EMBALSE PASO SEVERINO

In 1991, the Dutch social psychologist and anthropologist Geert Hofstede observed and suggested that values are elements that are conditioned by culture. He thus argues that personal values cannot exist without taking cultural values into account. He calls cultural values to be the “mental programs” or “software of the mind”. Cultural values are the framework that is easily internalized in early childhood when humans are most susceptible to learning and assimilation (Hofstede, & Minkov, 2010:122). Hofstede seems to suggest that understanding of human values is dependent on an understanding of the concept of cultural values. Cultural values are thus mental programmes. Such mental programmes are largely subconscious elements if an individual wishes to gain more control in the value realm (Stika, 2012: 13). Specifically, Hofstede focuses primarily on “cultural dimensions” as the basis of what is of value. There thus three cultural dimensions mentioned or suggested by Hofstede: 1) culture and power distance, 2) individualism versus collectivism, 3) Femininity versus masculinity and 4) short-term versus long-term orientations.

97 4.3.9.1 Culture and power distance

The first dimension is culture and power distance. It describes willingness of subordinates to question the authority of their superiors in the context of power distance (Pedersen & Hofstede, 2002:82). In high power distance cultures such as those of Asian and African countries for example, subordinates are obedient and afraid of their superiors because there is a very wide power distance between the two groups. This is why it is in some developing countries such as those in Africa where one could find a head of state behaving like a small god. This could be because of the immense power and authority he or she possesses. Consequently, it could be hard for such a head of state to critically understand the economically sorry state of people under his or her jurisdiction because he or she is too far from the ordinary life of such people.

Wilbur (2013:32) further notes that where there is a wide power distance, hierarchical structures are rigid, conservative, and stable. For example, many pre-colonial states in Africa were characterized by this kind of hierarchical structure, with the king or chief at the apex of authoritarian rule (Njoroge & Bennaars, 2000:40). Low power-distance environments, on the other hand, could be found in developed countries such the USA, most of Europe and South Africa, where a greater degree of equality and democracy are observed between superiors and their subordinates. For example, in many developed countries it is rare for communities to be put on tension when a head of state is visiting or planning to visit. Everything remains somewhat normal business.

4.3.9.2 Individualism versus collectivism

The second dimension describes the difference between individualism and collectivism values. Members of individualist societies, for example, are expected to take care of themselves as much as possible, and individual rights and values are seen as important. Such individualist values are common with political ideologies such as pure capitalism (Rarick & Nickerson, 2008:19). For example in capitalist thinking, survival for the fittest is the core value of society. Consequently, competition for resources and economic power becomes the order of the day. Individualism is a value system common in developed societies where money and wealth is the ultimate end-goal (Spinrad, & Eisenberg, 2009: 80). On the other side of the spectrum, collectivist cultures involve

98

a more mechanical system of solidarity where interdependence is integral to the social system and often transcends a single human lifetime in the form of family ties. Such cultures are common in the so-called primitive societies like those in indigenous Africa where the communal aspect dominated the existing social order (Sekamwa, 2000a). In other words, collective interests are valued over personal interests.

4.3.9.3 Femininity versus masculinity

Femininity versus masculinity continuum constitutes the third dimension described by Geert Hofstede. He argues that when feminine principles are valued, a pleasant and conflict-free social environment is pursued and cooperation is preferred over competition (Stika, 2012:15). A masculine-dominated culture, for instance, supports insubordination (Tamale, 1996:12). The suppression of women is a sign of the lack of affirmative action programmes which stalls possible development and kills the opportunities for social advancement for particular sections of society. This idea of Hofstede about Masculinity versus femininity is similar to that of Carol Gilligan who advocates for women involvement in the moral growth process (Gilligan, 1982).

4.3.9.4 Short-term versus long-term orientation

In the fourth dimension, there is a tendency towards long-term versus short-term orientations (Hofstede & Minkov, 2010). For example, a culture that focuses on long-term values/goals, such as China or India, exhibits a greater tendency to respect hierarchies as fixed in time. Again, individuals are more open to risk-taking and innovation (Pedersen & Hofstede, 2002:84). However, in long-term orientations persistence is preferred over change and innovation. For example, it requires a great deal of persistence, dedication and devotion in changing an education system and also ensuring critical innovations in it (Harrow, 2002). In short-term oriented cultures however, quick results are valued and face-saving behaviour is observed more frequently (Puka, 2000:145). It is also here that absolutes about good and evil are a fundamental part of people‟s beliefs, while in long-term oriented environments good and evil are seen as more circumstantial (Stika, 2012:18).

99

In summary, Hofstede‟s cultural dimensions portray how values are defined, ranked, and situated in social systems. Issues of power distance indicate that there are societies whose value system is based on rigid and conservative structures and hierarchies as opposed to those of a soft and a democratic structure. Individualism and collectivism are also values in their own right. Individualism is popular in capitalist societies where survival for the fittest is the basis of what is of value while collectivism is a popular element in primitive social systems where communalism is rampant. The femininity versus masculinity ideology also has critical value areas that are pertinent to human growth and development. For example, there are those who believe that when feminine principles are valued, a pleasant and conflict-free social environment is pursued. Affirmative action is the basis for social growth. On the other hand, Hofstede argues that masculinity-dominated societies support insubordination. The suppression of women is a sign of the lack of affirmative action programmes which stalls possible development and kills the opportunities for social advancement for particular sections of society.

Critically examining Hofstede‟s theory of cultural dimensions, one would concentrate on a few aspects that are relevant to the present debate on values incorporation in school discipline. At the same time, some aspects are quite irrelevant. Issues of equality, for example, are emphasized by Hofstede through the femininity versus masculinity paradigm. Equality is a strong value critical to human growth and moral development (Turiel, 2002). The theory also advances an idea about power as a factor that could determine human development if utilized equitably. Power should be used as an engine for social cohesion and equal distribution of resources other than a conduit for seeking greater authoritarianism to the detriment of other social groupings. Sergiovanni (2006:13) further indicates that positive school discipline could be propelled further if power distance between schools is used as a platform for sharing successes for the benefit of the entire educational system.