Cultural Comparison of the US between Germany, South Korea, and Japan

Abstract
Purpose-The purpose of this paper is to discover key differences and similarities of cultures
concerning the countries of Japan, Germany and South Korea when compared to the United
States. The examination of such information could help the US and major trade partners with the
US specifically Japan, Germany and South Korea with the cultural barriers they are faced with
when engaging in commerce with one another. Such findings may move forward greater progress
in stabilization of global markets and a better understanding of how to interact with people from
diverse backgrounds.
Design/methology/approach-The data gathered was obtained from the Hofstede Model of
cultural dimensions when comparisons were performed between the analyzed countries. The
majority of sources were collected from the publisher emerald insight as well as the academic
journals including the International Journal of Conflict Management and the Journal of
Managerial Psychology.
Findings-The findings revealed there were many differences when the dimensions of the US
were compared to South Korea and Japan. The US and Germany were split on the comparisons
with three being closely related and three of the dimensions being on the opposite side of the
spectrum.
Originality/value/contribution- The paper gives additional usefulness by discussing key
similarities and differences between nations that do a large volume of exchanges with the United
States.

Key terms-United States, Germany, South Korea, Japan, power distance, individualism,
masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, long term orientation, indulgence

Cultural Analysis
The United States and Germany have areas of resemblances and dissimilarities when the
cultures of these two are compared when applying the Hofstede model. The updated model uses
six dimensions, which incorporates power distance, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty
avoidance, long-term orientation and indulgence. This research gives companies located in the
US and Germany who are involved with trade with one another, a through look into their
business associates culture. Furth more Hofstede deliberately evaluated dimensions which could
be discovered to the work place giving such model a substantial of importance when applied to
the business world. As the United States and Germany have a portion of the dimensions, which
are similar, Japan and South Korea have little likeness to the dimension scores of the United
States. Knowing these strong differences, gives a glimpse to the US government and US
companies on what these major oriental countries value and why they may act the way they do.
And not knowing the differences between these diverse cultures might lead to conflicts and
misunderstandings (Komarraju, Dollinger, Lovell, 2008) Furthermore knowing you business
partners culture during negotiation will be exceedingly important. (Ma 2007) Also the more
usage of expatriate managers makes the regularity of interacting with people in business around
ever increasing necessary to know the others culture. (Schermerhorn, Bond 1997)
Germany
Power distance is the degree of which common people of a particular culture accept that
power is distributed unequally. According to Hofstedes model Germany scores a 35 as the

United States scores 40. Showing the middle class individuals of Germany and the US do not
have great barrier between the elites of society and the general public. Subordinates of these
cultures are more likely to relate to their superiors without a strong focus on status. (Koslowsky,
Baharav, Schwarzwald, 2011) Similarities on power distance may make communication between
German and US organizations go more smoothly by relating ones employees with the others
manager and visa versa.
Individualism is the degree to which the society of ones country has interdependence
concerning its citizens. Germany scores a 67 while the US shows an astronomical score of 91.
(Hofstede) Even though Germany is placed on the more individualistic side, the US scores
approximately thirty five percent higher. The US and Germany have an emphasis on nuclear
family relations and tend to look out for their own. The closeness of individualism could spill
over into the business world by the way of how Germans are so honest even if it hurts
according to the Hofstede model. Unfiltered honesty such as this would allow American
companies to truly know if there are any problems with the product they are selling to the
Germans or if there is a miscommunication of orders needed. Also a sharing of strong
individualistic ideals may make business dealings run efficiently compared to say South Korea or
Japan, nations where collectivism runs high.
Masculinity is the degree of whether a society values being the best (masculine) or
enjoying what you do (feminine). Similarly as the power distance scores, the scores for
masculinity are fairly alike when the Germany and US are examined. The countries result in
scores of 66 and 62. (Hofstede) Both nations show a strong pull towards the world of
competition in the global business world. The two cultures express an attitude of living to work
rather than the feministic view of the world, working to live. Knowing this from the perspective

of a US company will allow them more insight of where the competition is coming from with
German corporations. Whether the competition arises from penetration into the German market
or German companies coming from over seas. Also knowing this might actually lead to a US
company not trying to gain market share in the German market due to the fierce competiveness.
The last three dimensions of the Hofstede model begins to show more differences
between the countries of the Germany and the US. Beginning with uncertainty avoidance,
meaning how much the members of a society feel vulnerable by unknown events and have
created organizations and beliefs to evade these situations. Additionally countries with a higher
uncertainty avoidance score favor structure-allowing procedures, which are predictable. (Lee,
Garbarino, Lerman 2007) Germany scores a 65 on the uncertainty avoidance dimension, while
the US scores a 46. Germany like Japan and South Korea score high on uncertainty avoidance
and an example of their low uncertainty avoidance level is their legal system. The German legal
system is a perfect example of which is deductive.
Long term orientation, is the way a culture retains connections with its history while
confronting with the challenges of the present-day and future. Germany scores a high of 83,
meaning Germany can easily adjust their customs to deal with the changes of the future. Unlike
Germany, the US shows a low score of 26. (Hofstede) Long term orientation, being the
dimension where the two countries be differ the greatest. Germany takes a very pragmatic view
of the world while the US is low on long term orientation. Americans usually have a clear set for
them as what is right and what is wrong, holding onto traditions and cautious when new ideas or
ways of thinking come about. Also US companies focus on short term performance this obvious
from the networks such as CNBC who report on quarterly earning as if the financial system
depended on beating analyst estimates.

Indulgence is the degree to which members of society control their cravings and urges.
Germany and the US also differ on the dimension of indulgence. Germany scores 40 on the
Hofstede model for indulgence while the US scores a 68. (Hofstede) The society we find in the
US is one where impulses are rarely controlled and even the restraints of such impulses are even
looked down upon. While Germans see the restraint of acting on ones impulses as an action that
should be praised and looked up with admiration. One might need to be cautious and reserved of
acting through pure emotions during business meetings with German representatives. Showing
any sign of irrational outburst would come across as unprofessional and taboo to their society,
which is of great legality.

South Korea
Power distance in the South Korea is slightly high with a score with of 60 while the score
for the US is 40. (Hofstede) Such scores means that South Korea accepts a codified hierarchal
civilization while the US believes in a society in which status is less important relatively to other
countries. Subordinates of the South Korean culture, by having a high power distance score more
effortlessly consent to their roles. (Koslowsky, Baharav, Schwarzwald 2011) The value added to
the literature, would be, countries with low power distance, similar to the United States would
have to adapt to the negotiations. An example might include if an employee of a US company
had the opportunity to interact with a manager of a Korean company would go about their
dealings with extreme formality and caution. A tendency to have strict codes authority is also
characteristic of how South Korean companies are operated. (Morden Bowles 1998)
Individualism is practically not existent in South Korea with a score of 18. (Hofstede)
South Korea is a stout collective society, which is common with oriental countries. China,

Thailand, Hong Kong, and Taiwan all have scores of twenty, twenty, twenty-five, and seventeen.
Such scores are in stark contrast to the US score of 91 where nuclear family is central and duty to
oneself is held to a high standard. While South Korea is a collective society, knowing this will
give you some foresight into how difficult breaking into the South Korean market with a brand
new mark. According to (Yoo 2009) countries with high levels of collectivism, individuals show
a strong brand loyalty and hardly break habit that would lead them to switch to another product.
The knowledge of this information would be useful to firms who are looking to bring their
product to the Korean market. They would learn the barrier to entry due to the high levels of
collectivism, which translates to many people staying with their brands even though something
goes wrong.
Just as with Power distance and Individualism, South Koreas and the US are on the
opposite ends of the spectrum. South Korea scoring a 39 compared with the score of 62 for the
US, telling us people in South Korea have the mentality work to live while the US holds the
beliefs live to work. (Hofstede) Unlike Germany and the US, South Korea values consensus and
equality among the workforce. They put fierce competition lower than free time and flexibility.
This comes into contradiction of (Morden, Bowles 1998), who describe South Koreans, as ones
who have a win-lose philosophy during the times of negotiation even aggression comes into to
play. Descriptions such as these sound of reflective of the scores of Japan and Germany.
Uncertainty avoidance is immensely high with a score of 85 for South Korea, as well as
the long-term orientation with a score of 100 according to Hofstede model. (Hofstede) Both
scores being very different when compared to the scores of the US, which scores 46 and 26 for
the dimensions of uncertainty avoidance and long term orientation. An example of these scores
in a real world business exchange is how South Koreans value perceived quality much more than

Americans in retail shopping, showing the greater use of uncertainty avoidance in South Korea
than the US. (Jung, Sung, 2008) The low score of uncertainty avoidance for the US means the
society is more tolerant of diversity and able to handle ambiguity (Lee, Garbarino, Lerman,
2007) The US is also comfortable with a multiracial hierarchy whether the minorities be African
American, Asian American or any other minority group validating the low scale of uncertainty
avoidance (Bell, Marquardt, Berry, 2014)
The indulgence dimensions of both of these countries also are at the opposite sides of the
scale with South Korea scoring a low 29 and the US scoring a 68. (Hofstede) The US tends to
have a higher score of indulgence when compared to most countries. Similar to Germany as well
as Japan, South Korea has a low indulgence score while the United States has a relatively high
one. The description of a low indulgent society is one of restraint, meaning they see indulging
one self has a vice rather than a virtue. The US on the other hand has a culture where leisure time
is greatly valued.

Japan
One of the highest scores for Japan in Hofstedes model is in uncertainty avoidance, which is
92 (Hofstede). This has been speculated to be a result of the earthquakes, volcanoes, and other
dangerous natural phenomena that happen on a very frequent basis in Japan (Hofstede), thus
giving them a large incentive not just think in the present and be especially focused on what the
future has in store. They also practice high amounts of uncertainty avoidance in Keirestu, which
creates intertwined business which significantly lowers risks taken by businesses by creating
buffers should a bad financial crisis arise (Turestsky and Tudor 11). This prevents these
companies from taking significant hits or collapsing if a financial crisis; it also allows these

companies who participate in Keirestu to weather an economic storm by spreading all the risk
through many companies. Theres also the fact that government funded job rotation is very high
in Japan, while low in the United States (Panos 57), suggesting that the high uncertainty
avoidance of the Japanese even extends to employment. After all, no one wants to be out of a
job. This constant job rotation to avoid unemployment also suggests that there is a very high fear
of losing jobs and keeping everything as stable as possible. A US company could take this
knowledge and use it to their advantage. They would use this knowledge in business transactions
writing and emphasizing in contracts with Japanese companies that there will be no surprises
along the way. A Japanese might take this as a very positive thing, due to the high level of
uncertainty avoidance and this confident cooperation of others culture would lead to healthy and
continuous business operations.
Also, as a culture Japan is incredibly collectivistic with a score of 46 (Hofstede).
Responsibility is collectivistic, with individual workers checking other workers work, with
minimal oversight from inspectors in manufacturing jobs (Arunoday 10). There is consensus
team decision making, and when rewards are given, they are given to the whole group to foster
teamwork (Yoshida 442). Theres also a system where decisions are made collectively until
everyone agrees (Khookay 17). It has been noted by people who are familiar with the matter that
while Japan is still relatively collectivistic, the influence of the Wests individualism, especially
that of the United States, and appear to be decreasing their collectivist tendencies and increasing
their individualistic tendencies (Fukushige, Spicer 513). Whether this is good for Japan or not
depends on whether Japanese culture can handle such significant changes in management
structure. There is a dark side to a high degree of collectivism, which is the much higher levels of
materialism than in many Western countries (Odgen and Venkat 74). However, this does not

appear to lead to levels of decadence in spending that one might expect from a culture that has a
high level of materialism.
The Japanese culture is incredibly masculine in its outlook, with a score of 95 (Hofstede).
The Japanese always strive for excellence, and they do it by constantly training. Evidence for
that can be seen in how much time the typical Japanese, with about 8 hours per week spent
outside of the job learning additional skills (Saha 11). This dedication to excellence is consistent
with Hofstedes idea of a masculine society, which stresses high levels of accomplishment.
Theres also the concept of Kaizen, which is essentially a continuous incremental effort of
improvement that involves everyone (Brunet and New 1427-1428). While excellence in Japan
may come slowly, it will come, as everyone is involved in the project. However, this dedication
to excellence comes with a dark side: workaholism. For an American company to be able to
compete in the Japanese market, they would have to go above in beyond due to the fierce
competition that arises from Japanese companies. A US company might look to other markets
where competition is so intense or look in areas of the Japanese market where there is little
competitive and areas of growth. Also a US company might start to practice the work ethics of
Japanese companies to overcome wasted work hours and push up the efficiency of ones
company.
The power distance score for Japan is 54 (Hofstede). There is a belief in Japan that going
into a company is like being adopted into a family, with a middle manager often being assigned
to a new employee as a sort of mentor, allowing the new employee to build connections with his
superiors and learn his work (Saha 9). In addition, there are very few layers of bureaucracy,
meaning that lowest workers often have great access to upper management (Sasha 10). This
reinforces the idea of a family that the Japanese view of business, with leaders being parents and

employees as children, because after all, children tend to have almost completely unrestricted
access to their parents. The Japanese are known to work long hours, however, this has decreased
as times have gotten worse since the 1991 bubble popped, and the actual working hours have
decreased, especially in middle aged demographic (Wakabayashi 539) Similar to the United
States and Germany and unlike South Korea power distance is low. A US company might take
away from this knowledge is many employees of a Japanese company has the ear of the upper
management. So business interactions should try to be completed with the upmost importance
even with low ranking employees with the other company. Also there might be a greater
understanding of communications between the US and Japan company when compared to the US
and South Korean company, which would be an upside while operating in the Japanese markets.
The long-term orientation of the Japanese is very high, scoring at 88 (Hofstede). Oneway which long-term orientation manifests itself is in the typical Japanese employment: if you
are hired at a company, you stay there for a very long time (Yoshida 443). However, as more
Western influence has come in, this has started to decline, but for the most part has stayed that
way. Also, in Japan there is an emphasis on training the workers who came in (Yoshida 450), for
which, because of the expectation that the workers would stay for life (or at the very least a
significant amount of time), the company reasonably see a return of investment for a quite a
while. This also has the beneficial side effect of increasing trust between the employee and the
employer. They also believe that plans should be evaluated in terms of projected future benefits
(Turestsky and Tudor 9). In other words, how will this benefit us, the company, in the long run,
and not merely short run? This means they are less likely to be pressured into making bad shortterm decisions that will negatively affect themselves. This means that Japanese businesses
approach their business in a different way than American businesses. Theres also the issue of job

rotation rates inside companies, with companies electing to keep the same workers but shifting
them (Panos 57), with an emphasis on keeping people employed suggests a very long term view
of employment with a high degree of investment in its employees. Uncertainty avoidance also
shows up in decision-making, with an emphasis on avoiding conflict as a result of the high
sociability of Japanese culture (Isomura 406). With the long-term orientation focus US
companies might approach a Japanese company with a business deal only to be accompanied by
a long-term contract of some sort or provisions where in the future there might be long term
dedication if X company orders this much of product.

Further Research
Suggestions for further research would include performing analysis between other countries that
trade frequently with one another. Research such as this would only allow more understanding
and letting other countries that have a global presence see where trading partners place their
cultural attitudes. Performing research could use the Hofstede model, or other models involved
with cultural attributes. Another comparison concentrated with cultures would focus on countries
having conflicts amongst each other, whether they are religious, political, or economical.
Examination of a type as this might be able to stabilize or at least improve tensions in parts of the
world where instability is occurring. Specific areas of the world might include Israel and
Palestine, Russian and Ukraine, or North and South Korea. Research on Israel and Palestine
concerning cultural difference would give light about what are the dimensions these people differ
the most on and maybe more importantly what they find the most similar. Analyses of Russian
and Ukraine could cause a place in the world where tensions run high to see where the other is

coming from. Finally research on North and South Korea might be able to start a beneficial
dialogue, which may help heal the wounds of the Korean War. A war that devastated the two
Korean nations, leading to tremendous atrocities, which effected soldiers and civilians alike as
well as being the first major conflict of the Cold War. (Kim 2010) Conversations between North
Korea could aid both countries economically. According to (Shim 1993) North Korea has
focused on heavy industries, like steel, machinery and specifically military hardware. While
South Korea has not developed heavily into the steel or machinery markets, North Korea could
provide them with such capital goods if trade was allowed. Furthmore North Korea has a
tremendous shortage of consumer goods and opening up dialogue could lead to trade, which
would benefit both countries. The stabilization of the Korean peninsula will only open up trade
as well as a sense of understanding and unity between the two nations. (Choe 2003) Further
research could also be made between the US and China, the two major powers of the world who
sometimes come across shaking relations. There could also be further discussions on the
tremendous trade imbalance the US has with China and the negative connation that comes along
with the dialogue. (Soofi 2009) US companies also have a large amount of capital invested in
China whether directly or indirectly, only adding to the importance of open dialogue. As
regulations such as the Sarbanes-Oxly Act become more vital to operations overseas with US
companies specially, the necessity of clear communication is needed. (Hwang Staley 2005) A
healthy conversation between the two premier countries of the world, would greatly forward the
progress on global stabilization. As more companies enter into the global markets, companies
need to adapt to what other cultures perceive as beneficial to consumption. Global companies
need to still keep an overall identity across national borders but at the same time creating
localized expressions of the culture of the specific region. (Witkowsi, Ma, Zheng 2003)

Examples of such activities are how Taco Bell of Yum Brands does not serve beef and pork in
India due to the substantial Hindu and Muslim client base and how KFC another Yum Brands
company, offers more than the usual sides. The KFC offers regional delicacies such as seasonal
vegetables with chicken as well as rice porridge. Only by adapting to ones surroundings can
there be survival, companies have to know the cultural aspect to the global business world if they
care to remain in a growth state as well as developing and maintaining a competitive advantage.
Research could also be performed on what specific cultures prefer and this could be applied to
many aspects of business. The obvious one being the food industry but focusing on the cultural
wants can be applied to finance, service industries, housing and real estate, and many other
industries. A few examples could be on how a culture feels about money. Are the majority of the
citizens conservative about finances? What are their attitudes to towards savings? An
international company when concerned about their service-based company might take substantial
time to research on how the people of a country act and what they see as the norm. When
employees act a certain way how will are customers react. Especially when dealing with face-toface interactions which is so important in the service industries. One would think the best way to
operate a focused service company would be to hire the majority of employees from that specific
country so interactions would go smoothly and reduce the risk of misunderstandings where the
differences are the greatest. A practice such as this would be vital to countries where cultures
diverge substantially, similar to the United States and South Korea.

References
Hofstede, G. (n.d.). What about the USA? Retrieved April 11, 2015, from http://geerthofstede.com/united-states.html

Hofstede, G. (n.d.). What about South Korea? Retrieved April 11, 2015, from http://geerthofstede.com/south-korea.html

Hofstede, G. (n.d.). What about Germany? Retrieved April 11, 2015, from http://geerthofstede.com/germany.html

Hofstede, G. (n.d.). What about Japan? Retrieved April 11, 2015, from http://geerthofstede.com/japan.html

Arunoday Saha, (1990),"Basic Human Nature and Management in Japan", Journal of Managerial
Psychology, Vol. 5 Iss 3 pp. 3 - 12

Aya Fukushige David P. Spicer, (2007),"Leadership preferences in Japan: an exploratory study",

Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 28 Iss 6 pp. 508 530

John Van Maanen, (2006),"Rediscovering Japan: some thoughts on change and continuity in
traditional Japanese careers", Career Development International, Vol. 11 Iss 4 pp. 280 292

Vagelis Dedoussis, (2001),"Keiretsu and management practices in Japan resilience amid

change", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 16 Iss 2 pp. 1 16

Howard F. Turetsky Thomas R. Tudor, (1996),"Long-term Horizon and Financial Management:

Japan's Competitive Advantage Over the United States", Management Research News, Vol. 19
Iss 7 pp. 8 22

Arunoday Saha, (1990),"Basic Human Nature and Management in Japan", Journal of Managerial
Psychology, Vol. 5 Iss 3 pp. 3 12

Meni Koslowsky Hadar Baharav Joseph Schwarzwald, (2011),"Management style as a mediator

of the power distance-influence tactics relationship", International Journal of Conflict
Management, Vol. 22 Iss 3 pp. 264 277
Meera Komarraju Stephen J. Dollinger Jennifer L. Lovell, (2008),"Individualism-collectivism in
horizontal and vertical directions as predictors of conflict management styles", International
Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 19 Iss 1 pp. 20 35
Zhenzhong Ma, (2007),"Conflict management styles as indicators of behavioral pattern in
business negotiation", International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 18 Iss 3 pp. 260 279
Julie Anne Lee Ellen Garbarino Dawn Lerman, (2007),"How cultural differences in uncertainty
avoidance affect product perceptions", International Marketing Review, Vol. 24 Iss 3 pp. 330
349
Myrtle P. Bell Dennis Marquardt Daphne P. Berry , (2014),"Diversity, immigration, and the
new American multi-racial hierarchy", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 29 Iss 3 pp. 285
303

Jaehee Jung Eunyoung Sung, (2008),"Consumer-based brand equity", Journal of Fashion

Marketing and Management: An International Journal, Vol. 12 Iss 1 pp. 24 35
John R. Schermerhorn Michael Harris Bond, (1997),"Cross-cultural leadership dynamics in
collectivism and high power distance settings", Leadership & Organization Development
Journal, Vol. 18 Iss 4 pp. 187 193
Boonghee Yoo, (2009),"Cross-national invariance of the effect of personal collectivistic
orientation on brand loyalty and equity", Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 21
Iss 1 pp. 41 57
Abdol S. Soofi, (2009),"China's exchange rate policy and the United States' trade deficits",
Journal of Economic Studies, Vol. 36 Iss 1 pp. 36 65
TonyMordenDavidBowles,(1998),"ManagementinSouthKorea:areview",Management
Decision,Vol.36Iss5pp.316330
Panos Mourdoukoutas Udayan Roy, (1994),"Job Rotation and Public Policy: Theory with
Applications to Japan and the USA", International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 15 Iss 6 pp. 57
71
Adam Paul Brunet and Steve New, (2003),"Kaizen in Japan: an empirical study", International
Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 23 Iss 12 pp. 1426 1446
Harold J. Ogden Ramesh Venkat, (2001),"Social comparison and possessions: Japan vs Canada",
Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 13 Iss 2 pp. 72 84

Hsien H. KhooKay C. Tan, (2003),"Managing for quality in the USA and Japan: differences
between the MBNQA, DP and JQA", The TQM Magazine, Vol. 15 Iss 1 pp. 14 24
Atsuko Kanai Mitsuru Wakabayashi, (2004),"Effects of economic environmental changes on job
demands and workaholism in Japan", Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 17 Iss
5 pp. 537 548
Bahaudin G. Mujtaba Kazuhito Isomura, (2012),"Examining the Japanese leadership orientations
and their changes", Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 33 Iss 4 pp. 401 420
Bowon Kim, (2010),"Cultural forces and historical events to shape organizing principles in
Korea", Management Decision, Vol. 48 Iss 5 pp. 826 841
Ki R. Shim, (1993),"An Economic Model of Korean Reunification", International Journal of
Social Economics, Vol. 20 Iss 10 pp. 13 22
Sang T. Choe, (2003),"NORTH KOREA MOVING FROM ISOLATION TO AN OPEN
MARKET ECONOMY: IS IT TIME TO INVEST OR TO CONTINUE OBSERVING?",
Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal, Vol. 13 Iss 2 pp. 60 69
Terrence H. WitkowskiYulong MaDan Zheng, (2003),"Cross-cultural influences on brand
identity impressions: KFC in China and the United States", Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing
and Logistics, Vol. 15 Iss 1/2 pp. 74 88
Dennis B.K. Hwang A. Blair Staley, (2005),"An analysis of recent accounting and auditing
failures in the United States on US accounting and auditing in China", Managerial Auditing
Journal, Vol. 20 Iss 3 pp. 227 234