed under the seven dimensions model, which was developed by Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner in 1997 (Nyssen et al., 9).
Hofstede’s model acknowledges that power distance emerges from the idea that not all people in society are created equal. It describes how people, institutions, and organizations within a country view social inequality and denotes the degree to which they foreknow and accept that power is not distributed fairly. Figure 2 shows that Vietnam scores highly on power distance, at 70, indicating that the society prefers a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place and does not require further justification (Hofstede Insights). Hierarchy is seen as a reflection of inherent inequalities, centralization is popular, and the junior staff expect to be told what to do. The Vietnamese people prefer to rule under a benevolent autocracy, and their leadership abhors being challenged in any way.
Decision-Making
Meyer’s fourth cultural dimension is decision-making, which can be either consensual or top-down. As shown in Figure 1, Vietnamese people prefer making decisions in groups through common agreement. This dimension closely relates to the leading dimension and aligns with Hofstede’s concept of power distance, which was previously discussed.
Trusting
Meyer proposed trust as the fifth cultural dimension, which is highly critical in business and can be either task-based or relationship-based (Srivastava et al., 2010). Figure 1 illustrates that Vietnamese people build trust by establishing relationships, such as visiting the coffee machine and sharing evening drinks. Such interactions enable different parties to establish long-term relationships based on an in-depth understanding of each other, resulting in the creation of trust.
The dimension is closely connected to the achievement versus ascription dichotomy, as described in the seven dimensions model, performance orientation by the GLOBE project, and Hofstede’s individualism/collectivism framework. Figure 2 shows that Vietnam has a low score of 20, meaning that it is a collectivist society (Hofstede Insights). It is characterized by a long-term commitment to being part of a group, which can be a family or an extended network of relationships.
In addition, a collectivist society is built on loyalty, which is paramount and overrides most other societal regulations and ordinances. Nyssen et al. (5) indicate that strong relationships are a key feature of a society where everyone is accountable to fellow members of the group, such that those who commit an offense are ashamed of their actions. In organizations, employer-employee relations are gauged on moral terms, and groups take charge of hiring and promotion functions under the oversight of management.
Disagreeing
Disagreeing is the sixth cultural dimension proposed by Meyer, and its two extremes are confrontational and non-confrontational. People in Vietnam tend to avoid confrontation, as it can harm society and organizational operations. Open confrontation is considered improper and may tear down group harmony or adversely affect relations (Says). The dimension overlaps with femininity/masculinity as defined by Hofstede, assertiveness as identified by the GLOBE project, and the affective versus neutral dimension proposed under the seven dimensions model. Femininity/masculinity has been described in detail in the previous section of the paper.
Scheduling
The last key cultural dimension proposed by Meyer is scheduling, which can either be based on linear-time or flexible-time. Figure 1 illustrates that Vietnamese society prefers a scheduling approach, which allows for the introduction of changes as opportunities arise. According to Kathryn, people prefer to deal with things at once, and interruptions are accepted, as the emphasis is on flexibility and adaptability. The dimension shares a close resemblance to Hall’s dimension of time (monochronic versus polychronic) and sequential versus synchronic time as advanced under the seven dimensions model. The dimensions tend to be ranked on the same side of the extreme as the trusting dimension, which corresponds to the femininity/masculinity dimension, as proposed by Hofstede.
Do’s and Don’ts: Rules and Customs for Conducting Business in Vietnam
Table 1 – Rules/Customs for Conducting Business in Vietnam
In addition to the above-listed guide for dos and don’ts for conducting business in Vietnam, it is vital to avoid certain taboos and issues. One is to avoid delving into sensitive political topics or expressing strong opinions on Vietnamese politics. It is essential to show respect to older individuals and refrain from disrespecting or mocking Vietnamese customs, traditions, or beliefs. Refrain from public displays of affection, as they are generally considered inappropriate in a business setting. The guidelines generally provide a framework for conducting business in Vietnam. Adapting to individual preferences and circumstances is key to building successful relationships.
Works Cited
Furxhi, Gentisa. “International Business and Country’s Culture Impact.” European Journal of Business and Management Research, vol. 6, no. 1, 2021, pp. 125–27.
Hofstede Insights. “Country Comparison Tool.” Www.hofstede-Insights.com, 2023.
Leonaviciene, Edita, and Aurelija Burinskiene. “Accelerating Cultural Dimensions at International Companies in the Evidence of Internationalisation.” Sustainability, vol. 14, no. 3, 2022, p. 1524.
Meyer, Eryn. “The Culture Map by Erin Meyer: A Summary and Review.” Kathryn Read, 2021.
Nyssen, Guillen, et al. “Cultural Influence on Innovativeness – Links between ‘the Culture Map’ and the ‘Global Innovation Index.’” International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, vol. 6, no. 1, 2021, pages 1-12.
Says, Marianneleen. “Increase Your Team’s Performance with the Culture Map.” Agents of Awareness, 2019.
Srivastava, Saurabh, et al. “Culture and International Business Research: A Review and Research Agenda.” International Business Review, vol. 29, no. 4, 2020, p. 101709.
Sturm, Mike. “Erin Meyer – Lead, Negotiate, and Get Things Done across the World.” Nordic Business Forum, 2022.