Culture assessment can be whichever a vast bottomless nadir or a absorbed exercise around specific issues based on the issue we are trying to solve. We occasionally need to evaluate the macro cultures of nations and occupations to identify cultural DNA since we have some specific problems to solve or changes to make. There for we need selected dimensions so that we cut across macro cultures. This chapter will review the ways by which macro cultures can be assessed and show some of the dimensions that are beneficial in comparing macro cultures.


Travel and Literature

The three-level model for cultural analysis that is being discussed in (chap 2 ) of book “Organizational Culture and leader ship” edition 5th can be helpful in observation of  macro cultures like nations and occupations when we reflect on what we observe in our own national or racial culture and what we experience in other countries when we travel. The artefactual level is what we meet when we travel as a tourist or, in the occasion of an occupation like medicine, what we experience when we meet our doctor or go to a hospital. The espoused-values level is found in the available ideology of nations or in the official mission declarations of occupations. The basic conventions, as with organizations, have to be contingent from talking to people, intensive personal assumption over some period of time, or systematic observation and interrogating of “informants” as in ethnography.



Assessing macro cultures in terms of all of the dimensions mentioned in the preceding chapter is a huge task, but it is useful only for the researcher with a certain interest in a certain country or somebody who wants to compare macro cultures. For an organizational leader or the person wants to join an organization, a more applied and focused approach is required. The best place to start is with the observation that multicultural task forces and projects will not only become more common in the future but have even acquired a new name “collaborations.” Such new kinds of effort groups are well defined in article within the Handbook of Cultural Intelligence (Ang & Van Dyne, 2008):

Participants in a alliance may come together on a one-time basis, without anticipating continuous interaction. A fundamental set of members may remain involved for an prolonged period of time, but other members may soar on and off the effort, working only on an “as needed” periodic basis. Further, collaborations may have phases of intensely reliant interaction, but may otherwise consist of quite independent actors. Many are not entrenched in a single organizational framework but represent either cross-organizational cooperation or participants may not have any organizational affiliation at all. Contributors may feel as though they share a common purpose for the period of a specified project, yet may not sight themselves as a “team.”



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *