2.4.2 Hofstede’s dimensions and their application to marketing communications

In late 1960s and early 1970s anthropologist and cross-cultural scholar Geert Hofstede came up to the ideas how to categorize world cultures (Sapienza, 2017).

In accordance with Hofstede’s studies there are 4 dimensions of culture such as: power distance, individualism (collectivism), masculinity (femininity) and uncertainty avoidance.

Power distance is considered as the level to which uneven allocation of authority, income and prosperity is treated. In other words, it shows the relation of people towards of hierarchy social classes. With regards to marketing, it is might be supposed that awareness of power distance in a certain country helps to distribute roles/present situations in advertising context in a more appealing/conventional way for consumers. For example, Mooij (2005) claimed that for low power distance cultures it is normal to use humour in their commercials, while for high power distance cultures it is not very common.

Considering power distance, Russia was ranked very high – 93 scores, it means that it is common to see hierarchy and more formality in the context of promotional mix, then in Ireland, which was ranked as 28 – distance and inequality tend to be minimized in promotional message.

Hofstede supposed that the understanding of power distance level of a country helps to identify whether it is effective to reflect a certain status of a social hierarchy and emphasise at luxury for example, or a humorous approach might work best (Mooij and Hofstede, 2010).

As for individualism/collectivism, this categorizes individuals in terms of lifestyle: whether people prefer individualism or holidays are mostly shared with collective/community. It shows the level of social integration or isolation. In addition, if the level of individualism is high then individuals want to know all the product benefits, while for collectivism cultures it is important to build trust first and then evaluate practical information (Mooij and Hofstede, 2010).

In terms of individualism both Ireland and Russia got different results, Ireland was ranked higher in terms of individualism – 70, Russia was 42. From the marketing perspectives, it might be beneficial to know whether an image of group of people (family, friends) is more appealing for some countries and more individualistic approach for others. As an example, more specifically, there was a research of Western and Asian advertisements which showed that in American and German commercials there are usually not a lot of people (less than 3), while in Asian usually more than 3 (Alden et al., 1993). Regarding to Ireland high score of individualism it might be assumed that individualistic nature of advertisement is more appealing there rather, than in Russia.

Masculinity/femininity are not identified with gender dominance. In fact, Hofstede referred to strong masculine characteristics such as power, persistence, achievements and success in contrast to women traits such as personal relationships, comfort, service and prosperity. Regarding to masculinity, Russia got 59, while Ireland got 68. In a marketing context it might be learned what are the most important concerns of different countries, which might be effective to reflect in a promotional message.

To illustrate, it was found out that for those nations, which were ranked high in terms of masculinity, the most important is to see a full information about product efficiency and capacity, while for feminine cultures it is not a main priority in advertisement (Tai and Chan, 2001). As an example, American participants perceived commercials better when they saw full, useful information supported with as many goods characteristics as possible to see evaluate how valuable product is, while Korean (ranked less in terms of masculinity in Hofstede dimensions) were not impacted by a factor of informational level in advertisement (Taylor, Miracle, and Wilson, 1997).

Additionally, for masculine nations it is effective to emphasize accomplishment and success with relation to product use, while for feminine cultures the background information is important as well (Mooij and Hofstede, 2010).

Uncertainty avoidance is characterized by people’s relation towards unknown situations and gaps in a structure. In other words, it is about future planning and control of life for some and not such a strict relation for others. Having said this, individuals with low level of uncertainty avoidance will tend to set structure and plan with clear navigations. As for uncertainty avoidance, Russia got 70 scores, Ireland is 35, thus Russian people tend to avoid ambiguity and control all the steps in planning process, while Ireland wasn’t estimated as high in this process. Thus, for marketing it may be assumed that for some countries in promotional mix the emphasis should be at structure and clarity, while others might appreciate more freedom (Jones, 2007). People of high uncertainty avoidance are suspicious, the will look for facts, which prove that product information is truth. They would rather believe to commercials, which supported by experts or opinion leaders and show less ambiguity, while people of low uncertainty avoidance are more open for changes and innovations in advertising ( Mooij and Hofstede, 2010).

Figure 1 – The scores of Ireland and Russia in Hofstede’s dimensions

The dimensions and scores (figure 1), which Hofstede investigated are commonly applied indicators in tourism and hospitality cross-cultural marketing. For example, there was a study, which found out that travellers from Japan have high uncertainty avoidance, Australia – average uncertainty avoidance, and China low uncertainty avoidance respectively (Quintal, Lee, and Soutar, 2010).

With regards to these findings and Hofstede’s dimensions it might be assumed that travellers with high uncertainty avoidance are more demanding in seeing detailed and guaranteed information, than individuals of low uncertainty avoidance. The opportunity to draw and fulfill specific target customers is largely depends on the travellers’ cultural interpretation of the promotional message, and different cultures express varied explanations of the marketing communications due to cultural diversity. Therefore, it is critical to analyze the differences to understand which of the cultural differences have the most impact.

On the one hand, cultural identity and studies about culture is highly important in marketing. If there is awareness about cultural features of target customers it is likely that firm will develop marketing communications with less failures and mistakes. Albers-Miller and Gelb (1996) contributed to cultural research in marketing communications identifying that cultural dimensions help to reflect national appeals, which are “silent”, not obvious for marketers. Thus, the knowledge about them assist in presenting and anticipating common values in advertising for a certain culture.

On the other hand, large numberof multicultural researches, including Hofstede, are being criticized for not proving their findings. Michael and College (1997) claimed that all information in this area seems not certain and specific and is given in general behavioural terms even though some results were obtained in a practical way.

Even though Hofstede’s work is reasonable for investigating cultural differences in advertising, it should not be applied without thorough consideration of possible changes as dimensions were crated in early 1970s (Moon and Chan, 2003).