Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Fajar Nugraha Syahruramdhan - 12010112130154
Fajar Nugraha Syahruramdhan - 12010112130154
Fajar Nugraha Syahruramdhan - 12010112130154
UNDERGRADUATE THESIS
Submitted by:
Thesis Advisor,
ii
THESIS EXAMINATION APPROVAL
has presented and defended in front of the Board of Reviewers on January 31,
2017 for fulfilling the requirement to be accepted.
Board of Reviewers:
iii
STATEMENT OF THESIS ORIGINALITY
Undersigned,
iv
MOTTO AND DEDICATION
“Being Black didn’t degrade Bilal and being Arab didn’t save Abu Lahab”
– Prophet Muhammad ﷺ
“We certainly are one single species, and it is becoming morally preferable to say
that we are one human race”
– Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza
v
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Alhamdulillah. All praise be to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala for the strength, ability,
and good health given to me to complete this work.
This thesis becomes a reality with the kind support and help of many individuals. I
would like to extend my sincere thanks to all of them.
I would like to express my thanks towards my family for the unconditional love and
encouragement which helped me get through this exhaustive yet exciting process.
My parents, bapak Darso Rudy Hartono and ibu Oon Saonah, for their endless
affection, prayer, and support towards me. To my sisters teh Luthfi and teh Ade,
and my brother, Nabil, for bringing joy and happiness in my life. And to the
newborn, Arka, thank you for your absolute cuteness! You sure did help me
alleviate my stress, boy. Uncle loves ya!
I would like to express my special gratitude and thanks to my advisor, bapak Dr.
Suharnomo S.E., M.Si., for sharing his invaluable knowledge and expertise which
has helped me a lot in my study. This thesis is also possible with his permission to
use his data banks.
To the Board of Reviewers, bapak Dr. Fuad Mas’ud, MIR. and ibu Andriyani
S.E., M.M. who have spent their invaluable time to examine and provide me
meaningful feedback for this thesis.
PT Freeport Indonesia, for the financial support during my study through the
company scholarships. With the fund, I have been able to take Academic English
courses during the past two years.
Izzah Istiadzah, who has been very supportive and encouraging, and loving, and
vi
caring. She was always mad whenever I showed any sign of “relaxing” during these
demanding times and it turned out to be a huge help for me. Thank you, mba Isti!
Ajeng and Romi, who have been my best friends during the campus life. Thank
you for the sincere friendship and supporting gestures. I hope to see you guys again
soon.
EECC Rangers, mba Aisyah, mas Alif, mba Iwana, mas Bahrul, mas Randy, mas
Arief, mba Uli, mba Hasna, mas Shohib, mas Hendra, mas Ghani, Rina,
Taufika, Fattiya, Shasha, Lintang, Meidinta, Puspa, Naufal, Inan, Dika,
Hannina, Yuyun, Windhy, Ruli, Ojan, Rissa, Dinda, Gita, Andini, Dian,
Bunga, Fadhil, Clara, Nadia, Andre, Isti, Saddek, Arsan, Uchi, Andika,
Sholeh, Rini, Atikah, Bagus, Djioe, Marko, Faisal, and other rangers, who have
shared their time together with me in this beautiful organization. Thank you, guys.
BEM FEB Undip members, Naufal, Taufika, Citra, Astuti, Eko & Iman, Asih,
Ian, Rendi, Maesa, Setiawan, Agung, Alvin, Mirza, Harley, Ferdyan, Tama
and other members of this organization, thank you such an amazing experience
working with you guys.
HMJM members, mba Noven, mas Novan, mas Afif, mas Wahyu, mas Tito, mas
Panda, mas Ferdy, Aji, Sofy, Diba, Itang, Mende, Yudha, and other members,
whom I spent most of my first year with. I had a really good time in this
organization.
To ILO Better Work Survey team members, Dr. Harjum, Dr. Mirwan Perdhana
S.E., M.M., Ph.D., mas Ghalih, mas Novan, mba Angela, mba Nabila, and mba
Winda for the exciting experience. I learnt many things from the project as well as
from you. The fact that I enhanced my driving skills during the time of the project
is a bonus. Thank you for the trusts given to me.
Academic English Lads, mba Ratna, Maesa, Setiawan, Yudha, Hannina, Havid,
thank you for helping me to keep pushing until the end.
To pak Pri and family for providing me warm settlement during my time here in
Semarang.
My thanks and appreciations also go to my colleague and people who have willingly
helped me out with their abilities.
vii
ABSTRACT
viii
ABSTRAK
Kata kunci: budaya nasional, Indonesia, nilai budaya, suku bangsa, value survey
module
ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS
x
2.2.4.1 Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck (1961) ...................................... 16
2.2.4.2 Edward T. Hall (1960) ........................................................ 16
2.2.4.3 Geert Hofstede (1980) ........................................................ 17
2.2.4.4 Trompenaars (1993) ........................................................... 17
2.2.5 The Chosen Framework: Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions ............. 17
2.3 Literature Review on Indonesia and its Subcultures .................................. 19
2.3.1 Indonesia .......................................................................................... 19
2.3.2 Javanese............................................................................................ 20
2.3.3 Sundanese ......................................................................................... 20
2.3.4 Batak ................................................................................................ 21
2.3.5 Minangkabau .................................................................................... 22
2.3.6 Chinese-Indonesian .......................................................................... 23
2.4 Prior Studies ............................................................................................... 24
2.5 Research Gap .............................................................................................. 29
CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY........................................................................ 31
3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................ 31
3.2 Respondents of the Study ........................................................................... 31
3.2.1 Population ........................................................................................ 31
3.2.2 Sample .............................................................................................. 32
3.3 Research Instrument Used .......................................................................... 33
3.4 Research Procedure .................................................................................... 33
3.4.1 Pilot Testing ..................................................................................... 33
3.4.2 Questionnaire Design ....................................................................... 34
3.4.3 Data Collection................................................................................. 35
3.5 Data Handling ............................................................................................. 35
3.6 Data Computation and Analysis ................................................................. 36
3.6.1 Data Computation ............................................................................ 36
3.6.1.1 Power Distance Index ......................................................... 36
3.6.1.2 Uncertainty Avoidance Index ............................................. 37
3.6.1.3 Individualism Index ............................................................ 37
3.6.1.4 Masculinity Index ............................................................... 38
3.6.2 Data Analysis ................................................................................... 38
CHAPTER IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ................................................... 41
xi
4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................ 41
4.2 Description of the Sample .......................................................................... 41
4.2.1 Gender .............................................................................................. 43
4.2.2 Age ................................................................................................... 44
4.2.3 Education.......................................................................................... 45
4.2.4 Job Position ...................................................................................... 46
4.3 Results of the VSM 82 Calculations........................................................... 48
4.3.1 Power Distance................................................................................. 49
4.3.1.1 Question 19 of Part 1 (a)..................................................... 52
4.3.1.2 Question 20 of Part 1 (b) .................................................... 54
4.3.1.3 Question 22 of Part 1 (c)..................................................... 55
4.3.2 Uncertainty Avoidance..................................................................... 56
4.3.2.1 Question 21 of Part 1 (d) .................................................... 58
4.3.2.2 Question 19 of Part 2 (e)..................................................... 59
4.3.2.3 Question 23 of Part 1 (f) ..................................................... 60
4.3.3 Individualism vs. Collectivism......................................................... 61
4.3.3.1 Question 4 of Part 1 (m4) .................................................... 63
4.3.3.2 Question 1 of Part 1 (m1) .................................................... 64
4.3.3.3 Question 8 of Part 1 (m8) .................................................... 65
4.3.3.4 Question 13 of Part 1 (m13)................................................. 67
4.3.4 Masculinity vs. Femininity .............................................................. 68
4.3.4.1 Question 8 of Part 1 (m8) .................................................... 70
4.3.4.2 Question 11 of Part 1 (m11)................................................. 71
4.3.4.3 Question 6 of Part 1 (m6) .................................................... 72
4.3.4.4 Question 14 of Part 1 (m14)................................................. 74
4.4 Discussion of the Findings ......................................................................... 75
4.4.1 Javanese............................................................................................ 77
4.4.1.1 Javanese Dimensions Scores Comparison .......................... 78
4.4.2 Sundanese ......................................................................................... 80
4.4.3 Batak ................................................................................................ 81
4.4.3.1 Batak and Javanese Scores Comparison ............................. 82
4.4.4 Minangkabau .................................................................................... 83
4.4.5 Chinese Indonesian .......................................................................... 84
xii
4.4.5.1 Chinese Indonesian Scores Comparison............................. 86
4.4.6 Averaged Dimensions Scores of the Present Study (Indonesia) ...... 87
4.4.7 Hofstede’s Unidentified Samples Revealed? ................................... 88
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION ............................................................................. 92
5.1 Conclusion .................................................................................................. 92
5.2 Research Limitations .................................................................................. 93
5.3 Recommendations ...................................................................................... 94
5.3.1 For Future Studies ............................................................................ 95
5.3.2 For Managers Managing Indonesian Employees ............................. 95
BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................. 98
APPENDIX 1 QUESTIONNAIRE BOOKLET ................................................. 104
APPENDIX 2 CALCULATION TABLES (FROM TOTAL SAMPLES) ........ 109
xiii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1 Prior Studies .................................................................................. 25
Table 4.1 Profile of Respondents .................................................................. 43
Table 4.2 Value Survey Module 82 Formulae .............................................. 49
Table 4.3 Power Distance Scores of Five Ethnic Groups Studied ................ 50
Table 4.4 Uncertainty Avoidance Scores of Five Ethnic Groups Studied .... 57
Table 4.5 Individualism Scores of Five Ethnic Groups Studied ................... 62
Table 4.6 Masculinity Scores of Five Ethnic Groups Studied ...................... 69
Table 4.7 Javanese Comparison with Perdhana (2014) ................................ 78
Table 4.8 Batak and Javanese Scores Comparison ....................................... 83
Table 4.9 Chinese Indonesian Comparison with Perdhana (2014) ............... 86
Table 4.10 Range of VSM Dimensions Scores of Five Ethnic Groups .......... 87
Table 4.11 Javanese and Hofstede Indonesian Scores Comparison................ 89
xiv
LIST OF FIGURES
Exhibit 3.1 Steps Taken During the Study....................................................... 40
Exhibit 4.1 Gender ........................................................................................... 44
Exhibit 4.2 Age ................................................................................................ 45
Exhibit 4.3 Education Qualification ................................................................ 46
Exhibit 4.4 Job Position ................................................................................... 48
Exhibit 4.5 Full Responses on Question 19-1.................................................. 53
Exhibit 4.6 Full Responses on Question 20-1.................................................. 54
Exhibit 4.7 Question 22-1 Subordinates Afraid to Contradict Boss ................ 56
Exhibit 4.8 Question 21-1 Intensity of Being Nervous about Job ................... 59
Exhibit 4.9 Question 19-2 Company Rules Should Not Be Broken ................ 60
Exhibit 4.10 Question 23-1 Intention to Stay at Current Job............................. 61
Exhibit 4.11 Question 4-1 Have Good Working Environment ......................... 64
Exhibit 4.12 Question 1-1 Sufficient Time for Personal or Home Life ............ 65
Exhibit 4.13 Question 8-1 Have Pleasant People to Work with (IDV) ............. 67
Exhibit 4.14 Question 13-1 Live in a Desirable Area ........................................ 68
Exhibit 4.15 Question 8-1 Have Pleasant People to Work with (MAS)............ 71
Exhibit 4.16 Question 11-1 Have Chances for Better Financial State............... 72
Exhibit 4.17 Question 6-1 Have Security of Employment ................................ 73
Exhibit 4.18 Question 14-1 Have Chances for Promotion ................................ 75
xv
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
This chapter explains the background that underlies this research. It also
consists of research questions, the purpose of the research, and usefulness of the
Indonesia, the country has seen a 6.88% increase in foreign direct investment from
US$ 253.1 billion in 2014 to 271.8 billion in 2015. This number was higher than
World Factbook 2016). For instance, it indicates that Indonesia is still seen as one
interactions might cause problems if they are not well planned and prepared,
must provide proper orientations to their managers that will be placed outside his
1
2
or her home country. Understanding cultural differences will help them become
more effective leaders and thus will increase the chance of their success in the new
countries.
behavior and recent studies have shown its influences on business performance
(Perdhana 2014; Matveev & Milter 2004). It is defined as “the collective mental
programming of the mind that distinguishes the member of a group or society to the
culture dimensions.
added to the original four dimensions (Hofstede & Bond, 1988). In 2010,
Indulgence versus Restraint dimension was added based on World Values Survey
findings, Indonesia is a country that is high on power distance, low preference for
(Hofstede et al., 2010). Although Hofstede did not explain literally from which
3
ethnicities his respondents were, there is a tendency that he presents ethnic Javanese
in explaining Indonesia (Perdhana 2014). Hofstede also admits his scores might be
is not matched by the availability of the empirical study findings in the country.
the country (e.g. Liddle 1996; Goodfellow 1997; Irawanto 2009; Irawanto et al.
2012). In response to this problem, recent studies have tried to bridge the gap.
Given the dearth of literature available for foreign managers and possibly
values, this study aims to bridge the gap by extending Hofstede’s work on
(PDI score 78), collectivistic value (IDV score 14), low masculine (MAS score 46),
and low preference for avoiding uncertainty (UAI score 48). Although all
2014). Hofstede himself admits that his score may be misleading in a multiethnic
of major ethnic groups in Indonesia, this study aims to show that there are cultural
and worsen by the lack of studies which discuss Indonesia’s cultural variations,
Indonesia exists. The purpose of the present study was to assess whether a national
Chinese-Indonesian employees.
This research studied employees from five ethnic groups in Indonesia. It has
Indonesians as having one single culture. Recent studies have shown that there are
With the small number of literature that empirically discuss the variations
of culture within Indonesia, the present study was aimed to fill in the gap by
investigating five major ethnic group in Indonesia. Previous studies have mostly
described Indonesia’s culture as one; disregarding the fact that Indonesia consists
This study was also conducted with the aim of contributing to both academic
this research studied only 5 ethnic groups out of 31 major ethnic groups
only.
questionnaires, making 69.9% response rate. The respondents were all employees
mainly residing in Central Java. With the help of Dr. Suharnomo’s students,
questionnaires were distributed from May 2014 until May 2015. All questionnaires
were paper based and therefore the responses were manually inputted into the
electronic form.
The instrument used in this study was Hofstede’s Value Survey Module
1982 (VSM 82). The use of this instrument was based on the rationale that it was
the closest instrument to the IBM’s value survey module. The weakness is,
however, VSM 82 doesn’t cover two additional dimensions that are only available
on the latest version, the Value Survey Module 2013. Despite being old, however,
the findings of the study have been able to show differences and similarities among
This thesis has been structurally written to adhere the Undergraduate Thesis
chapters that will serve their own purposes with the following explanation:
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION
This chapter discusses the background and its theoretical rationale of this
study, statement of the problem, research purposes and usefulness and the
This chapter provides literature used for the present study as the theoretical
This chapter explains about the methodology used for the study, sampling
This chapter explains and describes the object of this study, the findings,
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
Subsequently, the existing literature on Indonesia and its ethnic groups; particularly
presented in order to provide a general idea about the cultural complexity in the
country. The emphasis will be on the historical experiences of the respectable ethnic
Culture has been defined in many ways. It has been a discussion among
anthropologist, Sir Edward Tylor in 1871 (Kottak 2013). Tylor (as cited in Kottak
2013) defines culture as “…complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, arts,
morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a
member of society”. By the definition, Sir Tyler underlines the role of culture as
preparation tools needed for somebody in order to fit in in their society. It indicates
8
9
Culture can also be defined as “the sum total of the beliefs, rules, techniques,
institutions, and artifact that characterize human populations” (Ball & McCulloch
1999). Hall & Hall (1990) define culture as “a system for creating, sending, storing,
The term of culture used in the present study was coined by the Dutch
the mind that distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from
others” (Hofstede, Hofstede, et al. 2010; p. 6). This term of culture also indicates
that culture is learned. Hofstede distinguishes culture from human nature and
individual’s personality. Human nature is inherited. It is the same within all human
beings. The human ability to feel anger, fear, joy, sadness, and shame. Whilst the
needn’t be shared with any other human being. It is partly inherited from one’s
programming of the mind. The word “collective” is often associated with a national
border, arguing that nationality and culture tend to correspond with each other.
local beliefs, many researchers think that making comparisons among countries is
often the best compromise (Hofstede 2002). Access to data is often unavailable for
closer investigation regarding culture. Hence, the term national culture is argued to
10
have been coined due to the need for understanding cultural differences across
cultures. National stereotypes have been proved to be useful in capturing the variety
proposed many frameworks for the past few decades. The purpose of the study was
to investigate the cultural variations among five major ethnic groups in Indonesia;
to relationship with other people, their motives for behaving, and their human
nature. The basic assumptions regarding this framework is that a society has its own
The first dimension is time orientation, whether the people should put more
emphasis on the past, on the present, or on the future. Second, humanity and natural
toward the nature. Motive for behaving, whether the people behave driven by their
hierarchy in the society, or whether the people should be treated as equals. Nature
framework. However, Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck (1961) did not really elaborate it
(Hills 2002).
These dimensions are their view toward time and the context of the culture –
The first dimension is the society’s view toward time. Hall and Hall (1990)
done one at a time with a focused manner. On the contrary, in a polychronic culture
time is seen as a rotating sequence which can repeat itself (Hall & Hall 1990).
The second dimension is the context. Context refers to all drives and
motives that surround every communication, and the degree of how much it matters
is different in many cultures. Therefore, Hall and Hall (1990) divided this
with the extensive network within a family, friends, clients, and partners. Their
relationship is tight and personal as they always try to be well informed regarding
the state of their closest people. Whilst in low context cultures, communications
will occur explicitly. The people have a tendency to separate one activity from the
other. Therefore to give a meaning from one specific event, they will need a lot of
message.
national cultural dimensions. Not only making cultural comparisons, his framework
is also able to provide explanations toward the how culture will define the behavior
of a person at the workplace. The four dimensions are presented in points below:
look after himself or herself and his or her immediate family only”.
13
which social gender roles are clearly distinct: men are supposed to be
both men and women are supposed to be modest, tender, and concerned
of the research was first published in 1993 (Trompenaars 1993). His work is
map of variety of cultures. Each dimension has a continuum from one extreme to
the other.
culture which believes that ideas and practices can equally be applied in
14
believes that every ideas and practices should consider the actual
Turner 1997).
the people within a culture that will pay more attention to themselves
3. Specific versus diffuse. Specific means that individual has a large room
of privacy and at the same time has a little room of private space. The
emotion and keep it for themselves. For instance, in this culture people
15
give the respect due to the ascribed status which is based on the person’s
Turner 1997).
of the people toward their nature and the natural environment. Should
human take full control over the nature? Or should human live in
events are done at the same time). This dimension is identical to Hall
it is possible. The people within this culture are used to deal with
simultaneous issues or events at the same time and like to keep tabs for
Hampden-Turner 1997).
The previous section has presented the concept of national culture and
to be able to achieve the aim of investigating the cultural values of employees from
framework must be chosen. The first step was to understand each framework’
in points below:
develop other theories around their work. However, despite being the first
(2014) considers their work as “too ambiguous” that the interpretations of each
dimension relies heavily on subjective judgment. Moreover, Hills (2002) notes that
the work of Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck is unfinished yet attempts at continuing the
Hall & Hall (1990) described cultures as being either primarily High
17
Context or primarily Low Context. Each culture use both contexts in their
discussed his methods, creating doubts over the rigorousness of the framework
(Cardon 2008).
among countries (Shackleton & Ali 1990; Triandis 1982; Schuler & Rogovsky
1998), his work is also subject to criticisms. McSweeney (2002) points out the issue
of the use of country as the unit of analysis in comparing cultures. In his response,
Hofstede (2002) admits that it is not the best unit of analysis but argues that nations
are “usually the only kind of units available for comparison and better than
nothing.”
Bearing similar problems to Hall’s work, Trompenaars’ framework didn’t have any
peer-reviewed academic publications and never specified the actual contents of his
database (Hofstede, Hofstede, et al. 2010). Moreover, Perdhana (2014) argues that
Trompenaars’ items was too complex to use given a huge number of items asked
For the purpose of this study, which was to investigate the cultural values
cultural variations among countries (Triandis 1982; Shackleton & Ali 1990) and his
work is also widely cited and used by management scholars and practitioners
(Venaik & Brewer 2010). Although, to some extent, Hofstede missed certain details
such as failing to capture the cultural variations within a culturally complex country
such as Indonesia (Perdhana 2014), the present study did not bear the same problem.
food and beverages, textile, and service industries originating from Javanese,
Sundanese, Batak, Minangkabau, and Chinese Indonesian. Due to the fact that these
Koentjaraningrat 2004), it is also argued that they will also have different cultural
The second consideration is the ease of use of the questionnaire. The present
study decided to employ the Value Survey Module 1982 (VSM 82). It is a set of
questions which is divided into 2 main parts consisting a total of 47 items. The
relatively small number of items asked toward the respondents made it easier for
The present study is fully aware that there are newer versions of Hofstede’s
Value Survey Module, such as VSM 08 and VSM 13 which generate 7 and 6
chosen due to having the original items used in the IBM’s original questionnaire
19
Indonesia has all 6 scores for 6 dimensions, only 4 of which were derived from the
IBM project. The other 2 dimensions were obtained from the findings of other
2.3.1 Indonesia
13,000 islands spread across from the tip of Sumatra Island to the edge of West
New Guinea (Papua). Indonesia is also world’s largest Muslim-majority and the
fourth world’s most populous country (The World Factbook 2016). Indonesia is has
over 1,300 distinct ethnicities and tribes which are incorporated into 31 major ethnic
different ethnic group. Indonesian people in general like to use their own traditional
order to be able to be functioning as a united nation, the founding fathers have set
a unifying philosophy for Indonesia: Pancasila. Pancasila literally means “The Five
Principles” (Kennedy, Lee, & Grossman 2010, as cited in Perdhana 2014). These
five principles serve as Indonesia’s state philosophy. Moreover, Indonesia also has
being united despite all the differences is essential to the harmonious life among
20
Indonesian people.
2.3.2 Javanese
Within the Javanese ethnic group, there are many distinct smaller ethnic groups
such as Javanese ethnic, Osing, Tengger, Samin, Bawean, Naga, Nagaring and
In its social interaction, people are divided based on its social status.
classifications, they are santri, abangan, and priyayi. A person is classified as santri
is the one who embraces pure teachings of Islam. Whilst for abangan, it refers to
the persons who mix the teachings of Islam with traditional beliefs called Kejawen.
Javanese people believe that everything has been set up for them by God,
and thus most people will have accepting behavior. With this belief, a Javanese
person will think that being ambitious is unnecessary because when it is meant for
2.3.3 Sundanese
cultural anthropology, Sundanese people or Sundanese ethnic group people are the
ones who have been speaking Sundanese language for generations and reside in
West Java area. This area is also known as “Tanah Pasundan” or “Tatar Sunda.”
21
Islamic culture (Harsojo 2004). It is even more difficult to distinguish which one is
custom and which one is Islamic teachings or sharia. In terms of linage, Sundanese
culture has bilateral kinship system (Harsojo 2004). Bilateral kinship system is the
lineage which takes into account the kinship through the male and the female.
2.3.4 Batak
Bangun (2004) explains that there are certain unwritten rules regarding
social stratification within Batak culture. The judgment of social status is mainly
based on 1) age differences, 2) blood purity, 3) titles and positions, 4) marital status.
Age differences affect in the way in which the responsibilities among the people
ceremonies or family business, only the elderly who has the right to voice his or her
opinions and make subsequent decisions. For younger adults, their job is to
implement the decision. As expected, younger members within the culture don’t
have any rights to speak nor to implement the decision. Even in the matter of
patrimonies, their mothers will take the patrimony for them since they are not
allowed to do anything (Bangun 2004). This aspect of Batak shows that there
hierarchical order that is maintained by Batak people, indicating they are a high
1810, Islam was spread by Minangkabau people and it is now embraced mostly by
Southern Batak people, such as Mandailing and Angkola. As for Christianity, it was
Simalungun regions and by the Dutch religion organization to Karo region (Bangun
2004). To date, Christian Protestant and Islam are the two major religions among
Batak people.
2.3.5 Minangkabau
part of Bengkulu, West Jambi, North Sumatra's west coast, southwest of Aceh, and
population.
they are the inheritors of a long tradition of Malay and Sriwijaya kingdom who likes
to trade. Besides trading, Minangkabau ethnic group also has high tendency to leave
their village and settle in elsewhere which is considered to provide a better life.
Minangkabau also the largest culture which has matrilineal social system.
Matrilineal system is adopted by both within a marriage, tribal, heritage, and so on.
Koning (2000) explains that Minangkabau women have a special position in the
social system of the society. The women are called as Bundo Kanduang, played a
role and determine the successful implementation of the decisions made by men in
positions as mamak and the Penghulu (headman). A big influence is even making
community settings. In addition, the tribe is also the basis of economic units. The
wealth of a family is determined by the family land ownership, property, and other
members of a family member. Such property can’t be sold nor can it be privately
is almost no distinctive rituals or symbols coming from their own culture. Almost
all rituals are influenced by Islamic customs such as kitan and katam which are
2.3.6 Chinese-Indonesian
about 1.2% of the total population (Statistics Indonesia 2011). Despite being
recognized for their impact on Indonesia’s economy. For many years, the wealthiest
(Forbes 2017). Their success in the business sector can be traced back to Indonesia’s
historically not from a specific area of the mainland China. They mostly came from
Canton. These languages have significant differences that most of the time a
speaker from one language cannot effectively communicate from other speaker of
other language.
and ancestral culture (Whitehead & Brown 2011). Such characteristics are reflected
in the Chinese Indonesian ethnic who still holds the values and thoughts of
the key of success is hard work and willingness to sacrifice (Seng 2006).
Confucianism emphasizes ethics in the life of family and relationship with other
human beings. The main values of the Confucianism teachings are ren (humanity),
xiao (filial piety), zhi (wisdom), yi (righteousness), and li (courtesy) (Rozie 2012).
among subcultures within a country, have been conducted in the past studies.
25
Table 2.1
Prior Studies
Author(s)
No. Title Scope Methods
(Year)
1. Comparing Hofstede, Regional level comparisons in VSM 82 &
Regional Garibaldi de Brazil. Three independently VSM 94
Cultures Hilal, conducted studies. (quantitative)
within a Malvezzi,
Country: Tanure, &
Lessons from Vinken
Brazil (2010)
2. In for a Oliver Dividing Hofstede’s Arab VSM 94
Surprise Fischer & World into its own countries: (quantitative)
Piloting the Ahmad Al- Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon,
Arab Version Issa (2012) Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Syria,
of the VSM and UAE.
94
3. Is There Mangundja Ethnic group level comparison Modified
Cultural ya (2013) in one public organization, version of
Changes in the 2000 respondents of various VSM 94
National level of job position. (quantitative)
cultures of
Indonesia?
4. Cultural Perdhana Ethnic group level comparison Mixed
Values and (2014) in Indonesia. Samples: 100 methods:
Leadership managers for each ethnic group employing
Styles of from different organizations. VSM 13 and
Managers in MLQ5X
Indonesia: (quantitative)
Javanese and and in-depth
Chinese interviews
Indonesians (qualitative).
5. Measurement Weustink Regional level comparisons in VSM 94
of Culture; are (2014) India. (quantitative)
Regional and
National
Level Culture
Any
Different?
India as a case
study
Source: Compiled for the present study 2017.
comparisons can also be used for comparing other collective groups within
a country such as regional culture or ethnic group. The VSM used in these
three studies were VSM 82 and VSM 94. Despite the results of the study
suggest that there are significant differences among regional cultures, they
Hofstede 2001; Hofstede & Hofstede 2005; Hofstede, Hofstede, et al. 2010).
Sharjah, UAE.
The evidence suggests that despite showing the opposite value to the
suggesting that Arab cultures might have a similar cultural values. However,
studied, Fischer and Al-Issa pointed out that there might be changes in
framework.
3. Mangundjaya (2013)
version of VSM 94. Mangundjaya was well aware about the sampling
The results indicate that all ethnic groups are categorized as large
and each ethnic groups show strong similarities in the dimensions scores,
28
4. Perdhana (2014)
Javanese and Chinese Indonesian managers. Not only did he measure the
5. Weutsink (2014)
and thus will also have different cultural values. It is found that there are
another, the term “collective group” is not always refer to the national culture. It
can also be applied to various levels of cultures such as regional cultures and ethnic
group cultures within a single country. A country might be formed with high degree
because of the same vision due to sharing the same historical events in the past such
as Indonesia.
(2011), the country has over 1,300 ethnicities with hundreds of local languages
which are formed into 31 major ethnic groups such as Javanese, Sundanese, Batak,
minor ethnic groups because the differences among them are often only visible
among the members of the ethnic groups themselves. The purpose of the present
study was to give a closer investigation regarding the cultural variations using
that have emerged historically and set people apart” (Giddens et al. 2012). Members
of ethnic groups see themselves as culturally distinct from other groups and are seen
30
groups form one another, but the most common are some combination of language,
history, religious faith, and ancestry – real or imagined – and styles of dress or
to help understand the essential differences among the countries studied. Whilst not
rejecting this approach entirely, the present study argued that such approaches are
only useful at the early stage of a research project. At the early stage, data
validations for the concept is very much needed. Therefore, comparing one nation
researchers have begun to have strong awareness (i.e. Mangundjaya 2013; Perdhana
2014; Mas’ud 2010; Suharnomo 2016; Mas’ud 2008) towards this problems, efforts
must be aimed at addressing the cultural variations within the country. In response
with it, the present study was done with the aim of investigating the cultural
differences and similarities among employees from five major ethnic groups:
METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
better understanding of the culture of the country, one must also understand the
cultural values of its ethnicities. Therefore, this study employed Hofstede’s national
participate in this study. The sample consisted of 452 males (64.66%) and 247
females (35.34%). In terms of age, the sample was relatively young with the age
group of 20 to 29 years old dominated the composition with a total number of 428
respondents were Javanese, 21.32% were Sundanese, 14.31% were Batak, 14.31%
3.2.1 Population
31
32
of interest for which the researcher wants to make inferences based on sample
statistics (Sekaran & Bougie 2013). The aim of this study was to closely investigate
the cultural values of employees from five major ethnic groups in Indonesia:
population of this study is all employees originating from those five ethnic groups.
3.2.2 Sample
from it (Sekaran & Bougie 2013; Sekaran 2009). The purpose of employing
groups of respondents should not be smaller than 50. As mentioned earlier, this
study managed to collect responses from 699 respondents with 200 of which were
Javanese, 149 were Sundanese, 100 were Minangkabau, Batak with the same
amount as Minangkabau, and 150 were Chinese Indonesian. With the minimum
number of 100 of each group, the present study has exceeded Hofstede’s minimum
criteria of 50 respondents.
The four dimensions in which groups will be scored were developed for
describing national cultures. However, the scores are also affected by other
VSM users to only collect data from matched groups of respondents from two or
more countries (in the case of this study, ethnic groups). To satisfy this requirement,
33
this research utilized purposive sampling method with the following criteria:
position;
which his or her ethnic groups was originated (e.g. a Sundanese by blood
This study employed the 1982 version of Hofstede’s Value Survey Module
(VSM 82). It is the first version of VSM that was available for research replications
and extensions. The composition of the module is based on research among 116.000
the response option ranges from 1 (of utmost importance) to 5 (of very little or no
questions; and 3) the last part is demographic questions which ask about age,
English First English Proficiency Index (EF EPI) (2016), Indonesia is ranked 32nd
out of 72 countries, placing the country in the moderate proficiency band. On this
their area of expertise and passive communication only. They will not be able to
34
make a proper presentation at work or read advanced texts with ease (English First
2016). Understanding this fact, translation into Bahasa Indonesia was considered as
compulsory. Therefore, for the purpose of this study, VSM 82 was translated.
After the first draft of translation was obtained, the researcher consulted the
research or pilot testing. Pilot testing was aimed to obtain comment and clarification
from the respondents about any mistakes found in the questionnaire such as typos
and unclear terms. On the other hand, researchers were able to estimate the total
Consequently, the revised draft of the questionnaire was used in the pilot
test. The pilot test was conducted in the Master of Management Department,
was a total of 40 respondents in the test which were divided into two groups. Only
students who were employed in a company were eligible to participate in the pilot
test. This was due to the research sample used in this study which was employees
of various industries. Their responses were included in the research data according
express researchers’ seriousness and commitment towards the respondents, the final
the study.
After the pilot test was done and the new design had been applied, the next
stage was data collection. The data collection was mainly done by the Management
students from batch 2012 who were taking Manajemen Indonesia or Indonesian
would brief the students and explain the intention and the background of this study.
He then explained about the criteria of respondents as mentioned in the section 3.2.1
regarding the population of this study. In order to achieve the goal of the study,
which was understanding the cultural variations among five ethnic groups, he
After the briefing, each class was divided into 5 groups. Each group was
tasked to collect data from one specific ethnic group after the middle test, each
group would present their findings using available literature about Hofstede
national cultural framework and the cultures of Indonesian’s ethnic groups. For
instance, in each class, there were five ethnic groups studied: Javanese, Sundanese,
versus Collectivism, and Masculinity versus Femininity. The score normally ranges
between 0-100 creating two continuum on each dimension (e.g. small power
Data analysis rely on the scores on each dimension. The discussion was
based on Hofstede et al. (2010) book, the Cultures and Organizations: Software of
the Mind and literature available that discuss Indonesia’s subcultures, in this case,
This dimension uses questions 19, 20, and 22 of Part 1 of the VSM. Data
computation was done on each ethnic group using Power Distance Index, as
follows:
PDI = 135 – a + b – 25 c
base consists of the number of valid responses only, that is those who
excluded).
as follows:
The percentage base was also valid answers only (blanks and doubles
were excluded).
2. Data computation was done on each ethnic group using Uncertainty Avoidance
Index, as follows:
UAI = 300 – 40 d – 30 e – f
f) The percentage of “two years at the most” plus “from two to five years”
The computation of the Individualism Index (IDV) used the mean scores on
questions 1, 4, 8 and 13 of Part 1 (treated the same as Power Distance Index, point
IDV = 76 m4 – 43 m1 + 30 m8 – 27 m13 – 29
developed in the same way as for IDV (Hofstede 1982). It uses the mean scores on
questions 6, 8, 11 and 14 of Part 1. Question 8 is used both in the IDV and MAS.
The data obtained during data collection process was transformed into the
electronic form. In this process, there were 3 responses that had been omitted due
to quality issue such as exceeding 25% blank responses criteria. Therefore, out of
702 responses, there are 699 responses that was ready to be computed.
As mentioned in the previous section, the data computation was done using
the formulae VSM 82. The present study was able to produce all four dimensions
After the scores had been obtained, data analysis was able to be done. Data
analysis relied on Hofstede’s definition regarding all four dimensions studied and
its consequences toward the behavior of the people of the culture. Literature
regarding Indonesia and its ethnic groups are now available to help address the
The data analysis was also done by looking closely on how each ethnic
group responded to each question and see how it eventually affected the overall
scores given to them. A detailed discussion regarding the results and their analysis
Exhibit 3.1
Steps Taken During the Study
STEP 1
DESIGNING AND PREPARING THE INSTRUMENT
1. Determining which VSM version that would be used;
2. Translating the chosen instrument;
3. Reviewing the first draft of translation;
4. Conducting a pilot test to obtain feedback;
5. Perfecting the instrument as well as applying new design to it;
6. The questionnaire is ready.
STEP 2
DATA COLLECTION
1. Communicating the research purposes and objectives to the students of
Manajemen Indonesia;
2. Dividing the classes into several groups, and assigning each of them to
focus on a particular ethnic group;
3. Questionnaire distribution to targeted respondents;
4. Distribution done, each group would then make a brief report and
present their findings in the class;
5. Physical questionnaires submission to Dr. Suharnomo.
STEP 3
DATA CLEANING
1. The questionnaires were given to the researcher in order to data
recalculation;
2. 702 questionnaires were obtained and transformed into an electronic
document, in this case the researcher used MS Excel;
4 4 out of questionnaires were omitted in for being short of quality;
3. The data is ready to calculate.
STEP 4
DATA CALCULATION AND INTERPRETATION
1. Calculation was done as prescribed by the formulae of VSM 82;
2. Each ethnic group was given four scores on Power Distance,
Uncertainty Avoidance, Individualism, and Masculinity;
3. Interpretation was based on Hofstede’s own explanation regarding the
consequences of the scores and the literature available regarding
Indonesia and its ethnic groups’ cultures.
4. Writing research report: thesis and article for publication
Source: Developed for the study 2017.
CHAPTER IV
4.1 Introduction
The previous chapter presented the methodology used in this study in order
to investigate the cultural values and make comparison among Indonesia’s five
major ethnic groups. This chapter will show the results obtained after employing
Module 1982 formulae. With the formulae, this study was able to produce scores
The aim of this study was to investigate the cultural values of Javanese,
Sundanese, Batak, Minangkabau, and Chinese Indonesian ethnic groups, the results
groups who live in the area. With the involvement of students of Management FEB
Undip, some questionnaires were also able to be distributed directly to the addresses
of the respondents and/or via email to ease all the process of data collection. For
41
42
responses through email, the students would then fill the responses to the paper
version of the questionnaire before submitting all the physical questionnaires to Dr.
Suharnomo.
The initial responses of this study were 702 responses. It is worth to note
that there were 3 responses that have been omitted due to exceeding the acceptable
amount of blank responses of 25% (Sekaran & Bougie 2013). For instance, the total
sample of this study was 699 respondents from Javanese, Sundanese, Batak,
The purpose of this study was to investigate the cultural values of Javanese,
whether there were any distinctive cultural values that exist among them. This study
argued that in order to understand the culture of Indonesia, one must first understand
the cultural values that exist on an ethnic group level. Understanding similarities
and differences among ethnic groups will benefit one’s ability to interact to and to
respondents:
43
Table 4.1
Profile of Respondents
Variable N Percentage
Ethnicity
Javanese 200 28.6
Sundanese 149 21.3
Batak 100 14.3
Minangkabau 100 14.3
Chinese-Indonesian 150 21.5
Gender
Male 436 62.4
Female 263 37.6
Age
20 – 24 years old 316 45.2
25 – 29 years old 112 16.0
30 – 34 years old 76 10.9
35 – 39 years old 50 7.2
40 – 49 years old 90 12.9
Over 50 years old 55 7.9
Education
Doctorate Degree 6 0.9
Master’s Degree 110 15.7
Bachelor Degree 452 64.7
Senior High School 163 23.3
Junior High School 8 1.1
Job Position
Manager of at least
164 23.5
one subordinate
Employee 535 76.5
Source: Research Data 2017.
4.2.1 Gender
be influenced by the respondents’ sex and gender (Hofstede, Hofstede, et al. 2010).
For this reason, it is essential to have a fair and balanced composition based on
gender in employing Hofstede’s Value Survey Module. The present study was able
acceptable composition.
Sundanese and Minangkabau employees, the compositions are almost similar with
48.32% for Sundanese and 46% for Minangkabau. Exhibit 4.1 outlines the gender
Exhibit 4.1
Gender
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
JAVANESE SUNDANESE BATAK MINANGKABAU CHINESE
INDONESIAN
MALE FEMALE
4.2.2 Age
The age profile of reveals that the respondents were mostly at very young
20 and 24 years old. For the rest of ethnic groups, there were at least 30% belonged
to this age category. The percentage is almost similar for Sundanese, Batak, and
Minangkabau for age category between 20 and 24 years old with 42.3%, 44%, and
45
44% respectively. Exhibit 4.2 outlines the respondents’ age category in full as
follows:
Exhibit 4.2
Age
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
20 - 24 25 - 29 30 - 34 35 - 39 40 - 49 > 50
JAVANESE SUNDANESE BATAK MINANGKABAU CHINESE INDONESIAN
4.2.3 Education
in the study was Junior High School with the number of as small as 8 respondents,
whilst the highest degree was Doctorate Degree, albeit only with 6 respondents.
Moreover, both groups were only contributed by a single ethnic group: the group
of Doctorate Degree was only available in Sudanese sample whilst group of Junior
The group of Bachelor Degree dominated this study with 452 respondents,
comprising 64.7% of the total sample. The second and third highest groups in terms
46
of education were Senior High School and Master’s Degree with 163 and 110
ethnicity:
Exhibit 4.3
Education Qualification
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
DOCTORATE MASTER BACHELOR SENIOR HIGH JUNIOR HIGH
SCHOOL SCHOOL
JAVANESE SUNDANESE BATAK MINANGKABAU CHINESE INDONESIAN
The question asking the respondent’s job position has 3 options, they are 1)
am not a manager but I work in an office; and 3) I am not a manager and I don’t
work in an office. Option number 1 and 2 were used to differentiate the respondents
controlling option to ensure that the respondents match the criteria of this study.
divided into two positions. The first position is manager. A person who has at least
without any extra role in terms of managing another person. The decision to draw
samples from only these two categories of respondents was due to the purpose of
this study which was to obtain the cultural values among employees from five major
workplace.
percent of the total 699 respondents were non-managing employees, whilst 23.5%
of them were managers. The composition differs slightly when observed on each
ethnicity. Ethnic Minangkabau has the least managers both in number and in
percentage with 17 samples out of 100 samples. On the contrary, ethnic Chinese
Indonesian has the highest managers both in number and in percentage with 45
samples out of 150 samples. Exhibit 4.4 outlines the characteristic of the present
Exhibit 4.4
Job Position
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
JAVANESE SUNDANESE BATAK MINANGKABAU CHINESE
INDONESIAN
MANAGER EMPLOYEE
Batak, Minangkabau, and Chinese Indonesian were calculated using Value Survey
Module 82 (VSM 82). It consists of 47 main items which were divided into two
parts or sections. There are also demographic questions in the last part of the
questionnaire.
It normally produces scores for each dimension with a range between 0-100
(Hofstede 1982). The formulae for VSM 82 questionnaire are presented in Table
4.2.
49
Table 4.2
Value Survey Module 82 Formulae
Dimension Formula
Power Distance (PDI) PDI = 135 – a + b – 25 c
Uncertainty Avoidance (UAI) UAI = 300 – 40 d – 30 e – f
Individualism vs. Collectivism (IDV) IDV = 76m4 – 43m1 + 30m8 – 27m13 – 29
Masculinity vs. Femininity (MAS) MAS = 60m8 – 66m11 + 30m6 – 39m14 + 76
Source: Adapted from Hofstede (1982).
On the UAI formula, “d” and “e” represent the mean score on question 21
of part 1 and question 19 of part 2 respectively. Whilst “f” on the formula represent
the percentage of option 1 “two years at the most” plus option 2 “from two to five
On the IDV and MAS formulae, “mn” represents the mean score on question
n of part 1. Therefore, “m8” is the mean score on question 8 of part 1, “m11” is the
mean score on question 11 of part 1, and so on. As for the numbers 76, 43, 60, 66
etc. before the “mn”, they represent the weighting factors of the equations. The
results and further explanation regarding the formulae will be presented on each of
(Hofstede, Hofstede, et al. 2010). It has two poles of a continuum: small power
Table 4.3
Power Distance Scores of Five Ethnic Groups Studied
Formula
Ethnic Group a b c Score Cat.
PDI = 135 – a + b – 25 c
Javanese 32.00 41.00 3.32 135 – 32.00 + 41.00 – (25*3.32) 61.00 Large
Sundanese 35.57 30.87 3.08 135 – 35.57 + 30.87 – (25*3.08) 53.29 Mod.
Batak 31.00 40.00 2.83 135 – 31.00 + 40.00 – (25*2.83) 73.25 Large
Minangkabau 41.00 44.00 2.88 135 – 41.00 + 44.00 – (25*2.88) 66.00 Large
Chinese
22.00 32.00 3.23 135 – 22.00 + 32.00 – (25*3.23) 64.33 Large
Indonesian
Source: Research Data 2017.
PDI = Power Distance Index
a = percentage of option 3 in question 19 of Part 1
b = percentage of option 1 plus option 2 in question 20 of Part 1
c = the mean value of question 22 of Part 1
Cat. = Category; Large = Large Power Distance
From the calculations above, it can be seen that all ethnic groups scored
more than 50 on this dimension and can be considered as having large power
distance (Hofstede 1982; Hofstede, Hofstede, et al. 2010). Nevertheless, there are
still obvious differences that can be observed. According to the results, ethnic
Sundanese has the lowest score compared to the rest of other ethnicities with the
score 53.29, whilst ethnic Batak has the highest score with 73.25. Smit (2015)
people of other culture to feel the difference. For instance, to Sundanese employees,
hand, ethnic Javanese, Minangkabau, and Chinese Indonesian have the scores of
Overall, the results of this dimension are not too surprising. Hofstede et al.,
(2010) regards Indonesia as a country with large power distance with managers
51
detailed analysis was applied resulting in the writing of point 4.3.1.1 regarding
question 22 of Part 1.
Before going into more specific explanation regarding each question used
in the calculation for this dimension, here are 4 types of managers that are explained
would communicate the decision to the subordinates with concise explanation and
are therefore made by him or herself and it is subordinates’ job to finish them (this
he or she would try to explain his or her decision to the subordinates, including the
always answers to the questions addressed to him regarding the decision. Decisions
are made by him or herself with clear explanation (this type of manager is classified
any decision. He or she always listens to what the subordinates have to say, and
then announce the decision that he or she takes. After the decision has been made,
52
explain about the problems faced by them and therefore there will be a discussion
among them. In the end, the manager will ask everyone to vote and then make a
participative style).
or her ideal type of boss as explained above. In the calculation, only responses that
chose “manager 3” or option number 3 were included into the equation. It can be
concluded that the “a” in the formula pertains to the respondents’ view regarding
In this section, analysis regarding the full responses of each ethnic group is
presented. Exhibit 4.5 shows the comparison among ethnic groups studied. Due to
the differences in the number of respondents for each ethnic groups, the responses
this study. Two-hundred of which were of Javanese ethnicity, 149 for Sundanese,
Batak and Minangkabau 100 each, and 150 for Chinese Indonesian.
53
Exhibit 4.5
Full Responses on Question 19-1
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
MANAGER 1 MANAGER 2 MANAGER 3 MANAGER 4
JAVANESE 1% 12% 32% 56%
SUNDANESE 2% 17% 36% 46%
BATAK 18% 22% 31% 29%
MINANGKABAU 14% 19% 41% 26%
CHINESE INDONESIAN 43% 14% 22% 21%
From Exhibit 4.5, it can be seen that the majority of Chinese Indonesian
quickly and by him or herself. After that, it is the job of the subordinates to do the
rest of the work as desired by the manager. On the contrary, Javanese and
type of manager who is accessible and a great listener or manager type 4. Javanese
and Sundanese opted for the manager 4 for 56% and 46% respectively. In the case
of Batak and Minangkabau employees, they opted the highest on manager type 3
boss or manager. In the calculation, “b” is the percentage of answers that chose
“manager 1” and “manager 2”. As mentioned above, these type of managers have
tendencies to make decisions by him or herself and thus, are regarded as having an
authoritative style of leadership. Therefore, the “b” has positive value in the
In the Exhibit 4.6, it can be seen that Javanese, Batak, and Minangkabau
employees had virtually the same amount of all type of managers. Whilst Sundanese
employees had mostly manager type 3 as their managers with 45%. Despite having
employees were mostly (38%) bossed by managers with the participative style of
Exhibit 4.6
Full Responses on Question 20-1
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
MANAGER 1 MANAGER 2 MANAGER 3 MANAGER 4 NEITHER
JAVANESE 21% 21% 25% 29% 5%
SUNDANESE 11% 19% 45% 21% 3%
BATAK 14% 26% 30% 21% 9%
MINANGKABAU 22% 22% 28% 20% 8%
CHINESE INDONESIAN 18% 14% 24% 38% 6%
afraid in showing disagreement to their bosses. “c” in the equation is the mean value
From Exhibit 4.7, it can be observed that the majority of Sundanese (47%)
and Javanese (40%) employees opted for “Sometimes” in this question. In relation
to the question 19, in which the Javanese and Sundanese employees had virtually
the responses in question 22 shows that they also sometimes are afraid to confront
their own managers whenever their disagreement. Interestingly, there is still 30%
In the case of Batak and Minangkabau employees, they often feel afraid to
show disagreement to their bosses as indicated by the responses of 38% and 37%
respectively. Whilst for Chinese Indonesian employees, they have lower tendencies
in being afraid to show disagreement with their boss as indicated by the relatively
Exhibit 4.7
Question 22-1 Subordinates Afraid to Contradict Boss
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
ALWAYS OFTEN SOMETIMES SELDOM NEVER
JAVANESE 3% 16% 40% 30% 12%
SUNDANESE 7% 14% 47% 26% 5%
BATAK 6% 38% 32% 15% 9%
MINANGKABAU 4% 37% 34% 17% 8%
CHINESE INDONESIAN 2% 22% 35% 33% 8%
Using Value Survey Module 82 formula, the present study was able to
extract scores on this dimension for each ethnic group and will be presented in Table
4.4 below:
57
Table 4.4
Uncertainty Avoidance Scores of Five Ethnic Groups Studied
Formula
Ethnic Group d e f Score Category
UAI = 300 – 40 d – 30 e – f
300 – (40*2.70) – (30*3.04)
Javanese 2.70 3.04 57.00 – 57.00
43.80 Weak
300 – (40*3.38) – (30*2.91)
Sundanese 3.38 2.91 38.26 – 38.26
39.33 Weak
300 – (40*3.50) – (30*2.73)
Batak 3.50 2.73 58.59 – 58.59
19.51 Very Weak
300 – (40*3.08) – (30*2.70)
Minangkabau 3.08 2.70 34.34 – 34.34
61.46 Strong
Chinese 300 – (40*2.82) – (30*2.88)
2.82 2.88 33.57 67.23 Strong
Indonesian – 33.57
Source: Research Data 2017.
UAI = Uncertainty Avoidance Index
d = mean value of question 21 of Part 1
e = mean value of question 19 of Part 2
f = percentage of option 1 and option 2 in question 23 of Part 1
Low = Low Uncertainty Avoidance; Very Low = Very Low Uncertainty Avoidance; High = High
Uncertainty Avoidance
According to the results above, it can be seen that there are significant
differences among five ethnic groups studied in the way they are dealing with
uncertainties. From the calculations above, the ethnic groups can be divided into
above 50, 2) weak uncertainty avoidance indicated by a score ranges from 30 to 49,
avoiding cultures, the need for more structured and written rules are higher. On the
second category, there are Javanese and Sundanese with score 43.80 and 39.33
respectively. And the last category with a very low preference for avoiding
uncertainty is Batak with score 19.51. Dividing these ethnic groups into different
detailed analysis was applied resulting in the writing of point 4.3.2.1 regarding
question 23 of Part 1.
work?” With the options range from 1 (always) to 5 (never), scoring high in this
question will indicate lower preference for avoiding uncertainty and vice versa.
The fact that Batak scored very low on the UAI dimension (19.51), this isn’t too
surprising. What isn’t too surprising either is the fact that the ethnic groups which
scored high on this dimension, Minangkabau and Chinese Indonesian, had also high
percentage of option 1 (always) and 2 (often) with 34% each. This is not the case
for Javanese, however, despite scoring low on this dimension (43.80), they still
have high anxiety regarding their job as indicated with the high percentage of option
1 and 2 (37%).
overall score of UAI dimension and the percentage answers on this question. As a
culture with low preference for avoiding uncertainty (39.33), Sundanese had high
percentage of option 4 and 5 with a combined value of 44% and small percentage
Exhibit 4.8
Question 21-1 Intensity of Being Nervous about Job
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
ALWAYS OFTEN SOMETIMES SELDOM NEVER
JAVANESE 16% 21% 45% 15% 4%
SUNDANESE 3% 6% 47% 37% 7%
BATAK 4% 13% 32% 31% 20%
MINANGKABAU 9% 24% 31% 22% 14%
CHINESE INDONESIAN 13% 20% 44% 19% 4%
company rules shouldn’t be broken even if it was done in the aim of benefitting the
(not important). “e”, in the UAI formula, is the mean value of question 19 of part 2
which means scoring high on this question will indicate higher preference for
avoiding uncertainty. Cultures with high uncertainty avoidance will see the rules as
preference for avoiding uncertainty, Batak and Sundanese still reflected the
importance of obeying the rules. Respectively, 84% and 81% of the respondents
Exhibit 4.9
Question 19-2 Company Rules Should Not Be Broken
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
UTMOST VERY FAIRLY NOT
IMPORTANT
IMPORTANCE IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT
JAVANESE 6% 22% 42% 22% 8%
SUNDANESE 5% 19% 56% 17% 2%
BATAK 8% 30% 43% 19% 0%
MINANGKABAU 9% 30% 43% 18% 0%
CHINESE INDONESIAN 10% 14% 60% 10% 6%
their future in the organization. There are 4 options to choose, 1 being “maximum
2 years”, 2 being “between 2 to 5 years”, 3 being “more than 5 years”, and 4 being
“until retired”. “f” is the percentage of option 1 plus option 2 in the question 23 of
part 1. As indicated by the options that were measured, scoring high percentage of
option 1 plus option 2 will indicate lower preference for avoiding uncertainty.
cultures, had very high percentage in option 1 and 2 with combined percentages of
58% and 58% respectively. Whilst for Minangkabau and Chinese Indonesian, they
uncertainty culture, also had a relatively small percentage of option 1 and 2 with a
and 4 with 52%. Exhibit 4.10 provides all the answers on question 23 of part 1:
Exhibit 4.10
Question 23-1 Intention to Stay at Current Job
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
BETWEEN 2 - 5 MORE THAN 5
MAX 2 YEARS UNTIL RETIRED
YEARS YEARS
JAVANESE 21% 37% 20% 23%
SUNDANESE 19% 19% 19% 43%
BATAK 16% 42% 19% 22%
MINANGKABAU 3% 31% 33% 32%
CHINESE INDONESIAN 8% 25% 34% 32%
stands for a society in which “the ties between individuals are loose: a person is
expected to look after himself or herself and his or her immediate family only”.
Whilst, collectivism stands for a society in which people from birth onwards are
62
Using the formula provided for VSM 82, the present study was able to
Table 4.5
Individualism Scores of Five Ethnic Groups Studied
Ethnic Formula
m4 m1 m8 m13 IDV = 76 m4 – 43 m1 + 30 Score Cat.
Group
m8 – 27 m13 – 29
(76*1.97) – (43*2.21) +
Javanese 1.97 2.21 1.94 2.09 (30*1.94) – (27*2.09) – 29
27.60 Col.
(76*2.08) – (43*2.35) +
Sundanese 2.08 2.35 2.45 2.70 (30*2.45) – (27*2.70) – 29
28.76 Col.
(76*1.99) – (43*2.11) +
Batak 1.99 2.11 2.30 2.70 (30*2.30) – (27*2.70) – 29
27.61 Col.
(76*1.99) – (43*1.96) +
Minangkabau 1.99 1.96 2.29 2.01 (30*2.29) – (27*2.01) – 29
52.39 Ind.
Chinese (76*2.20) – (43*2.35) +
2.20 2.35 1.96 2.31 37.93 Col.
Indonesian (30*1.96) – (27*2.31) – 29
Source: Research Data 2017.
IDV = Individualism versus Collectivism Index
Cat. = Category; Col. = Collectivistic Culture; Ind. = Individualistic Culture
mn = mean of question n of Part 1
observed from the table, almost all ethnic groups are categorized as collectivistic
cultures except for Minangkabau which scored at a moderate score with 52.39.
scores 27.60, 28.76, and 27.61 respectively. Whilst for Chinese Indonesian, the
ethnic scored slightly higher compared to the three ethnic groups mentioned earlier
with 37.93. For instance, these ethnic groups are still categorized as cultures with
collectivistic culture.
63
detailed analysis was applied resulting in the writing of point 4.3.3.1 regarding
working environment. “m4” is the mean value of question 4 of part 1. It has five
As shown in Exhibit 4.11, the graph shows similar patterns for ethnic groups
which scored low on the IDV dimension (Javanese, Sundanese, Batak, and Chinese
Indonesian). Most of the respondents opted for option 2 which regarded of having
good working environment as very important. Whilst second most opted option was
option 1, which is of the utmost importance. This fact is in line with the majority of
the IDV scores for each ethnic group which indicate as collectivistic cultures.
(very important).
64
Exhibit 4.11
Question 4-1 Have Good Working Environment
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
UTMOST VERY FAIRLY NOT
IMPORTANT
IMPORTANCE IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT
JAVANESE 27% 54% 14% 5% 0%
SUNDANESE 26% 50% 15% 7% 1%
BATAK 29% 47% 20% 4% 0%
MINANGKABAU 33% 39% 24% 4% 0%
CHINESE INDONESIAN 22% 50% 18% 6% 4%
sufficient time for themselves as well as for their family. “m1” is the mean value of
question 1 of part 1. It has five options to choose from 1 (of utmost importance) to
importance of having quality time for themselves and for their family. This
preference is identified as one of the collectivistic value. In the case of this study,
importance. Moreover, 31% of them regarded personal and family time as very
important. This is interesting because in the IDV score overall, Minangkabau scored
at a moderate point (52.39) which is higher than any other studied ethnic groups.
65
Sundanese had a low score on the IDV dimension with 28.76. However, as can be
personal and family time as the utmost importance. Nevertheless, 44% of them
In the case of other ethnic groups, the results showed a rather unsurprising
fact. By combining responses of option 1 and 2, it can be seen that Javanese, Batak,
and Chinese Indonesian had high percentages with 58%, 63%, and 51%
Exhibit 4.12
Question 1-1 Sufficient Time for Personal or Home Life
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
UTMOST VERY FAIRLY NOT
IMPORTANT
IMPORTANCE IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT
JAVANESE 26% 32% 39% 4% 0%
SUNDANESE 17% 36% 44% 4% 0%
BATAK 31% 32% 32% 5% 0%
MINANGKABAU 38% 31% 28% 3% 0%
CHINESE INDONESIAN 28% 23% 46% 3% 0%
the respondents about their opinion in having pleasant people to work with at the
workplace. “m8” is the mean value of the question 8 of part 1 and it had five options
to choose from 1 being (of utmost importance) and 5 being (not important).
The presentation of Exhibit 4.13 did not reveal any surprising fact. As can
regarded to have pleasant people to work with as very important. As for Batak, there
is also high percentage of respondents who regard this matter as very important,
albeit not as high, with 49%. On the contrary, the majority of Sundanese (44%)
people to work with as their top priority. Overall, there is almost no part of the
respondents in each ethnic group regarded having pleasant people to work with as
not important, meaning that having a close relationship with everyone in the
Exhibit 4.13
Question 8-1 Have Pleasant People to Work with (IDV)
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
UTMOST VERY FAIRLY NOT
IMPORTANT
IMPORTANCE IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT
JAVANESE 32% 42% 26% 0% 0%
SUNDANESE 15% 33% 44% 7% 1%
BATAK 15% 49% 29% 5% 2%
MINANGKABAU 5% 66% 25% 3% 1%
CHINESE INDONESIAN 38% 36% 20% 4% 2%
a desirable area. “m13” is the mean value of question 13 of part 1. It had five options
to choose from 1 being (of utmost importance) and 5 being (not important).
important with 44% and 40% respectively. In spite of having a relatively large
who regarded this matter as utmost importance with 35%. Moreover, 36% of them
regarded living in a desirable area as very important. This is also the case for
68
having fairly distributed answers on the option 1, 2, and 3. Meanwhile, Batak had
a fair amount of respondents who regarded this matter as not important (13%). It
might indicate their preference for chasing their luck in another place or even island.
below:
Exhibit 4.14
Question 13-1 Live in a Desirable Area
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
UTMOST VERY FAIRLY NOT
IMPORTANT
IMPORTANCE IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT
JAVANESE 28% 44% 21% 7% 1%
SUNDANESE 11% 40% 22% 22% 5%
BATAK 17% 30% 32% 8% 13%
MINANGKABAU 35% 36% 24% 3% 2%
CHINESE INDONESIAN 22% 35% 34% 7% 2%
dimension. Masculinity stands for a society in which social gender roles are clearly
distinct: men are supposed to be assertive, tough, and focused on material success;
women are supposed to be more modest, tender, and concerned with the quality of
life. Femininity stands for a society in which social gender roles overlap: both men
69
and women are supposed to be modest, tender, and concerned with the quality of
With the formula provided, the present study was able to obtain scores for
Table 4.6
Masculinity Scores of Five Ethnic Groups Studied
Ethnic Formula
m8 m11 m6 m14 MAS = 60 m8 – 66 m11 + Score Cat.
Group
30 m6 – 39 m14 + 76
(60*1.94) – (66*2.16) +
Javanese 1.94 2.16 2.53 2.14 (30*2.53) – (39*2.14) – 76
42.28 Low Mas
(60*2.45) – (66*2.17) +
Sundanese 2.45 2.17 2.03 2.26 (30*2.03) – (39*2.26) – 76
52.26 Low Mas
(60*2.30) – (66*2.03) +
Batak 2.30 2.03 2.41 2.04 (30*2.41) – (39*2.04) – 76
72.76 Mas
(60*2.29) – (66*2.02) +
Minangkabau 2.29 2.02 1.66 2.34 (30*1.66) – (39*2.34) – 76
38.62 Fem
Chinese (60*1.96) – (66*1.88) +
1.96 1.88 2.50 2.03 65.46 Mas
Indonesian (30*2.50) – (39*2.03) – 76
Source: Research Data 2017.
MAS = Masculinity versus Femininity Index
Cat. = Category; Mas = Masculine; Low Mas = Low Masculine; Fem = Feminine
mn = mean of question n of Part 1
As can be observed in Table 4.6, the results varied among ethnic groups.
category indicated by score of more than 55; 2) low masculine category indicated
by score between 41 and 54; and 3) feminine category indicated by score of less
than 40. These classifications were based on Hofstede et al., (2010) explanations
about Indonesia’s MAS score. In Hofstede’s finding, Indonesia was given MAS
score of 46. Considering that Indonesia scored relatively higher than North
European countries which are very low in this dimension yet not as high as other
Asian countries like Japan, China, and India, Indonesia is regarded as low
As shown in the table above, the ethnic groups categorized as masculine are
Chinese Indonesian and Batak with score 65.46 and 72.76 respectively. These
results are very much as expected. Chinese Indonesians are identified by their
success in the business sector. The evidence provide further support on Perdhana's
(2014, 2015) findings which show that Chinese Indonesians have higher sense of
assertiveness, competition, and are more open toward ambitions and ambitious
detailed analysis was applied resulting in the writing of point 4.3.4.1 regarding
having pleasant people to work with at the workplace. “m8” is the mean value of
the question 8 of part 1 and it had five options to choose from 1 being (of utmost
importance) and 5 being (not important). Having high score on this question for this
Exhibit 4.15
Question 8-1 Have Pleasant People to Work with (MAS)
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
UTMOST VERY FAIRLY NOT
IMPORTANT
IMPORTANCE IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT
JAVANESE 32% 42% 26% 0% 0%
SUNDANESE 15% 33% 44% 7% 1%
BATAK 15% 49% 29% 5% 2%
MINANGKABAU 5% 66% 25% 3% 1%
CHINESE INDONESIAN 38% 36% 20% 4% 2%
importance of having better financial state from the job they do. “m11” in the
equation was derived from the mean value of question 11 of part 1. It had five
options to choose, from 1 being “of utmost importance” and 5 being “not
important”.
significant importance of having chances for better financial state from the work
they do. This is in line with the MAS score of Chinese Indonesian ethnic which was
achieve material success, assertive, and tough (Hofstede, Hofstede, et al. 2010).
Surprisingly, the majority of Javanese ethnic (44%) regarded this matter as very
72
important despite being identified as feminine society. This number is even higher
Batak and Minangkabau, they showed a slightly similar pattern in the graph.
However, there are more people favoring to have better financial state (as indicated
15%.
Exhibit 4.16
Question 11-1 Have Chances for Better Financial State
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
UTMOST VERY FAIRLY NOT
IMPORTANT
IMPORTANCE IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT
JAVANESE 24% 44% 24% 8% 0%
SUNDANESE 27% 36% 30% 6% 1%
BATAK 33% 42% 15% 9% 1%
MINANGKABAU 30% 41% 26% 3% 0%
CHINESE INDONESIAN 46% 30% 18% 2% 4%
security. “m6” in the MAS equation was derived from the mean value of question
6 of part 1. This question also had 5 option, from 1 being “of utmost importance”
importance) and 2 (very important) with the percentages of 48% and 39%
masculine society in this study, only regarded having a job security as of moderate
importance. This is also the case for Chinese Indonesian ethnic. Also identified as
indicated that this matter was of moderate importance to them. Lastly, Sundanese
toward having job security with the percentages of option 1 and 2 were 33% and
38% respectively. For full investigation of the question 6 of part 1, refer to Exhibit
4.17 below:
Exhibit 4.17
Question 6-1 Have Security of Employment
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
UTMOST VERY FAIRLY NOT
IMPORTANT
IMPORTANCE IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT
JAVANESE 22% 25% 38% 12% 5%
SUNDANESE 33% 38% 21% 7% 0%
BATAK 20% 31% 38% 10% 1%
MINANGKABAU 47% 37% 8% 8% 0%
CHINESE INDONESIAN 24% 24% 34% 14% 4%
question asked respondents about their views regarding chances for promotion.
“m14” in the equation was derived from the mean value of question 14 of part 1. It
had five options to choose, from 1 being “of utmost importance” to 5 being “not
important”.
The findings of this question showed two interesting facts to mention. First,
showed very high importance of having chances for promotion. There was no less
than 44% of the Javanese respondents regarded this matter as very important. And
second, the Batak finding. Batak was identified as having masculine value in this
study. However, there were still a fair amount of Batak respondents who regarded
Other than those interesting facts, the overall results of this question did not
show any particular surprising fact. Sundanese, as a low masculine culture, showed
a fairly balanced results. Most of them (40%) regarded having chances for
promotion as very important whilst at the same time, there was a fair amount of
them (22%) who regarded this matter as a fairly important. The evidence shows that
material success isn’t always the source of motivation for Sundanese people. There
are other important reasons for them other than this particular matter.
in the graph due to sharing the same value of masculinity. On both cases, the
combining those two options, it was found that Batak had 62% of the respondents
who regarded having chances for promotion as an important matter. Whilst for
Chinese Indonesian, there was no less than 69% of the respondents regarded this
matter as important. Not to mention there were 22% of them who regarded having
chances for promotion as their top priority. For further investigation, refer to
Exhibit 4.18
Question 14-1 Have Chances for Promotion
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
UTMOST VERY FAIRLY NOT
IMPORTANT
IMPORTANCE IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT
JAVANESE 28% 44% 21% 7% 1%
SUNDANESE 11% 40% 22% 22% 5%
BATAK 17% 30% 32% 8% 13%
MINANGKABAU 35% 36% 24% 3% 2%
CHINESE INDONESIAN 22% 35% 34% 7% 2%
The previous sections have presented the findings of the present study with
an emphasis on its key ones and how each responses contribute to the overall scores
given on each ethnic group. In this section, the results are presented once again one
by one for all dimensions and comparisons among ethnic groups are applied.
Consequently, the results will again be presented in full to see how the
76
scores of ethnic groups will compare to the overall score of this study’s respondents
not comparable to those of the present study. Presenting the results with Hofstede’s
was aimed to give more insights regarding the findings of this study rather than
reasons. First, Indonesia’s VSM dimensions scores were only available in 1982
after Hofstede published a booklet entitled “Cultural Pitfalls for Dutch Expatriates
Jakarta (Perdhana 2014). Had he not set a minimum respondents needed for VSM
wouldn’t have been available in the first place (Perdhana 2014). Second, there is a
chance that Hofstede used an earlier version, the VSM 80, which was not available
sales or service people, matching the rest of the samples in his study (Hofstede,
Hofstede, et al. 2010; p. 64). On the contrary, the present study employed
Javanese and Chinese Indonesian managers. On the contrary, the present study drew
differences in job position, his findings are rather similar to the findings of the
present study. Therefore, it was argued that it is worth to discuss in special sections
77
after the discussion of each dimension’s findings has been presented. In this case,
section 4.4.5.1.
4.4.1 Javanese
interesting that they have strong uncertainty avoidance (PDI score of 61), low
preference for avoiding uncertainty (UAI score of 44), collectivistic value (IDV
expect their managers to tell what to do. Since the subordinates expect to be told
what to do, more supervisory personnel is needed among Javanese employees due
In terms of UAI, Javanese has a score of 44 which means they have a rather
avoidance will generally feel satisfied about their lives. Therefore they tend to be
employees also have high tolerance about uncertainty at the workplace (Hofstede,
78
In such a culture, relationship prevails over task. It might make life of Javanese
managers difficult because when they have to be firm toward their subordinates, the
managers will feel hesitant to do so because there is already warm relationship built
In the MAS dimension, Javanese has score of 42 which indicate that they
have low masculinity. There is a tendency for the people to chase material success.
However, the main motivation was not really material gain, but the higher status
achieved through high job position and high education. In the Javanese society, now
there are more freedom between genders regarding career. Both men and women
are allowed to choose their job that is suitable for themselves (Hofstede, Hofstede,
et al. 2010).
present study show a rather similar results. The comparison table is presented
below:
Table 4.7
Javanese Comparison with Perdhana (2014)
Javanese Javanesea
Dimension
Score Category Score Category
PDI 61 Large PD 54 Large PD
UAI 44 Weak UA 30 Weak UA
MAS 42 Low Mas 47 Low Mas
IDV 28 Collectivist 49 Collectivist
Source: Research Data 2017.
PDI = Power Distance Index; UAI = Uncertainty Avoidance Index; MAS =
Masculinity Index; IDV = Individualism Index
a
Based on Perdhana (2014); two newer dimensions Long Term Orientation
(LTO) and Indulgence versus Restraint (IVR) are excluded
79
Despite the differences in VSM choice, in which the present study chose to
employ VSM 82 (compared to VSM 13 in Perdhana’s study), and the criteria of the
sample, the scores between the two are showing that they both are in the exact same
categories. However, it must also be noted there are still significant scores
differences between the two findings. It is argued that these differences are due to
the sampling criteria. Perdhana’s study decided to gather responses from a very
that employs no less than 300 employees. On the contrary, the present study decided
As the result, there are also differences in terms of age and educational
years old, whilst in this study, the majority of this study’s samples were between 20
the majority of the samples were very young, the samples were dominated by
Heuer et al. (1999) indicate that higher educational degree will make a shift
in values among the persons, especially in the power distance and individualism
dimension. People with higher education will have less need for preserving power
and collectivistic behavior. As can be observed in the table 4.7, Perdhana’s Javanese
samples score lower power distance and show tendency toward individualistic
value. For instance, Heuer et al.’s (1999) findings are perhaps further supported by
4.4.2 Sundanese
The evidence for Sundanese ethnic group shows that they have moderate-
to-high power distance (PDI score of 53), low preference for avoiding uncertainty
(UAI score of 39), collectivist value (IDV score of 29), and low masculinity (MAS
score of 52).
high power distance. Every person needs to know their own position in the
organization and act accordingly. Managers are respected for their position and they
count on the obedience of the subordinates. With such a score, however, employees
see their managers as more accessible (compared to the absolute high PDI of Batak).
In the UAI score, Sundanese has a score of 39 which indicates that they have
low preference for uncertainty avoidance. Sundanese people are identified by their
to the uncertainty avoidance. People of faith believe that everything has been
decided by God and thus there is no point of doing an extra mile (Perdhana 2014).
culture. At the workplace, relationships between subordinates and superiors are like
family. Superiors take the role of father which gives the subordinates an example.
For instance, relationship prevails over task (Hofstede, Hofstede, et al. 2010).
they have low masculinity value. In this case, there is a tendency among Sundanese
people to chase their career in order to have higher job position and thus higher
social status. The drive to be successful isn’t always the money in a low masculine
81
4.4.3 Batak
The evidence for Batak ethnic group shows that they have large power
distance (PDI score of 73), low preference for avoiding uncertainty (UAI score of
20), collectivistic value (IDV score of 28), and tendency toward masculinity (MAS
score of 73).
With PDI score of 73, Batak is regarded as a large power distance culture.
In fact, Batak scores the highest in this dimension. At the workplace, managers rely
toward their superiors (Hofstede, Hofstede, et al. 2010). In general life, people are
respected due to their social status, wealth, job occupation and position, and
very low uncertainty avoidance. The tendency of Batak people in search of better
life underlines their low preference for avoiding uncertainty. They will take it as a
challenge rather than as a burden. Batak people are thus identified as adaptable and
collectivist culture. At the workplace, employees are member of in-groups who will
With the MAS score of 73, Batak people live in order to work. In terms of
gender careers, men are obliged to be financially independent. Due to high in PD,
82
status and symbols are very important for Batak people. Therefore in relation to the
MAS dimension, money gain is preferred over more leisure time (Hofstede,
In Hofstede’s 2010 book, the 3rd edition of Cultures and Organizations, there
are two ethnic groups from Indonesia that are mentioned in the book, they are
Javanese and Batak. Interestingly, we found a piece in the book that indicates that
there are indeed cultural differences among ethnic groups in Indonesia. Despite
admitting that there are cultural variations in Indonesia, there is no attempt at fixing
the issue of generalization. Here is the piece quoted from Hofstede, Hofstede, et al.
The findings of this study are interestingly able to give, to some extent,
answers on why a Batak on Hofstede’s book feels the way he or she feels about his
or her Javanese boss. The evidence shows that Batak has a high score of masculinity
culture, praising a good performer within a team might disrupt the confidence of
other team members and thus the Javanese boss (of feminine culture) prefer not to
Table 4.8 below outlines the full dimensions scores for Javanese and Batak
ethnic groups:
Table 4.8
Batak and Javanese Scores Comparison
Batak Javanese Indonesiana
Dimension
Score Category Score Category Score Category
PDI 73 Large PD 61 Large PD 78 Large PD
UAI 20 Weak UA 44 Weak UA 48 Weak UA
MAS 73 Masculine 42 Low Mas 46 Low Mas
IDV 28 Collectivist 28 Collectivist 14 Collectivist
Source: Research Data 2017.
PDI = Power Distance Index; UAI = Uncertainty Avoidance Index; MAS = Masculinity Index;
IDV = Individualism Index
a
Based on Hofstede et al. (2010); excluding two newer dimensions Long Term Orientation
b
(LTO) and Indulgence versus Restraint (IVR)
4.4.4 Minangkabau
The evidence for Minangkabau ethnic group shows that they have large
power distance (PDI score of 66), high preference for avoiding uncertainty (UAI
score of 61), tendency toward less collectivistic value (IDV score of 52), and
Minangkabau has PDI score of 66 which indicates that they are a large
power distance culture. The people embrace status symbols as a source of pride. At
the workplace, superiors are respected due to their positions, not necessarily their
In terms of UAI dimension, Minangkabau has a score of 61. With this score,
a society in which there is a strong preference for avoiding uncertainty, there are
more self-employed people. For example is there are many of Minangkabau people
84
collectivist compared to the rest of other ethnic groups. It indicates that the people
are independent self. On the other hand, the fact that Minangkabau is matriarchate
culture might lead them to pay attention only to their nuclear family only. Whenever
a man is married, he brings the name of his wife. His responsibility lies on the wife’s
they are a feminine culture. In a feminine culture, relationships and quality of life
are important. In terms of career choices, both are optional for both of them
The evidence for Chinese Indonesian ethnic group shows that they have
large power distance (PDI score of 64), high preference for avoiding uncertainty
(UAI score of 67), tendency toward less collectivistic value (IDV score of 38), and
Chinese Indonesian has PDI score of 64. It indicates that they are large
power distance society. Within a family parents teach children obedience. Parents
expect nothing but full obedience from their parents. Within a business context,
from trade or business activity. In the Dutch colonial era, Chinese Indonesian
85
people are only allowed to work as traders and money lenders. At the same time,
they have faced long history of discrimination either from the Dutch government or
from the Indonesian government. After Indonesia gained independence, there are
uncertainties regarding the status of Chinese Indonesian people whether they are
recognized as Indonesian citizens. Long story short, only after the late President
Abdurrahman Wahid took the presidential office, full recognition towards Chinese
influence the high score of UAI (64) for Chinese Indonesian samples. In a high
uncertainty avoidance culture, their strong motivation in what they are doing is to
get security. There is an emotional need from both written and unwritten rules
among the people of this culture as well as an inner urge to work hard (Hofstede,
Batak, Chinese Indonesian scores a little higher. This might indicate that among
employees, collectivistic behavior are shown more significantly among other ethnic
groups.
has a MAS score of 65. It indicates that they are a masculine society. The fact that
wives are usually supporting what their husbands do (Vasanty 2004). For instance,
more money is preferred over leisure time and people live in order to work
Table 4.9 below presents the dimensions scores of the present study and
Table 4.9
Chinese Indonesian Comparison with Perdhana (2014)
Chinese Indonesian Chinese Indonesiana
Dimension
Score Category Score Category
PDI 64 Large PD 65 Large PD
UAI 67 Strong UA 30 Weak UA
MAS 65 Masculine 63 Masculine
IDV 38 Collectivist 36 Collectivist
Source: Research Data 2017.
PDI = Power Distance Index; UAI = Uncertainty Avoidance Index;
MAS = Masculinity Index; IDV = Individualism Index
a
Based on Perdhana (2014); two newer dimensions Long Term
Orientation (LTO) and Indulgence versus Restraint (IVR) are excluded
As can be observed from the table above, there are no significant differences
between the two findings except for uncertainty avoidance. The argument presented
here is probably due to the fact that Perdhana’s samples were drawn from
provide stability and certainty and thus, it is argued that the Chinese Indonesian
managers in the case of Perdhana’s study have less external source of anxieties.
On the contrary, the present study drew samples from mostly non-managing
employees and at the same time, the majority of the respondents are aged between
20 to 29 years old. It can be inferred that they are still in their beginning stage of
their career and thus they have strong preference for avoiding uncertainties. In terms
87
In this section, overall scores are presented again along with the average
score of the total samples in this study and with Hofstede’s Indonesian scores. The
purpose was to examine whether Hosftede’s findings regarding the cultural values
Table 4.10
Range of VSM Dimensions Scores of Five Ethnic Groups
Dimension
Ethnic Group
PDI UAI IDV MAS
Javanese 61 44 28 42
Sundanese 53 39 29 52
Batak 73 20 28 73
Minangkabau 66 61 52 39
Chinese-Indonesian 64 67 38 65
Indonesiana 63 47 34 53
Indonesian b 78 48 14 46
Source: Research Data 2017.
VSM = Value Survey Module; PDI = Power Distance Index;
UAI = Uncertainty Avoidance Index; MAS = Masculinity Index;
IDV = Individualism Index
a
Based on total calculation of the present study
b
Based on Hofstede et al. (2010); excluding two newer dimensions Long Term
b
Orientation (LTO) and Indulgence versus Restraint (IVR)
After doing full analyses on the findings, all 699 responses were
4.10). The results might indicate an aggregate value of what applies among
large power distance (PDI score 63), low preference for avoiding uncertainty (UAI
score 47), low masculine (MAS score 53), and collectivistic value (IDV score 34).
findings was accurate despite being challenged due to lack of research design and
planning (Javidan, Dorfman, De Luque, & House, 2006 as cited in Perdhana, 2014)
described as having large power distance (PDI score 78), low preference for
avoiding uncertainty (UAI score 48), low masculine (MAS score 46), and
However, despite categorized within the same categories, the results of this
Collectivism and Power Distance dimension. In this study, the average score of
was around 40 years ago when Hofstede studied Indonesia. Smit (2015) states that
10 point difference is big enough to make people of other culture feel the value
differences.
As for Power Distance dimension, the result of the present study shows that
the average score of Indonesia was significantly less than that of Hofstede with 63.
Overall, the results of the present study can be explained by the fact that education
has been more reachable nowadays. As mentioned in the Chapter 3, the majority of
respondents were graduates of bachelor degree. As Heuer et al. (1999) argue based
on their findings, education introduces new ways and ideas that might not be
thought before, thus creating a shift in values to accommodate the new ideals.
late compared to the other countries. It was due to the small size of respondents
who participated in the Indonesia’s samples (Perdhana 2014). Only after the VSM
82 had been publicly available, containing the scoring guide which set the minimum
entitled “Cultural Pitfalls for Dutch Expatriates in Indonesia” published in the same
year as the VSM 82. Some researchers have suggested the strong Javanese bias in
the discussion regarding the Indonesian dimensions scores in the booklet (e.g.
The present study had conducted scoring for five major ethnic groups in
Indonesian (averaged from the total samples), and Hofstede’s Indonesian version.
Table 4.11
Javanese and Hofstede Indonesian Scores Comparison
Javanese Indonesiana Indonesianb
Dimension
Score Category Score Category Score Category
PDI 61 Large PD 63 Large PD 78 Large PD
UAI 44 Weak UA 47 Weak UA 48 Weak UA
MAS 42 Low Mas 53 Low Mas 46 Low Mas
IDV 28 Collectivist 34 Collectivist 14 Collectivist
Source: Research Data 2017
PDI = Power Distance Index; UAI = Uncertainty Avoidance Index; MAS = Masculinity Index;
IDV = Individualism Index
a
Based on the average scores from the total sample of the present study
b
Based on Hofstede et al. (2010)
As shown in table 4.11, all three cultures belong to the same categories:
large power distance, weak uncertainty avoidance, low masculine, and collectivist.
Indonesian samples were merely Javanese or whether the culture of the ethnic
90
majority can indeed represent the culture and values of the entire country.
Indonesian samples were merely Javanese. The notion that Hofstede only used
respondents of Javanese descent in his study was started after critically reviewing
Javanese cultures in Hofstede’s publications was a sign that this notion is true. The
present study shows that Javanese ethnic is identified as having large power
The second view toward this evidence is that the culture of ethnic majority
can represent the culture and the values of the entire country. Many researchers
have taken this approach either in explaining the Indonesian culture in general or in
comparing Indonesian culture with those of other countries (e.g. (Liddle 1996;
Goodfellow 1997; Irawanto 2009; Irawanto et al. 2012) This view is supported by
the fact that after recalculating all responses, the scores showed that it also formed
similar patterns or categories like those of Hofstede’s findings (see table 4.11).
Either way, for the time being the evidence suggests that Hofstede’s
must always be taken by anyone who uses this score in attempting to understand
their readings with the latest findings on the cultural values of Indonesia’s ethnic
In the end, the present study also argues that as long as there are still many
91
ethnic groups left unstudied, this is still a subject for debate. The key here when it
comes to intercultural interactions, one mustn’t stop questioning the reliability and
generalizability of any cultural findings. One must take these findings as an initial
guidance to help what to expect from people coming from these five ethnic groups,
CONCLUSION
5.1 Conclusion
telecommunication, food and beverages, textile, and service industries and job
Batak, Minangkabau, and Chinese Indonesian. The objectives of this study are to
investigate the cultural variations among ethnic groups in Indonesia and to confirm
describe in-country cultural differences. Therefore, the present study was conducted
To answer the first questions, the present study had investigated the cultural
In the case of this study, Hofstede’s cultural dimensions is the chosen framework.
Whilst for instruments used in this study, VSM 82 was employed. The rationale
92
93
within a country. In Chapter 4, the findings of this study and discussion regarding
the subsequent behavior from each dimension have been presented. The followings
(low masculine);
Indonesian scores;
compared to Javanese;
scores from sample of the present study are seemingly forming the same
2. VSM 82. VSM 82 has been able to show that there are significant
since the module is one of the first version, it can only measure 4 main
position and 2) the person was raised, from 0-10 years of age, in an
environment in which his or her ethnic groups was originated. With such
criteria, the results of this study might not be able to represent the
serve as the ultimate way. There are still many aspects that can’t be
5.3 Recommendations
95
shows that a national cultural framework has been able to capture in-country
different research objectives. The design of the current study is suitable for
identifying whether there are any cultural differences among ethnic groups in
Indonesia. Since the evidence has shown that there are indeed cultural values
differences, future studies must be conducted upon the limitations of the present
management field.
Indonesian. The results of the present study show that each ethnic group has its own
cultural values as highlighted in section 6.1 on key findings of this study. However,
the overall results show strong similarities in power distance dimension and
The findings regarding power distance dimension show that all ethnic
groups uphold that power gap between more powerful person and less powerful
subordinates usually give certain gestures to show the boss their respect. Managers
96
need to assess whether this type of behavior is suitable and beneficial for their
subordinates and managers. On the contrary, power gap might be more suitable to
which the education gap or differences among the members are huge.
discussion. In the section, it was mentioned that a Batak employee (coming from a
masculine culture) would have liked his Javanese boss to be more vocal about
team members and thus the Javanese boss will never do it.
other people. At the workplace, managers need to have very clear idea about how
(Batak or Chinese Indonesian), might be more open about their ambitions compared
own culture. Without understanding their own culture, it would be difficult for
97
employees who share the same culture with themselves. In conclusion, a good
their own culture and then the cultural differences among the members and how
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ball, D.A. & McCulloch, W.H., 1999. International Business: The Challenge of
Global Competition, Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Batuah, A.D. & Madjoindo, A.D., 1959. Tambo Minangkabau dan Adatnya,
Jakarta: Balai Pustaka.
Fischer, O. & Al-Issa, A., 2012. In for a surprise piloting the Arab version of the
VSM 94. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 36(5), pp.737–742.
Geertz, C., 1981. Abangan Santri Priyayi dalam Masyarakat Jawa, Bandung:
Dunia Pustaka Jaya.
Hall, E.T., 1960. The Silent Language in Overseas Business. Harvard Business
Review.
Hall, E.T. & Hall, M.R., 1990. Understanding cultural differences, Available at:
http://p2048-
99
www.liberty.edu.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.proquest.c
om.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/docview/922421573?accountid=12085.
Heuer, M., Cummings, J.L. & Hutabarat, W., 1999. Cultural Stability or Change
Among Managers in Indonesia? Journal of International Business Studies,
30(3), pp.599–610.
Hills, M.D., 2002. Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck’s Values Orientation Theory. Online
Readings in Psychology and Culture, 4(4), pp.1–14.
Hofstede, G., Garibaldi de Hilal, A. V., et al., 2010. Comparing Regional Cultures
Within a Country: Lessons From Brazil. Journal of Cross-Cultural
Psychology, 41(3), pp.336–352.
Hofstede, G., 1982. Scoring Guide for Values Survey Module Version 1982,
Arnhem, The Netherlands.
Hofstede, G. & Bond, M.H., 1988. The Confucius Connection: From Cultural Roots
to Economic Growth. Organizational Dynamics, 16(4), pp.4–21.
Hofstede, G. & Hofstede, G.J., 2005. Cultures and Organizations: Software of the
Mind 2nd Ed., New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G.J. & Minkov, M., 2010. Cultures and Organizations:
Software of the Mind 3rd Ed., New York: McGraw-Hill.
100
Irawanto, D.W., Ramsey, P.L. & Tweed, D.C., 2012. Exploring paternalistic
leadership and its application to the Indonesian public sector. The
International Journal of Leadership in Public Services, 8(1), pp.4–20.
Jong, S.D., 1976. Salah Satu Sikap Hidup Orang Jawa, Yogyakarta: Yayasan
Kanisius.
Koning, J., 2000. Women and Households in Indonesia: Cultural Notions and
Social Practices, Routledge.
Kottak, C.P., 2013. Anthropology: Appreciating Human Diversity 15th Ed., New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Liddle, R.W., 1996. Leadership and Culture in Indonesian Politics, Sydney: Allen
& Unwin.
Matveev, A. V. & Milter, R.G., 2004. The value of intercultural competence for
performance of multicultural teams. Team Performance Management, 10(5/6),
pp.104–111.
McSweeney, B., 2002. Hofstede’s model of national cultural differences and their
consequences: A triumph of faith - a failure of analysis. Human Relations,
55(1), pp.89–118.
Rozie, F., 2012. Negeri Sejahtera Ala Konfusianisme Melalui Self Cultivation.
Jurnal Kalam. Available at:
http://download.portalgaruda.org/article.php?article=307873&val=5895&titl
e=NEGERI SEJAHTERA ALA KONFUSIANISME MELALUI SELF
CULTIVATION.
Sekaran, U., 2009. Research Methods for Business: Metodologi Penelitian untuk
Bisnis 4th Ed., Jakarta: Salemba Empat.
Sekaran, U. & Bougie, R., 2013. Research methods for business: a skill-building
approach 6th ed., West Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Smit, C., 2015. Humor and Culture in International Business. Available at:
https://youtu.be/MB6NXzGKMKg.
102
Venaik, S. & Brewer, P., 2010. Avoiding uncertainty in Hofstede and GLOBE.
Journal of International Business Studies, 41(8), pp.1294–1315. Available at:
http://link.springer.com/10.1057/jibs.2009.96.
Weustink, A., 2014. Measurement of Culture: Are Regional and National Level
Culture Any Different? India as a Case Study. Available at:
http://essay.utwente.nl/65879/1/201408251400 Thesis compleet
compleet.pdf.
Weutsink, A., 2014. Measurement of Culture: are Regional and National Level
Culture any Different? India as a Case Study. University of Twente.
QUESTIONNAIRE BOOKLET
104
105
106
107
108
109
APPENDIX 2
a b c
OPTION 3 1 2 1 2 3 4 5
N 222 121 139 29 161 269 180 60
PERCENTAGE 4.15 23.03 38.48 25.75 8.58
VALUE 31.76 37.20 3.12
FORMULA PDI = 135 – a + b – 25 c
CALCULATION PDI = 135 – (31.76) + 37.20 – 25 (3.12)
PDI 62.54
d e f
OPT. 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2
N 68 118 289 167 57 52 154 343 122 28 101 210
% 9.7 16.9 41.3 23.9 8.2 7.4 22 49.1 17.5 4
VAL. 3.04 2.89 45.07
FORM. UAI = 300 – 40 d – 30 e – f
CALC. UAI = 300 – 40 (3.04) – 30 (2.89) – (45.07)
UAI 46.82