PLAGIARISM DECLARATION FORM (T-DF)

Instructions
Please complete and attach this Plagiarism Declaration Form to each Assignment that you submit into
the Online Assignment Submission (OAS) system for marking.

I declare that the attached work is entirely my own (or when submitted to meet the requirements of an
approved group assignment is the work of the group), except where materials cited, quoted or paraphrased
are acknowledged in the text. I also declare that this work / assignment has not been submitted for
assessment in any other course or university without due acknowledgement.

I understand that plagiarism, collusion, and copying are grave and serious offences.

I understand that disciplinary action (which may include deduction of marks in the Assignment) will be taken
against me if I am found to be an offender of Assignment plagiarism.

Full name and IC No: Nur Hidayah Bt Mohd Abu Bakar Date: 6/2/2021
(940424075170)

Assignment (Asgmt) Declaration Form

Semester/Year JANUARY 2021 (JULY 2017)

Student’s Name Nur Hidayah Binti Mohd Abu Bakar

Student’s ID No: 041170619

Course Code BMG302/03

Course Title ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR

Class Code 4-OBV3

Assignment No: TMA 1

No. of pages of this 13

Assignment (including this
page)

Tutor LEE KEE CHIN

Course Coordinator KAJARI A/P B.SHANKAR

T-DF Assignment Declaration Form (1/2020 version #003)

Question 1

(a) Describe the five (5) Hofstede’s dimensions of national culture. (20 marks)
 There are five Hofstede dimensions of the national culture. The first one is the power distance.

Power distance refers to the degree to which people are equally distributed power. In a high power

distance culture, power is concentrated at the top in the hands of relatively few people while people at

the bottom are subject to decisions and instructions given by superiors. Subordinates address superiors

by the name of Mr or Madam, while superiors just call subordinates by name. Conversely, in a low

power distance culture, power is distributed rather equally among the members of the society (House

et al. 2002; 2004). Everyone just calls each other by name without formality. Power distance as a

concept has important implications in the organisational setting. Managers in high power distance

communities tend to give subordinates detailed instructions with little room for interpretation.

Subordinates are supposed to respect and obey the authority and superiority of upper hierarchy. Thus,

the mechanistic characteristics of high power distance cultures, such as inequality among the members

in the society, lack of free communication across different levels of the management, and centralised

control can stifle employee creativity and innovation. Conversely, low power distance communities

have characteristics, such as lack of hierarchical authority and less centralisation which tend to

promote employee interaction, lateral communication, and less emphasis on the rules. Non-directive,

hands off monitoring systems have often been implemented to allow the creativity and exploration

necessary for successful innovation. High power distance cultures children are raised with a great

emphasis on respecting elders, which is carried through to adulthood. Therefore organisations are

more centralised, employees prefer a more autocratic leadership style where subordinates are expected

to be told what to do and there are wide wage gaps in the hierarchical structure. On the other hand, in

low power distance cultures inequality is not desired, employees prefer to be consulted with regards to

decision making and thus prefer a more resourceful and democratic leader.

The second one is the uncertainty avoidance. This dimension refers to the degree to which people

feel comfortable when they are exposed to an ambiguous or uncertain situation. People in low

uncertainty avoidance culture are more willing to take risks and appreciate flexibility and informality
in the workplace. They are risk-takers. Conversely, people in a high uncertainty avoidance society tend

to be risk-averse, and favour rigid and formal decision-making processes in the workplace. They are

cautious people. Acceptance of uncertainty is essential for innovation because it requires a tolerance

for risk and change. Therefore low uncertainty avoidance societies are more dynamic in competition.

At the organisational level, in high uncertainty avoidance societies, numerous formal internal rules and

regulations exist to control the work process of employees. In low uncertainty avoidance societies,

managers are encouraged to be more flexible and are given more discretion in their decision-making

rather than relying on rigid internal rules and regulations. Uncertainty avoidance is the degree to which

members of a culture feel threatened or uncertain in unfamiliar situations. Thus in high uncertainty

avoidance cultures, people prefer a structured environment with rules and policies in place. Hard work

is embraced, and there is a greater sense of anxiety amongst the workforce. In contrast, in weak

uncertainty avoidance cultures rules create discomfort, almost fear, and exist only where absolutely

necessary. People tend to be more relaxed in these cultures, and work at a slower pace.

The third one is the Individualism vs. collectivism. This dimension is concerned with the degree

to which individuals are integrated into groups. In short it is about “I” and ‘We” cultures.

Individualism as a concept means that people seek and protect their own interests over the common

goal of society and their role in society. In an individualistic society, people are comfortable with

having the authority to make a decision based on what the individual thinks is best. In individualistic

culture, employees are given a great deal of personal freedom and autonomy. However, in a

collectivistic culture, people tend to belong to groups or collectives and look after each other in

exchange for loyalty. It emphasises group conformity and cohesion. Collective cultures therefore

usually do not allow the freedom and independence necessary for organisational members to think

creatively and, therefore, fail to cultivate an environment that fosters an innovative spirit. It must not

be mistaken that in a collectivistic culture, people are not innovative. Individualism (versus

collectivism) is the preference of people to belong to a loosely knit society where importance is placed

on the self and autonomy. In opposition, collectivist structures place importance on interdependent
social units such as the family, rather than on the self. In individualist societies, employees require the

freedom to work independently and desire challenging work (which is more important than personal

relationships) that will help them reach self-actualisation. In collectivist cultures, unquestioned

management structures are responsible for the organisation of teams of employees and the cohesion of

the collective.

The fourth one is the Masculinity vs. femininity. This dimension refers to the distribution of

emotional roles between the genders. It is the relationship of male and female and their influences on

work responsibilities. A masculine culture is basically a performance-driven society where rewards

and recognition for performance are the primary motivational factors for achievement. This type of

culture tends to give the utmost respect and admiration to the successful achiever, who fulfils his

ambition and demonstrates assertiveness and willingness to take risks in order to achieve goals. Top

management positions are usually filled by men who tend to display characteristics of dominance and

assertiveness which tend to be discouraged among women by societal gender norms. In contrast, in

feminine cultures people tend to emphasise the quality of the “whole” life rather than money, success,

and social status, which are easier to quantify. They are willing to reach out to the underprivileged and

share their wealth with them. Overall, organisations with a feminine culture are not as competitive as

those with a masculine culture, since the former places higher priority on concern for others and little

distinction is made between men and women in the same position. This dimension is often renamed by

users of Hofstede’s work, e.g., to quantity of life vs. quality of life, which emphasises assertiveness

and materialism versus relationships and leisure time. According to Hofstede, masculinity represents

cultures with distinct gender roles where men focus on success, competition and rewards while women

focus on tender values such as quality of life and modesty. Femininity represents cultures where

gender roles overlap. In masculine cultures managers are defined as more assertive and decisive,

whereas feminine cultures breed more intuitive managers who negotiate disputes and encourage

participation in decisions.
 The fifth one is the Short-term/long-term orientation (Confucian dynamism). Using a different

survey instrument called the Chinese Value Survey (CVS), Hofstede & Bond (1988) identified a new

cultural dimension, “long-term versus short-term orientation,” that strongly reflects Confucianism, a

cultural backbone of East Asian countries. This dimension includes such values as thrift, persistence,

having a sense of shame, and ordering relationships. Confucian work dynamism refers to dedicated,

motivated, responsible, and educated individuals with a sense of commitment and organisational

identity and loyalty. According to Hofstede (2001, 359), “long-term orientation” stands for the

fostering of virtues oriented towards future rewards, in particular perseverance and thrift. Its opposite

pole, short-term orientation, stands for the fostering of virtues related to the past and present, in

particular, respect for tradition, and preservation of ‘face’ and fulfilling social obligations.” This

describes the extent to which people have a dynamic, future-oriented perspective (long-term

orientation – LTO) rather than a focus on the past and present (short-term orientation – STO).

(b) Explain how Hofstede’s dimension of national culture can be used to explain innovativeness

or the lack of it in some national cultures. (20 marks)

It appears that Hofstede’s cultural dimensions are still valid today, supported by the recent GLOBE

study. It can be concluded that cultures have different learned values and norms which can determine

actions and play a significant role in influencing business outcomes. Although Hofstede’s framework

remains the most widely used approach to classify and compare national cultures, it is not without

limitations. An obvious weakness is that the data are relatively old and, despite the study’s

replications, may not fully capture recent changes in the political environment (e.g., the end of the

Cold War and the decline of communism) or the work place (stronger focus on cooperation,

knowledge-sharing and empowerment). Furthermore, Hofstede’s study was restricted to data from a

single organization. Generalizing about national cultural characteristics based on the analysis of a

small subset of cultural members relies on the untenable assumption that each nation consists of a
uniform national culture and that data from a section of IBM employees would be representative of

that supposed national uniformity.

It is also worth noting that the dimension of uncertainty avoidance did not emerge as a distinct

cultural dimension in a later study that Hofstede conducted using a Chinese equivalent of his original

survey developed by Chinese social scientists.10 Based on data from 23 countries, including 20 from

Hofstede’s original study, the scholars identified a different fourth dimension representing Chinese

values related to Confucianism. Originally termed Confucian Work Dynamism, this dimension was

later re-labelled long-term/short-term orientation and added as a fifth dimension rather than replacing

uncertainty avoidance. Therefore, while the dimension of uncertainty avoidance is conceptually

relevant, its applicability is necessarily limited. Further, beyond the mere confusion associated with

the labels of masculinity and femininity, it is also less clear what exactly this dimension involves. For

example, the finding that Japan scored as the most masculine culture appears to contradict the high

levels of concern and care that Japanese organizations usually show towards their employees and that

would be more indicative of a feminine culture as defined by Hofstede. It is possible that four cultural

dimensions are simply insufficient to capture the complexity of national culture.

Hofstede’s cultural value scores have also been used to compute aggregate cultural distances

between countries along these four dimensions in order to quantify cultural differences between

countries. Although these cultural distance scores have been widely used to explain different

phenomena in international business such as entry mode choice, international diversification, and

performance of multinational companies, this approach has also been heavily criticized.First, the

calculation of distances based on Hofstede’s scores suggests that the distances are symmetric. In other

words, a Swedish firm investing in China is thought to face exactly the same cultural distance as a

Chinese firm investing in Sweden, an assumption that has however received little support. Second, the

concept of cultural distance assumes homogeneity within each nation, a criticism already voiced

against Hofstede’s data collection per se. It becomes even more serious when the data are then used to
compute distance scores between countries, taking into account neither different intra-cultural

variations nor the actual physical distance between both locations. For example, we would expect

significant differences for a Spanish firm investing in France depending on whether the home and host

units are located in Barcelona and Perpignan, respectively, or in Seville and Le Havre, respectively.

This is particularly relevant for large and diverse countries like the BRICs (Brazil, Russia, India, and

China) but it also applies to smaller countries: The computed cultural distance between the Czech

Republic and Slovakia, two states that shared the same national flag for a long time, is higher than for

most other cultural pairs! This not only highlights the role of intra-cultural variation but it also raises

doubts over whether the country is necessarily a suitable proxy for defining cultural regions.

It is important to note that the application of any of the cultural value dimensions described above

comes with an important caveat. While the cultural frameworks are certainly useful in comparing one

culture with another, they only represent central tendencies at the level of the nation rather than a

description of specific individuals within that nation. Information about the actual values and

behaviours of a particular individual should therefore always supersede the group tendency.

QUESTION 2

I. Describe the theory which best describes the situation above.

The best theory to define this is the equity theory which fall under inequity a situation called

under reward. This is because both put in the same effort and only the other one is rewarded

and Hasni becomes upset. More often than not, when you perceive yourself to be ‘under-

rewarded’ the feelings/thoughts that motivate you to correct the inequity may range from

dissatisfaction, sadness, anger, annoyance, and frustration. When ‘under-reward’ inequity is

perceived, you will most likely be motivated to perform one of the seven actions which is

where Hasni:-

 Feels less organizational citizenship

  Might ask for salary increase

 Feels like other perks are so valuable

 Started to feel down

 Might resign

ii) Advise what Hasni could do to deal with the situation.

What I can advise to Hasni based on my view of perception is to ask Hasni not to feel down

and put in more effort and not to decrease her input, put more input or if she feels like she has

given all the input, I will ask her to give the same input and not to decrease it.

Next, I will ask her to increase her outcome and thus she can request for a salary increment.

Next I will ask her to stop increasing other people output and thus she needs to ask the boss why

there is a difference in salary between both of them. She needs to know what makes her less

compared to other colleague since she believe she have given all her efforts because clearly there

should be no favorism in working place.

The very next thing I will tell Hasni is to not compare herself with anyone because clearly

she have given all her best. Next, I will ask her to compare her situation with anyone else who

faced the same situation so that she knows what the next step she can do is.

The final advice I can tell her is to quit the job if she feels like no point in giving more or

thinks of giving less because clearly it is not good for her future. Leaving the field would be a

better decision. Try somewhere else. If one action does nothing to solve the inequity, you will

usually move on to the next course of action, until the inequity is finally resolved.
Question 3

(a) Explain the MARS model of individual behaviour.

As illustrated above four variables (motivation, ability, role perception, and situational factors
or the acronym MARS for short) account for the variation in employee behaviour and
results.

First is the motivation. According to Latham and Pinder (2005), motivation consists of

three elements, namely direction, intensity and persistence. Highly motivated individuals score

high in these three areas. To elaborate, highly motivated individuals have clear goals to achieve

(i.e., direction), exert a lot of effort towards these goals (i.e., intensity), and persevere until the goal

is finally achieved (i.e., persistence). On the contrary, we can also say that unmotivated individuals

do not have clear goals, do not put enough effort towards these goals, and give up easily when

pursuing a goal.

Second is the ability. An individual’s ability also plays a significant impact on his or her

behaviour and results. Abilities may either be inborn (i.e., natural aptitudes) or learnt over time

(i.e., learned capabilities) (Heinsman et al. 2007). To illustrate the differences between ‘natural

aptitudes’ and ‘learned capabilities’, let us take a look at a hypothetical scenario involving two

individuals, Nancy and Leona. Nancy and Leona participated in a national singing competition.
Both are very good singers (e.g., high ability), and successfully entered the final round because

they outperformed in the competition. They are equally good, and even the judges are undecided as

to whether Nancy or Leona should win the competition. Unknown to everyone however, both

candidates come from entirely different backgrounds. Nancy has been blessed with a beautiful

voice, and loves singing. Nancy inherited this melodious voice from her grandmother. However,

Nancy has never really taken singing seriously, but only does it for fun. She has never undergone

any professional training either. Nancy only joined the competition because she is forced to do so

by her boyfriend, who notices her talent. Nancy had never sung on a stage before, and was very

nervous when she first held the microphone during the competition. But the very minute she

opened her mouth to sing, she wowed the entire audience with her beautiful voice. With reference

to the MARS model, this is an example of how one’s singing ability may come from ‘natural

aptitude’. Now, with regard to the second candidate Leona, she has had dreams of being a

professional singer ever since she was 7 years old. Despite Leona only having and average singing

voice, this did not stop her from giving up her lifelong dream of pursuing singing as a career.

Leona has spent a lot of time and money on professional singing courses. She spends countless

hours a day training, sometimes even repeating the same boring line over and over again just to hit

the notes right. It has already been more than 10 gruelling years of vigorous training, and Leona is

so excited to finally make it this far. With reference to the MARS model, this is an example of how

one’s singing ability may be obtained via training (e.g., learned capabilities).

Third is the role perceptions. Individuals also need to have a clear and accurate definition

of what their role required. In other words, they need to know what tasks have to be done, how to

best perform these tasks, and what activities to allocate those efforts. For example, recall that there

may have been times when you were approached by an overly aggressive sales promoter? No

matter how much you refused them politely, they just can’t seem to take “no” for an answer. They

continued to harass you until you make a purchase. In the event that you make a stand to reject

making the purchase, they may usually give you an angry look, say something rude, or ignore you

when you walk by the next time. A few questions to ask yourself at this point in time: “Would you
return to this same sales promoter in the future to ask about new products?” “Does this sales

promoter enhance the image of the company or product they are representing?” Unfortunately, the

answer is a resounding ‘no!’, and ‘no’. Thus, from this example, we can see that the proper role of

a sales promoter is not just to hit the sales quota, but to hit the quota while being friendly and not

overly pushy. A sales promoter that correctly perceives the role of a sales promoter will display

correct behaviour, and perform well on the job. In contrast, a sales promoter that has an incorrect or

incomplete perception of their role will offend the customers.

The fourth is the situational factor. Employees that are motivated, possess sufficient

abilities, and have accurate role perceptions are also dependent on situational factors to perform

well. Situational factors are factors beyond an employee’s immediate control. These factors may

arise either from ‘within’ the organisation, or from the ‘outside’ the organisation. Examples of

factors ‘within’ the organisation are: a conducive working environment, sufficient management

support, time, budget, tools, facilities, and resources in order to perform optimally. Examples of

factors ‘outside’ the organisation includes: the condition of Malaysian economy (e.g., an economic

recession will negatively impact the job performance of sales promoters), government laws and

regulations (e.g., the introduction of the goods and service tax will have a negative impact on the

sales quota of promoters), and the entrance of a new competitor into the market (e.g., sales

promoters of the competing company will try to woo your customers away, and this will make it

harder for you to hit your own sales quota). It should be noted that all four factors in the MARS

model jointly play a role in determining an individual’s job performance. An implication of this is

that one must be careful not to overlook any of these factors. If one factor weakens, the entire

model weakens, and the employee’s performance eventually declines.

b) Analyse this scenario based on the MARS model of individual behaviour.

This is a situational factor. Employees that are motivated, possess sufficient abilities, and

have accurate role perceptions are also dependent on situational factors to perform well. Situational

factors are factors beyond an employee’s immediate control. These factors may arise either from
‘within’ the organisation, or from the ‘outside’ the organisation. As an example, due to the

pandemic, Ken have been going through the training in online and thus it is causing him

performance to be bad. It should be noted that all four factors in the MARS model jointly play a

role in determining an individual’s job performance. An implication of this is that one must be

careful not to overlook any of these factors. If one factor weakens, the entire model weakens, and

the employee’s performance eventually declines.

 REFERENCE

1. Dowling, P. J., Festing, M. and Engle, A. D. (2008) International Human Resource

Management, 5ed, London: Thomson Learning.

2. Hofstede, G. (1997) Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, London: McGraw-

Hill.

3. Organizational Behaviour Wawasan Open University Course Material