Hofstede’s model of culture has enjoyed enormous popularity for decades but no major attempt was made to replicate it until 2015. A quasi-nationally representative study with large samples (n = 500 to 2,500 respondents in most countries) from over 50 countries, as well as analyses of the International Social Survey Program data, demonstrated that some of the foundations of Hofstede’s theories are untenable. For instance, national anxiety is not related to approval of strict rules and laws (a presumed relationship that constitutes the backbone of “uncertainty avoidance”). Furthermore, differences between the values and personalities of men and women are not a function of “masculinity-femininity” but of individualism. This, and the impossibility to replicate masculinity-femininity with any data, makes it an illusory dimension. Nevertheless, two dimensions – revised versions of individualism-collectivism and long-term orientation (now referred to as “flexibility-monumentalism”) are solid and replicable dimensions, forming a revised Minkov-Hofstede model of culture. Recently, Agner Fog analyzed all replicable dimensions of culture, in all models, and found that they all converge into a close 2D variant of Minkov-Hofstede. The two dimensions are closely related to, and explain, a long list of national behavioural differences, including rule of law versus corruption, gender equality, fatalities from various types of accidents, family structures, adolescent fertility, violent crime, innovation rates, etc. Alternative models of culture perform less well as predictors of those variables.

The lecture will be held online on Webinar.ru platform on April 14, 9:00 CET (10:00 Moscow time). Working language is English.