What is power distance cultural differences?

Hofstede () defines power distance as “the extent to which the members of a society accept that power in institutions and organizations is distributed unequally” (p. 347). Cultures differ in their level of power distance, and those with high power distance justify inequalities in the society or ingroup, whereas those with low power distance are more concerned with maintaining equality. The countries with high power distance include Malaysia, Philippines, Mexico, and China among others, whereas Austria, Israel, Denmark, and New Zealand are some of the countries with the lowest power distance.

Introduction

In his seminal work Culture’s Consequences, Geert Hofstede () reports the findings of his famous IBM research and defines several cultural dimensions including power distance. In addition to cross-cultural research, power distance and its implications have influenced the psychological research on organizational culture and politics.

Power Distance and Cultural...

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  • Aycan, Z. (2006). Paternalism: Towards conceptual refinement and operationalization. In K. S. Yang, K. K. Hwang, & U. Kim (Eds.), Scientific advances in indigenous psychologies: Empirical, philosophical, and cultural contributions (pp. 445–466). London: Cambridge University Press.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C. C., Meindl, J. R., & Hunt, R. G. (1997). Testing the effects of vertical and horizontal collectivism: A study of reward allocation preferences in China. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 28, 44–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022197281003.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Eylon, D., & Au, K. Y. (1999). Exploring empowerment cross-cultural differences along the power distance dimension. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23, 373–385. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0147-1767(99)00002-4.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Gelfand, M. J., Erez, M., & Aycan, Z. (2007). Cross-cultural organizational behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 479–514. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085559.

    CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (1985). The interaction between national and organizational value systems [1]. Journal of Management Studies, 22, 347–357. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1985.tb00001.x.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G. (2009). The political mind: A cognitive Scientist’s guide to your brain and its politics. New York: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman, K. L., & Nollen, S. D. (1996). Culture and congruence: The fit between management practices and national culture. Journal of International Business Studies, 27, 753–779. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490152.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., & Bobo, L. (1994). Social dominance orientation and the political psychology of gender: A case of invariance? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 998–1011. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.6.998.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Singelis, T. M., Triandis, H. C., Bhawuk, D. P., & Gelfand, M. J. (1995). Horizontal and vertical dimensions of individualism and collectivism: A theoretical and measurement refinement. Cross-Cultural Research, 29, 240–275. https://doi.org/10.1177/106939719502900302.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Yasar University, Izmir, Turkey

    Sinan Alper

Authors

  1. Sinan Alper

    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sinan Alper .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Oakland University, Rochester, USA

    Virgil Zeigler-Hill

  2. Oakland University, Rochester, USA

    Todd K. Shackelford

Section Editor information

  1. Department of Psychology, Universität zu Lübeck, Lübeck, NC, Germany

    John F. Rauthmann

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Alper, S. (2019). Power Distance. In: Zeigler-Hill, V., Shackelford, T. (eds) Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_1888-1

What is power distance culture examples?

High power distance culture examples include: Special treatment for people in power. This could include special dining areas or parking places. Presence of a gatekeeper figure that serves to separate members of leadership from employees.

How does power distance affect culture?

Individuals in cultures demonstrating a high power distance are very deferential to figures of authority and generally accept an unequal distribution of power, while individuals in cultures demonstrating a low power distance readily question authority and expect to participate in decisions that affect them.

What is the power distance in culture and communication?

Power distance belief refers to the degree to which individuals, groups, or societies accept the unequal distribution of power, state, or wealth in society or organizations [7].

What is an example of cultural distance?

For example, if you thought of a country that you believe is very different than the U.S. because of the geographic distance between the two countries, that is an example of cultural distance.