The root element of individualism is the supposition that individuals are self-reliant from one another. For this, a number of logical consequences or indications can be determined. A question that can inquire into the significant research is whether the research has analytically approved the plausible consequences and whether the plausible consequences are specifically part of the individualism or not.
Geert Hofstede has defined individualism as a focus on rights above duties, a concern for oneself and family, an emphasis on personal autonomy and self-fulfilment, and the basing of one’s identity on one’s personal accomplishments where Waterman defines normative individualism as a focus on personal responsibility and freedom of choice and living up to ones potential and respecting the integrity of others.
The foundation of collectivism is the supposition that groups group together and jointly oblige individuals. From this, people distinguish a number of plausible consequences of collectivism. The question which arises and can be explored is that the quantitative research has empirically certify these plausible consequences cross-culturally and or these plausible consequences are universally of collectivism. However sometimes these can be observed as opposites. It is apparently more accurate to visualize individualism and collectivism as worldviews that differentiates in the affairs they make salient,
Gibson in 1998, said that the connection between individualism and collectivism and organizational culture has been largely observed. However the facts which shows that both concepts refer to the issues of cooperation in organizational settings. A closer look should be taken at the contacts of organizational culture and individualism/collectivism on 3 basic levels which are cultural, organizational and individual
Theory and Hypothesis
Hypothesis 1: The level to which the individuals in an organization trust...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document