Posts Tagged Customer Reference

One of the challenges I have struggled with when interpreting customer survey results is understanding why some countries give lower scores than others on the same questions – in particular in relation to product performance, which should be the same for all regions.  Most global companies divide the world into the following regions – NASA (North and South America), EMEA (Europe, Middle East and Africa) and APAC (Asia-Pacific Region).  I have observed that on the same survey, the NASA region will score highest, followed by EMEA, followed by APAC. In one instance, the NASA based support management assumed that this indicated that they were doing a better job and there was pressure applied to the other regions support teams to close the gap. Having worked in both NASA and EMEA based service organizations, I have suspected that variances in results might be culture related. Furthermore, if I took the APAC results for a particular survey and looked only at results for Australia and New Zealand, these closely matched NASA results – suggesting that the APAC support team was doing as good a job as their NASA counterparts.

Recently, I discovered the work of Professor Geert Hofstede who has conducted ground-breaking studies of cultural differences.  Analyzing a large data base of employee values scores collected by IBM between 1967 and 1973 covering more than 70 countries, Prof. Hofstede developed a Framework for Assessing Culture that identifies five dimensions of culture that can impact and predict behavior.

Wikipedia summarizes the five dimensions as follows …

• Low vs. High Power Distance –  the extent to which the less powerful members of institutions and organizations expect and accept that power is distributed unequally. Low power distance (e.g. Austria, Australia, Denmark, New Zealand) expect and accept power relations that are more consultative or democratic. People relate to one another more as equals regardless of formal positions. Subordinates are more comfortable with and demand the right to contribute to and critique the decision making of those in power. In High power distance countries (e.g. Malaysia), less powerful accept power relations that are more autocratic and paternalistic. Subordinates acknowledge the power of others simply based on where they are situated in certain formal, hierarchical positions. As such, the Power Distance Index Hofstede defines does not reflect an objective difference in power distribution, but rather the way people perceive power differences. In Europe, Power Distance tends to be lower in Northern countries and higher in Southern and Eastern parts. There seems to be an admittedly disputable correlation with predominant religions.

• Individualism vs. collectivism – individualism is contrasted with collectivism, and refers to the extent to which people are expected to stand up for themselves and to choose their own affiliations, or alternatively act predominantly as a member of a life-long group or organization. Latin American cultures rank among the most collectivist in this category, while Anglo countries such as the U.S.A., Great Britain and Australia are the most individualistic cultures.

• Masculinity vs. femininity – refers to the value placed on traditionally male or female values (as understood in most Western cultures). So called ‘masculine’ cultures value competitiveness, assertiveness, ambition, and the accumulation of wealth and material possessions, whereas feminine cultures place more value on relationships and quality of life. Japan is considered by Hofstede to be the most “masculine” culture (replaced by Slovakia in a later study), Sweden the most “feminine.” Anglo cultures are moderately masculine. As a result of the taboo on sexuality in many cultures, particularly masculine ones, and because of the obvious gender generalizations implied by Hofstede’s terminology, this dimension is often renamed by users of Hofstede’s work, e.g. to Quantity of Life vs. Quality of Life. Another reading of the same dimension holds that in ‘M’ cultures, the differences between gender roles are more dramatic and less fluid than in ‘F’ cultures

• Uncertainty avoidance – reflects the extent to which members of a society attempt to cope with anxiety by minimizing uncertainty. Cultures that scored high in uncertainty avoidance prefer rules (e.g. about religion and food) and structured circumstances, and employees tend to remain longer with their present employer. Mediterranean cultures, Latin America, and Japan rank the highest in this category.

Michael Harris Bond and his collaborators subsequently found a fifth dimension which was initially called Confucian dynamism. Hofstede later incorporated this into his framework as:

• Long vs. short term orientation – describes a society’s “time horizon,” or the importance attached to the future versus the past and present. In long term oriented societies, values include persistence (perseverance), ordering relationships by status, thrift, and having a sense of shame; in short term oriented societies, values include normative statements, personal steadiness and stability, protecting ones face, respect for tradition, and reciprocation of greetings, favors, and gifts. China, Japan and the Asian countries score especially high (long-term) here, with Western nations scoring rather low (short-term) and many of the less developed nations very low; China scored highest and Pakistan lowest.

The scores on the dimensions are available at Hofstede’s website.

In summary, although not without it’s detractors, Hofstede’s work remains the most exhaustive and scientific study of cultural differences to date. It presents compelling evidence that an individuals behavior is influenced by their cultural background and provides a predictive model based on the research. I have observed a similarity in survey responses from countries scoring high on the individualism/collectivism dimension.  I will certainly be leveraging Hofstedes work in future surveys to determine if this observation continues to hold true.

The key takeaways for customer experience and customer support managers are …

1. Survey results should not be used to compare performance across geographic boundaries, without taking into account the cultural background of the respondent.
2. Compare single country results to known benchmarks, if possible.
3. Survey frequently to capture trends. Trending will give you a reliable indication of your organizations performance over time.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Announcing the 2009 Google Online Marketing Challenge winners (googleblog.blogspot.com)