OUTINE FOR HOFSTEDE ANALYSIS COMPARISON BETWEEN THE USA AND MEXICO

This paper entails the following sections;

• Introduction

5. Doing business in a different country other than the host country requires an understanding of the country’s culture.
5. Different countries have varying ways of life that could considerably impact how business is done, including communication methods, business meetings, and creating contracts.
5. Hofstede's cultural dimensions are a vital framework that can help understand the variations in culture across nations and define how business is undertaken across diverse cultures.

• Similarities

5. A high score on the masculinity aspect depicts that culture is led by competition, success, and accomplishment.
5. The winner or expert in a particular field determines what it means to be successful in something.
5. This cultural practice begins during childhood and progresses throughout an individual’s life, whether in work or leisure quests.

• Long Term Orientation

5. This component shows how a culture maintains some connections with its past as it addresses present and future challenges.
5. It also demonstrates how cultures focus on the two existential aims differently.
5. Accordingly, cultures with low long-term orientation (normative societies) prioritize time-honored practices while seeing society's change with skepticism.

• Indulgence

5. People often face the challenge of how to socialize, considering the significance of socialization in society.
5. Indulgence depicts the degree of people attempting to regulate their desires and impulses. It is substantially dependent on how people are brought up.
5. Relatively low regulation over people's urges is referred to as indulgence, while relatively strong regulation is referred to as restraint.

• Differences

5. The USA has a significantly lower power distance than Mexico.
5. Power distance depicts the degree to which a society agrees that institutional power is unequally disseminated.
5. The point that every person is unique demonstrates that all persons in society are unequal. It shows society's attitude toward such power differences amongst people.

• Individualism

5. The USA has a considerably higher score than Mexico in individualism. Individualism relates to the magnitude of a culture's interdependence.
5. It deals with if people's self-image is considered as a group or individual.
5. Individualistic cultures are characterized by individuals looking after themselves and sometimes their immediate family only.

• Implications of Similarities

5. There is high masculinity in both the USA and Mexico.
5. Most American employee performance evaluation frameworks depend on accurate target setting.
5. Accordingly, employees are expected to work towards achieving the targets set by organizations and managers.

• Implications of Differences

5. There is a high power distance in Mexico, depicting the country as a highly hierarchical culture. This is unlike the USA, with a low power distance, emphasizing equal rights and justice for everyone.
5. USA people tolerate ideas more than Mexicans, including allowing free expression of any person's ideas, beliefs, and views.

• Conclusion

5. A Hofstede analysis comparison between the USA and Mexico reveals salient similarities and differences.
5. The two nations have high masculinity, with an emphasis on performance and competition.
5. USA businesses intending to do business in Mexico can ensure they provide an environment where competition is highly encouraged to motivate improved employee performance.

• Reference

 

 

 

 

                                                                                                                    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

HOFSTEDE ANALYSIS COMPARISON BETWEEN THE USA AND MEXICO       

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table of Contents

Introduction. 3

From the perspective of a Hofstede Analysis, what are the differences and similarities. 3

Similarities. 3

Masculinity. 4

Long Term Orientation. 5

Indulgence. 6

Differences. 6

Power Distance and Uncertainty Avoidance. 7

Individualism.. 8

2. What are the implications for USA businesses that wish to conduct business in Mexico. 10

Implications of Similarities. 10

Implications of Differences. 12

Conclusion. 13

References. 14

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

HOFSTEDE ANALYSIS COMPARISON BETWEEN THE USA AND MEXICO

Introduction

            Doing business in a different country other than the host country requires an understanding of the country’s culture. Different countries have varying ways of life that could considerably impact how business is done, including communication methods, business meetings, and creating contracts (Dartey-Baah, 2013). Hofstede's cultural dimensions is a vital framework that can help understand the variations in culture across nations and define how business is undertaken across diverse cultures. It helps closely explore what influences the business world in nations considered. Hofstede upheld that the country variations could be explained by their relations with critical cultural dimensions (Beugelsdijk & Welzel, 2018). The model describes the influence of every nation's cultural values. Every nation is unique in its ways. However, social control ensures that nationals do not diverge from cultural practices. Hence, there are cultural differences in all nations. This paper utilizes Hofstede's cultural aspects to examine the cultural commonalities and variations between the USA and Mexico and the implications of USA businesses doing business in Mexico. 

From the perspective of a Hofstede Analysis, what are the differences and similarities between Mexico and the USA?

            A Hofstede analysis of the USA and Mexico reveals salient differences between the two. This indicates that even though the two nations are close neighbors geographically, some of their cultural norms are highly different from each other. Some of Hofstede's cultural dimensions are similar in the two countries, while others are different culturally.

Similarities

A Hofstede analysis on the two nations depicts the following similarities in culture between the USA and Mexico.

Masculinity

A high score on the masculinity aspect depicts that culture is led by competition, success, and accomplishment (Beugelsdijk & Welzel, 2018). The winner or expert in a particular field determines what it means to be successful in something. This cultural practice begins during childhood and progresses throughout an individual’s life, whether in work or leisure quests. In contrast, a low score on this attribute indicates that the prevailing social values are caring for others and life quality. A Feminine culture is one in which life quality indicates success, and being exceptional is non-admirable. The basic question is what motivates people – whether it is individuals becoming their best (masculinity) or linking their work (Feminine).

USA’s high masculinity score can be observed in the typical USA behaviors, explained by the integration of high masculinity with individualism. Americans exhibit their masculinity individually. This USA integration of individualism and masculinity portrays itself uniquely. In particular, American's behavior in work depends on the typical norms that people should work to be the best they can be. Accordingly, having proven themselves of a worth strive, winners take it all (Yoo & Donthu, 2011). Thus, USA persons will tend to demonstrate and speak freely regarding their triumphs and successes in life. Achieving significant success in the USA is not a great motivator in itself, but individuals' ability to demonstrate their achievements. It is considered that a certain extent of conflict will encourage the best out of individuals since the aim is becoming the winner.

It indicates that culture is driven by competition, attainment, and success, with the winner defining triumph in a particular field (Favaretto et al., 2017). This value system commences in school and progresses throughout organizational life. Lower masculinity depicts that the prevailing practices in culture are caring for others and life quality. Feminine cultures are those in which life quality is the success indicator and how individuals and standing out from others are not valued. Mexicans also have higher masculinity. Thus, in Mexico, individuals also live to work like in the USA. Accordingly, organizational managers are required to be highly emphatic and decisive. They are expected to emphasize equity, competitiveness, and performance. They solve a conflict by addressing it directly. This similarity in masculinity between the USA and Mexico shows that Americans and Mexicans are both driven by competition and desire to achieve and become the best an individual can be. Therefore, performance in both societies is a critical drive among employees in organizational settings.

Long Term Orientation

            This component shows how a culture maintains some connections with its past as it addresses present and future challenges (Taras et al., 2012). It also demonstrates how cultures focus on the two existential aims differently. Accordingly, cultures with low long-term orientation (normative societies) prioritize time-honored practices while seeing society's change with skepticism. Contrary, societies scoring high on this element take a more practical mechanism – they promote prudence and future preparation through a modern education system (Favaretto et al., 2017). The USA has a low long-term orientation. Americans are highly likely to assess new information to check its credibility. Hence, its culture does not allow many Americas to be pragmatic. However, this cannot be tangled with the point that Americans are also practical, as depicted by their can-do mindset. The point reinforces polarization that Americans have strong and unique perceptions of what constitutes "good" or "evil." For instance, issues like weapons use and drug use. USA businesses evaluate their performance in various areas on a short-term basis. For instance, they issue financial performance results quarterly and semiannually. This short-term orientation stimulates most Americans to strive to achieve quick results in the work environment. Mexicans also depict similar short-term orientation as Americans. The low score of Mexico on long-term orientation reflects its normative culture. Individuals in this society are intensely concerned with determining the absolute truth; hence think normatively (Dartey-Baah, 2013). They display significant admiration for traditions, with a relatively lower tendency to save for the future and an emphasis to attain quick results, as is the case in the USA.

Indulgence

People often face the challenge of how to socialize, considering the significance of socialization in society. Indulgence depicts the degree of people attempting to regulate their desires and impulses (Taras et al., 2012). It is substantially dependent on how people are brought up. Relatively low regulation over people's urges is referred to as indulgence, while relatively strong regulation is referred to as restraint. Thus, cultures can either be indulgent or restrained.

            The USA has a high score on indulgence; hence its people are highly indulgent. Combined with its normative culture, this score is depicted by notable contradictory behaviors and beliefs, such as hard work and play. Similarly, Mexico is a highly indulgent society. Its people are willing and wanting to satisfy their desires regarding enjoying life or even having lots of fun. People in this society pose an optimistic attitude and tend to be positive in several things. Thus, they value leisure time much and act as they like, and use their resources, especially money, as they want to fulfill their urges.

Differences

            Despite the above similarities, a Hofstede analysis on the USA and Mexico depicts notable differences, as discussed below.

Power Distance and Uncertainty Avoidance

The USA has a significantly lower power distance than Mexico (Saenz et al., 2018). Power distance depicts the degree to which a society agrees that institutional power is unequally disseminated (Beugelsdijk & Welzel, 2018). The point that every person is unique demonstrates that all persons in society are unequal. It shows society's attitude toward such power differences amongst people. Power distance addresses the fact that both followers and leaders accept a culture's inequality. A salient inequality attribute is the power degree every individual can exert over others – the capacity to influence others' behavior. This attribute deals with the idea that all persons in society are unequal (Manrai & Manrai, 2011). It asserts a culture's attitude towards such inequalities amongst people. It is the degree the less influential institutional members expect and accept the society's unequal power distribution. Mexico is a highly hierarchical culture. Thus, in Mexico, individuals accept a hierarchical system where every person has a position requiring no rationalization. Organizational hierarchies depict inherent inequalities, increased centralization, and authorities give subordinates directions on what to do (Yoo & Donthu, 2011). Mexico's higher power distance score relative to the US indicates that Mexicans accept the hierarchical government system with less justification than the USA. Also, this could be related to their score regarding uncertainty avoidance. This aspect encompasses the extent to which people feel threatened by ambiguous circumstances. A high uncertainty avoidance among Mexicans may demonstrate their need to have a more stable political condition. On the contrary, the USA has a substantially lower power distance score relative to Mexico and uncertainty avoidance. It should also be noted that both power distance and uncertainty avoidance are higher and almost similar in Mexico, while in the USA, they are both lower and also almost similar.

Uncertainty avoidance deals with how a culture handles the point that the future is uncertain – whether people should try to control it or allow it to unfold (Taras et al., 2012). This uncertainty introduces anxiety, and various cultures have adapted to it differently. Uncertainty avoidance reflects the extent to which a culture's people have developed ideas and institutions in trying to deter this ambiguity. USA's lower score in uncertainty avoidance than Mexico suggests that the perceived circumstances USA people find themselves will influence their response to uncertainty more than when it would have been higher.

Individualism

            The USA has a considerably higher score than Mexico in individualism (Saenz et al., 2018). Individualism relates to the magnitude of a culture's interdependence. It deals with if people's self-image is considered as a group or individual. Individualistic cultures are characterized by individuals looking after themselves and sometimes their immediate family only (Masuda et al., 2020). Collectivist cultures are defined by people being part of a group that cares for each other in exchange for loyalty (Masuda et al., 2020). Hence, Mexico has a lower score and is regarded as a collectivist society, which is reflected in long-term dedication to the group, including family and relationships. In collectivist cultures, loyalty is critical and takes precedent over other norms in society. Societies reinforce strong relationships in which all individuals are responsible for others in the group. Thus, disloyalty results in shame and disgrace. In organizations, employer-employee interactions are regarded in moral perspectives, such as a family link. Accordingly, human resource decisions, such as hiring and promotion, consider employees' in-group, and management is framed from managing groups rather than individuals. With the moderately low power distance and its high individualist culture, the USA fosters freedom and justice for all. This is characterized by the American society's emphasis on advancing equal rights in every American society aspect, including government policies. In American society, bureaucracies in hierarchies are created for convenience, such as facilitating effective and efficient organizational management. Seniors are accessible, and leaders depend on individual workers and teams for their roles and contribution to organizational success. Management and employees consult with each other and share information regularly, either through meetings, one-on-one contact, or other communication channels (Dartey-Baah, 2013). Thus, American society is described by informal communication, which is highly direct and participative.

The American society is loosely-knit where people expect to look after themselves, including immediate family members only. They are not expected to depend much on the government or other people for support (Dartey-Baah, 2013). Geographical mobility in the USA is high. Although USA people are among the best joiners, they often find it hard to establish strong friendships, particularly among men. They are used to doing business or associating with people they are unfamiliar with. Effectively, they are confident when approaching their prospective peers, especially in seeking information. From a business standpoint, employees are required to be independent and show initiative. Within an exchange-oriented work context, hiring and promotional decisions depend on merit or proof of what individual employees have done to contribute to organizational success.          

Individualism has a significant effect on other scores. Highly individualist societies take care of themselves, while collectivist societies are more expected to care for each other in groups with intense loyalty (Botta, 2016). It makes sense culturally, the USA being highly individualist and with lower power distance and uncertainty. High power distance implies that individuals are not equal, whereby some are more influential than others. USA people are highly cautious of this perspective, focusing their whole culture on deterring anyone being considered not equal to others. Besides, the USA's low uncertainty avoidance score implies an identical logic. The USA's cultural practice of taking care of an individual's self and immediate family backs being comfortable with less ambiguity apart from an individual's family. Contrary, Mexico has dissimilar scores, with high power distance and uncertainty avoidance, and low individualism.

Mexico's high uncertainty avoidance depicts that its culture tends to hold onto conventional believes and behavior rigidly. This culture is intolerant of untraditional views and behavior. This culture's people have an emotional requirement for rules despite such regulations being dysfunctional (Manrai & Manrai, 2011). In this society, time management is critical, and individuals have the urge to work hard and remain busy, emphasizing punctuality and precision. Since security is vital to individuals and motivates them to work, they may not welcome innovation much; hence a higher resistance to change.

2. What are the implications for USA businesses that wish to conduct business in Mexico

The similarities and differences in culture have critical implications for USA businesses intending to undertake business in Mexico. Below is a discussion of how these commonalities and variations in culture could implicate American businesses in Mexico.

Implications of Similarities

There is high masculinity in both the USA and Mexico. Most American employee performance evaluation frameworks depend on accurate target setting. Accordingly, employees are expected to work towards achieving the targets set by organizations and managers (Favaretto et al., 2017). It means USA businesses will need to ensure they set high targets for their businesses in Mexico to inspire them to achieve success. Also, during performance evaluation, employees in the USA and Mexico are often expected to show how well they performed in achieving the set targets. They have a “can-do” mindset, which establishes much dynamism in both societies. People tend to believe that there is often the potential to do stuff better. Thus, Americans and Mexicans typically live to work to get financial rewards, which would enable them to achieve status based on how effective an individual is in attaining those rewards. It shows that USA businesses in American should attach financial rewards to performance, such as performance-based bonus schemes. These strategies can motivate employees in Mexico to bring out their best because they believe there are monetary rewards for their work. There is also a tendency by most white-collar employees to relocate to a more affluent neighborhood following each significant promotion or pay rise (Yoo & Donthu, 2011). Thus, USA businesses must create a workplace environment that encourages competition among its employees in Mexico.

The USA and Mexico both have a low score on long-term orientation. They have a relatively lower practice to save for the future. They emphasize achieving quick results. It means that USA businesses doing business in Mexico should emphasize short-term results evaluation like they do in the USA. They can provide quarterly financial results to allow organizational stakeholders to determine their business performance. They should also give employees in Mexico short-term targets to encourage them to work toward achieving them. At the same time, they should link employee performance to organizations' short-term performance.

The high indulgence in the two countries also has significant implications on USA businesses intending to do business in Mexico. Mexico is a highly indulgent society with its people valuing fun and enjoying life to satisfy their present desires rather than saving for the future. This indication means that American businesses should create policies that encourage fun at the workplace to enable employees in Mexico to feel that the organization values and takes care of their desires and urges in life. This would boost the high optimism among Mexicans, translating to positive work energy for organizational success.

Implications of Differences

There is a high power distance in Mexico. It depicts the country as a highly hierarchical culture (Ashmore & Tyler, 2015). This is unlike the USA, with a low power distance, emphasizing equal rights and justice for everyone. USA people tolerate ideas more than Mexicans, including allowing free expression of any person's ideas, beliefs, and views. USA people also require fewer rules and are less emotionally revealing than Mexicans. It means USA businesses in Mexico have to ensure clear rules and reporting channels to guide people on how to fulfill their organizational roles. These businesses should emphasize the hierarchical organizational structure to demonstrate a transparent chain of command.

Mexicans have high uncertainty avoidance. Thus, there is a moderate magnitude of acceptance for new or innovative concepts (Ashmore & Tyler, 2015). Contrary, USA people are more willing to try something new than Mexicans, such as business practices, innovative technologies, and new products. It indicates that USA businesses in Mexico should deal in products and ideas that Mexicans are familiar with to ensure they are acceptable.

Mexico is a collectivist society. Loyalty is critical and is treasured over other norms in society (Manrai & Manrai, 2011). It reinforces strong relationships; hence all persons care for others in the group. This is contrary to the USA, where there is an emphasis on individualism, including individual success over group success. It suggests that USA businesses should emphasize teamwork among employees rather than what employees can do as individuals. For instance, they should set performance targets for groups rather than individual employees. They should evaluate business projects from a group perspective rather than an individualistic standpoint.

Conclusion

            A Hofstede analysis comparison between the USA and Mexico reveals salient similarities and differences. The two nations have high masculinity, with an emphasis on performance and competition. USA businesses intending to do business in Mexico can ensure they provide an environment where competition is highly encouraged to motivate improved employee performance. Mexicans are also highly indulging and desire to have fun like in the USA. USA businesses should establish a workplace environment full of fun to motivate their employees, allowing feel their concerns are addressed. The low long-term orientation in both the USA and Mexico depicts that USA businesses should establish short-term performance evaluation systems for employees and the organizations to encourage workers to achieve set targets. Significant cultural differences between the USA and Mexico would also implicate USA businesses wishing to do business in Mexico. The highly hierarchical Mexican culture would require USA businesses to formulate clear rules and command chains to guide employees in Mexico, unlike in the US, where rules are established for convenient management. The high uncertainty avoidance among Mexicans means that USA businesses should deal in traditional products to ensure wide acceptability among Mexican consumers. They should approach organizational change and innovation with caution to accommodate Mexicans’ uncertainty avoidance. USA businesses should also adjust their individualist culture to accommodate the Mexican collectivist culture by emphasizing group performance rather than individual performance.

 

OUTLINE FOR REGIONAL ECONOMIC INTEGRATION          

This paper entails the following sections;

1. Key Term and Why I am Interested in It

5. I am interested in the key term “regional economic integration” because of the recent disintegration of several trade agreements between countries that have been trading with each other for many years.
5. For instance, Britain’s exit from the European Union (EU) in early 2020 hit the global news having been in the EU for almost four decades and traded in numerous products and services.
5. Therefore, I am curious of understanding the intricacies associated with regional economic integration to understand why countries may want to integrate in the first place and what makes them desire to disintegrate, especially after trading with each other for several years.         

2. Explanation of the Key Term

5. Regional economic integration refers to an agreement among groups of nation in a particular geographic region, to minimize or eradicate tariff and non-tariff impediments to the free flow of goods (including production factors) and services among each other.
5. Divisions among states, such as geography, underdeveloped infrastructure, and ineffective policies impede economic growth.
5. Regional economic integration allows nations overcome these barriers to trade, including people, goods, services, and capital free flowing among them, which may boost economic growth.

3. Major Article Summary

5. The main article is the study.
5. The paper explored recent empirical literature on how economic integration affects economic growth in both developed and developing economies.
5. Literature has mixed results regarding how economic integration associates with economic development.

4. Discussion

5. Regional economic integration’s impact on economic growth.
5. The work also highlights some of the benefits that countries get from integrating, including increased trade, capital accumulation, and FDI.
5. These benefits align with the assigned module’s discussion on the reasons for regional economic integration.

b. How the cited work relates to the other 4 works you researched

5. Relates to other four works regarding whether the other studies found regional economic integration to be either positively or negatively associated with economic growth.
5.  Regional economic integration to have a positive and significant influence on economic growth.
5. On the other hand, two studies found regional economic integration to be negatively linked with economic growth.

• References

REGIONAL ECONOMIC INTEGRATION  

1. Key Term and Why I am Interested in It

I am interested in the key term “regional economic integration” because of the recent disintegration of several trade agreements between countries that had been trading with each other for many years. For instance, Britain’s exit from the European Union (EU) in early 2020 hit the global news, having been in the EU for almost four decades and traded in numerous products and services. Therefore, I am curious about understanding the intricacies of regional economic integration to understand why countries may want to integrate with the first place, the economic effect of regional integration, and any other negative effect that may make countries want to disintegrate, especially after trading with each other for several years.         

2. Explanation of the Key Term (100 words minimum)

Regional economic integration refers to an agreement among groups of nations in a particular geographic region to minimize or eradicate tariff and non-tariff impediments to the free flow of goods (including production factors) and services (Lean, 2019). Divisions among states, such as geography, underdeveloped infrastructure, and ineffective policies, impede economic growth. Regional economic integration allows nations to overcome these barriers to trade, including people, goods, services, and capital freely flowing among them, which may boost economic growth. These barriers are highly costly to nations; hence regional economic integration eliminates and reduces most of these impediments to pave the way for goods, services, people to move freely.

3. Major Article Summary

            The main article is the study by Ehigiamusoe and Lean (2019). The paper explored recent empirical literature on how economic integration affects economic growth in developed and developing economies. Ehigiamusoe and Lean (2019) found that the literature has mixed results regarding how economic integration associates with economic development. Some studies revealed positive effects of economic integration on various country’s economic growth. Membership length in regional trade unions was also found to be positively linked with economic growth. Economic integration’s favorable effect on economic growth was attributed to its stimulating effect on foreign direct investment (FDI), trade, research and development, and capital accumulation, boosting economic growth. Trade was particularly a critical factor in stimulating economic growth, especially when countries integrated regionally. Trade interdependence results in the reconciliation of increasingly economic uncertainties within an economic region. The investigators also found that in some studies, economic integration had no significant impact on economic growth. Yet other studies revealed a negative effect. This adverse effect was attributed to economic integration resulting in income inequality, especially between developed and developing economies. Overall, even though studies showed inconsistent results, Ehigiamusoe and Lean (2019) found immense support that regional economic integration positively and significantly influences economic growth.

4. Discussion

a. How the cited work relates to the above explanation AND how it relates specifically to the content of the assigned module

Ehigiamusoe and Lean (2019) examined regional economic integration's impact on economic growth. The work also highlights some of the benefits of integrating, including increased trade, capital accumulation, and FDI. These benefits align with the assigned module's discussion on