2015

National Cultural
Differences: Brazil,
Colombia and Mexico
V.S. The Netherlands
MANAGING CULTURAL DIVERSITY
JULIA TADDEI, HUSSEIN RAMIREZ, ANTOINE JIHA, ANDRES SANCHEZ

C O N T E N T S
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................... 2
CULTURAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN BRAZIL, COLOMBIA AND MEXICO, AND THE NETHERLANDS .......... 3
HOFSTEDE DIMENSIONS ........................................................................................................................ 3
1. Power Distance .............................................................................................................................. 4
2. Individualism .................................................................................................................................. 5
3. Uncertainty Avoiding ..................................................................................................................... 7
TROMPENAARS DIMENSIONS ............................................................................................................... 8
4. Particularism versus Universalism ................................................................................................. 9
5. Specific versus Diffuse ................................................................................................................. 11
6. Neutral versus Affective .............................................................................................................. 12
7. Ascribed versus Achieved ............................................................................................................ 13
8. Sequential versus Synchronic ...................................................................................................... 14
RECOMMENDATIONS: HOW LATINAMERICAN NATIONALS COULD WORK MORE EFFECTIVELY WITH
DUTCH nationals ...................................................................................................................................... 16
TEAM REFLECTION ................................................................................................................................... 17
Bibliography ............................................................................................................................................. 19
ANNEX 1: QUESTIONNARIE ..................................................................................................................... 20
ANNEX 2: raw data .................................................................................................................................. 24










1

I N T R O D U C T I O N

Defining culture is a very difficult task. One may even say that culture is impossible to define exactly.
Many agree that it is as layered as an onion and cannot be restricted to one simple concept or idea and
is made up of multiple beliefs, values, behaviors and taboos. The sum of all these notions combines and
creates a recognizable pattern of behavior in a certain environment most notably a country or a nation.
Culture has made its way into our everyday life, from the way we greet each other to the way we
conduct business, In many countries women and men are not supposed to shake hands or say hello,
while other countries kissing on the cheeks is demanded.
National or local culture made its way into every social phenomena and most notably economy. The
most obvious examples include doing business in Japan, which is different from business in
Afghanistan. Likewise, conducting deals in Saudi Arabia differs monumentally from the way they do it
in the USA, where drinking alcohol to conclude said deal is very common.
So if a company is considering establishing itself in a new foreign country it is imperative to take into
consideration cultural diversity and customs in order to ensure operational success.
How culturally different can a country be compared to another one and if you were to compare the
Netherlands to your own country, what would be the result? These are the set of objectives laid out
by our Professor Dr. Stephanie Jones. So we set off and prepared a set of questions that could measure
and compare the general Dutch culture with our own in the workplace, using a combination of the
Trompenaars and Hofstede cultural dimensions as basis of study.
Trompenaarss model of national culture differences is a structure with 7 dimensions that covers the
way people deal with each other in the workplace. We used 5 aspects of those: Universalism vs
Particularism, Neutral vs Emotional, Specific vs Diffuse, Achievement vs Ascription and Sequential vs
Synchronic. We also relied on 3 out of the 5 Hofstede cultural dimension theories. Those 3 dimensions
were Power Distance Index, Individualism vs collectivism and Uncertainty Avoidance.
With these criteria we wrote up a questionnaire made up of 16 realistic questions aimed at simulating
situations employees had encountered or will likely encounter and see how they would behave. The
rating system ranged from 1 to 4 to avoid middle neutral answers and pointed at how likely the
candidate would behave in one way or the other. The national countries studied were Mexico,
Columbia and Brazil each corresponding to one team member, the sample agreed upon was 10 for
each country including the Netherlands.

C U L T U R A L D I F F E R E N C E S B E T W E E N B R A Z I L ,
C O L O M B I A A N D M E X I C O , A N D T H E
N E T H E R L A N D S

In this chapter, we will explore each of the dimensions selected for this assignment by introducing the
relevant concept, presenting our respective findings concerning Brazil, Mexico, Colombia and The
Netherlands and our specific comments on the matter.

HOFSTEDE DIMENSIONS

OUR RESULTS
0%
Low Power Distance
Low Individualism
Low Uncertainty Avoiding

100%
High Power Distance
High Individualism
High Uncertainty Avoiding

Colombia
48%
40%
70%

Brazil
40%
47%
82%

Mexico
65%
43%
69%

Netherlands
15%
67%
57%


HOFSTEDE RESULTS (http://geert-hofstede.com/)
0%
Low Power Distance
Low Individualism
Low Uncertainty Avoiding

100%
High Power Distance
High Individualism
High Uncertainty Avoiding

Colombia
67%
13%
80%

Brazil
69%
38%
76%

Mexico
81%
30%
82%

Netherlands
38%
80%
53%

1. Power Distance

Power distance deals with the acceptance by the members of a society that inequalities occur and that
power distribution is not uniform. Hofstede presents a low power distance society as the one that does
not accept the inequalities and demands for a more homogenous situation, whereas a high power
distance society is the one where individuals accept their place and submit to different hierarchy levels.

The questions we used in order to measure power distance in the nations we studied were the
following:
1. You are at the building you work at and you have been waiting for the elevator for
some time. It finally comes and it is almost full, there is enough room for only one more
person. Your boss arrives. How likely are you to give him/her your place in the elevator?

2. You finally find a parking spot in a very full parking lot at a shopping mall. Your boss
arrives in his/her car. How likely are to you to give him/her you parking spot?

Our findings and those of Hofstedes research, which can be schematically represented as per the
graphs below, show consistence. In other words, our interviews provided us with results that are
similar to Hofstedes.

4


0%
100%
Low Power Distance
High Power Distance
OUR RESULTS
HOFSTEDE RESULTS (http://geert-hofstede.com/)

Colombia
48%
67%

Brazil
40%
69%

Mexico

Netherlands

65%
81%

15%
38%

From the images above, one may observe that power distance in the 3 countries places itself in the
middle of the scale, showing that the power distance is a topic highly considered in the Latin American
countries considered for this review. In general, the study follows the same patterns as the former
Hofstede research where Mexicos results are higher while Colombia and Brazil have similar scores.
According with the sample taken in Colombia (5 men and 5 women) we can infer that women tend to
present a lower power distance score when the boss is a man, and it changes towards a higher power
distance level when the boss has a different gender.
In comparison to the Netherlands, the Latin American nations studied herein show that power distance
is nowadays a barrier that has not yet been crossed because of the inequalities perceived in such
societies.
The tendency in the results shows that, in the Netherlands, power distance is a topic of minor
importance; this is mainly due to the overall equality of the Dutch society.

2. Individualism

Hofstedes individualism dimension deals with the preference individuals have within a society to act
by themselves instead of searching for group approval (collectivism). A high individualist society tends
to be more concerned about themselves without reflecting on the impact the actions will have upon
the people around them.
In order to measure individualism in the nations we studied we set up the following questions
3. You are approaching a deadline and there is still a lot to be done. A colleague from your
own team, who also has a deadline approaching and a lot to do, asks for your help. How likely
are you to help him/her?
4. You are approaching a deadline and there is a lot to be done. How likely are you to ask for
help from a work colleague who is also very busy and with a deadline approaching?
In the charts below, we analyze the results concerning the Individualism dimension.

Individualism

Individualism
0%
100%
Low Individualism
High Individualism
OUR RESULTS
HOFSTEDE RESULTS (http://geert-hofstede.com/)

Colombia
40%
13%

Brazil
47%
38%

Mexico
43%
30%

Netherlands
67%
80%

As one may conclude from the above, there are similarities between the 3 Latin American countries,
being Brazil the country with the highest score in the region as in Hofstede past results.
In general one may observe that the tendency of the region has followed a similar pattern across time.
As a matter of fact, the local governments of the Latin American countries studied by us have fostered
a collectivistic culture of support and help among citizens.
According with the comments given by the interviewees in our sample, one could say that people are
more willing to help other co-workers rather than ask for help. In other words, people will be more
6

willing to cooperate and support the group, bearing in mind that power distance also plays an
important role in the willingness to support co-workers.
In comparison with the Latin American countries under review, the Netherlands show a higher
individualism, because most developed countries are considered to have more individualistic and
homogenous societies, this can be attributed to the distribution of welfare, quality of education and
higher GDP, where these variables play an important role in the collectivism of societies, as can be seen
in the results among the region.

3. Uncertainty Avoiding

Hofstedes uncertainty avoidance dimension relates to how comfortable people are with uncertainty,
with not knowing how the future will be like.
People with high uncertainty avoidance scores usually try to make the future as predictable as possible
so as to avoid the anxiousness they associate with the unknown. Such mind-set has avoiding failure and
maximising the predictability of the future as goals.
Those who score low on uncertainty avoidance, on the other hand, are more inclined to tolerate
ambiguous situations and are comfortable with less and more flexible rules and regulations.
Predictability is not a value cherished by low uncertainty avoidance people.
The questions we used in order to measure uncertainty avoidance in the nations we studied were the
following:
5. How likely are you to choose a fixed and stable pay over a lower fixed pay with a
commission earning potential?
6. The company you have been working for is underperforming and there are rumours that
cuts could happen. In that scenario, how likely would you be to accept a proposal to work for a
company in a better financial condition?
Our findings and those of Hofstedes research, which can be schematically represented as per the
graphs below, show consistence. In other words, our interviews provided us with results that are
similar to Hofstedes.

Uncertainty Avoiding

Uncertainty Avoiding
0%
100%
Low Uncertainty Avoiding
High Uncertainty Avoiding
OUR RESULTS
HOFSTEDE RESULTS (http://geert-hofstede.com/)

Colombia
70%
80%

Brazil
82%
76%

Mexico
69%
82%

Netherlands
57%
53%

As one can conclude from examining the images above, the three Latin American countries we studied
- Colombia, Brazil and Mexico - showed high uncertainty avoidance levels as a national trait.
Gabriel, a 29-year-old lawyer from Bogota, told us I dont like surprises, I am very conservative, and
I prefer the safe road, putting in plain words the high uncertainty avoidance level the scores show.
Our interviews with Dutch people, on the other hand, provide us with lower levels of uncertainty
avoidance. This means that our Dutch interviewees, and Hofstedes as well, are confortable with an
unpredictable scenario, with the lack of knowledge about the future.
One of the reasons for so much uncertainty avoidance in Brazil was highlighted by one of our Brazilian
interviewees. According to Bruno, a 35-year-old engineer from Rio de Janeiro, The uncertainty of the
Brazilian economy sort of requires that (uncertainty avoiding behaviour) from you.

TROMPENAARS DIMENSIONS


-100%
Particularism
Specific
Neutral
Ascribed
Sequential

100%
Universalism
Diffuse
Affective
Achieved
Synchronic

Colombia
27%
(13%)
17%
(10%)
3%

Brazil
(36%)
39%
11%
14%
6%

Mexico

Netherlands

(4%)
37%
7%
7%
4%

23%
(13%)
(57%)
70%
10%

4. Particularism versus Universalism

Trompenaars idea of opposing universalism to particularism derives from the generally mutually
excluding values of, on one side, (a) having all rules applied equally to everyone, and, on the other, (b)
applying exceptions based on relationships.
In other words, wherever universalism prevails the same set of rules applies equally to all individuals,
regardless of peoples individual situations. A single solution or path is applied to all cases as this is
seen as the best way to achieve fairness. Instead of adapting the rules to particular cases, groups in
which universalism prevails would pursue the adherence of those that do not conform to their
universal rules.
In contrast, particularism characterizes groups where personal circumstances may prevent the general
rules from being applied. Such groups understand that exceptions to the general rule are acceptable as
a consequence of an individuals set of relationships and of the specific circumstances.
The questions we used in order to measure universalism vs. particularism were the following:
7. You notice that office supplies are missing and you decide you are going to report that.
How likely are you to keep that decision if you find out that the person taking the supplies is a
friend of yours?
8. How likely would the relationship with your colleagues affect your decision-making?
9

Our findings from our interviews can me visually described as follows:

-100%
Particularism

100%
Universalism

Colombia
27%

Brazil
(36%)

Mexico
(4%)

Netherlands
23%

As one gathers from the above, we found considerable particularism in Brazil. The comments we were
given to the question in which we deal with reporting a colleague in the work environment are very
illustrative of the Brazilian way of thinking: an exception to a friend is acceptable.
Here is a selection of the comments justifying the non-reporting of a friend who is apparently
misbehaving:
I would not report at all. I would try to identify who was doing it and would approach that
person so as to convince him/her to change his/her attitude. (Marcela, 26, female, marketing
and strategy analyst, So Paulo)
I would talk to my friend first. It has already happened to me and I didnt report. Its not
worth possibly damaging someones reputation at work. (Flavia, 37, female, flight attendant,
Curitiba)
I would not report. Office supplies are not that important. (Augusto, 54, male,
physician/university lecturer, So Paulo)
Our interviews show that Mexico is also a nation in which particularism prevails but in a mild way when
compared to our results from Brazil.
Colombia, differently from the other Latin American countries analyzed herein, presents high
universalism. Even higher than the Dutch universalism rates.
One could expect from Colombia the high particularism scores stereotypical of countries with Latin
background and our surprising findings may be justified by the fact that the Colombian society has
made in recent years a clear and open decision on the sense of righteousness. The intention is to leave
behind the very particularist times of drug trafficking and other harmful breaches of the law.
Exceptions are no longer acceptable.

10

The Colombian will to leave the dark days behind by following their solid set of rules is so strong that
they managed to surpass the already very universalist Dutch tradition. The result, both in the
Colombian and in the Dutch case, is universalism, but it is worth highlighting that Dutch behave in such
way out of old habits, whereas Colombians have a conscious motivation for doing so.

5. Specific versus Diffuse

Someone with a diffuse personality is more likely to engage in small talk and conversations with their
co-workers and would like to establish meaningful relationships with them, engage in activities beyond
the hours of the office (e.g. sports activities) and even engage in family visits.
Whereas someone with a specific personality maintains a more professional relationship limited to
office hours, does not engage in activities nor is interested in hanging out with colleagues unless
necessary for the company.
In order to get an idea on how people generally behave in the workplace we set up the following 2
questions
9. How likely are you to engage in small talk with your co-workers in the middle of a busy
working day?
10. How likely are you to establish personal relationships with your co-workers as opposed to
keeping the relationships with them strictly professional?
The data gathered on these questions is the following

-100%
Specific

100%
Diffuse

Colombia
(13%)

Brazil
39%

Mexico
37%

Netherlands
(13%)

Mexico and Brazil scored high on diffuse they enjoyed engaging in sports team, become friends and
spend more than the required time together even reaching a point of fixing play dates for their kids.
Yet Colombia sided with the Netherlands and got a more specific attitude in the workplace. Upon
enquiry Colombians seemed to already have a group of friends for going out with (Sebastian, 28,
lawyer, Bogota) they prefer to keep the workplace distinct from their activities seeing as how they
11

already spend half of the week with them and would rather spend time with family and friends.
Colombians and Dutch people enjoyed the distinction between the workplace and the social
environment seeing as how the clarity of the relationship brought them comfort and clarity on
behavior and norms.

6. Neutral versus Affective

In this section we look for the likelihood of expressing emotions in the workplace, how comfortable is
the individual in expressing his/her emotions in the workplace. An affective person will find has no
problem showing content or discontent, comfort or discomfort during office hours, and a neutral
person will preserve a poker face regarding matters that an affective person would otherwise
express strong emotions about.
We prepared 2 questions to help us understand how the individual would behave and how he would
expect others to behave around him, as follows:
11. You are about to fire someone. How likely would you expect them to show an emotional
reaction?
12. You are in a bad mood and that does not make a difference to your work performance.
How likely would you show it?
With these questions we gathered the following data

-100%
Neutral

100%
Affective

Colombia
17%

Brazil
11%

Mexico
7%

Netherlands
(57%)

The three Latin American countries seemed to exhibit a very affective behaviour in the workplace
quoting
We are not afraid to show emotions because that is what make us humans we are allowed
to feel (Maria Paula, 28, lawyer, Bogota)

12

I am so transparent its sometimes a problem. I call that sincericidio (a combination of

sincerity and suicide) (Marcela, 26, female, marketing and strategy analyst, So Paulo)
I am afraid to show content or discontent to my boss but to my fellow colleagues I could not
feel at ease if we are honest with our emotions (Denise, 30, operations manager, Los Mochis)
Contrary to the Dutch that have no problem in maintaining a plain face throughout their workday and
expect the same from their colleagues

7. Ascribed versus Achieved

According to Trompenaars, while some societies accord status to people on the basis of their
achievements, others ascribe it to them by virtue of age, class, gender, education, and so on.1 This
means that some cultures accord status for what people does, while others instead do it for what
people are.
The questions we used in order to measure ascribed vs achieved in the nations we studied were the
following:
13. You are about to hire someone for a job position and there are two equally qualified
candidates. The father of one of them is an influential person. How likely would you opt for the
one with an influential father?
14. How comfortable would you be working for a highly qualified boss who is 20 years
younger than you?

And the date we gathered can be represented as follows:

-100%
Ascribed

100%
Achieved

Colombia
(10%)

Brazil
14%

Mexico
7%

Netherlands
70%

Although Mexicans and Brazilians are more on the side of achieved status and Colombians are more on
the side of ascribed status, the low scores of the three countries show that there is not a consensus on

1
Trompenaars, Fons & Hampden-Turner, Charles (1998): Riding the waves of culture: Understanding
cultural diversity in business. 2 ed., Nicholas Brealey Publishing Limited, London.
13

how to accord peoples status. As will be shown in the following examples, both achieved and ascribed
status are important for reaching a high status in the Latin American society.
In the case of Brazil, for example, when hiring someone, the most important thing is finding a suitable
connection, someone you are conformable working with. If the candidates were equal, I would hire the
one that could bring something extra to the company, says Marcela, a 26-year-old marketing and
strategy analyst of So Paulo. In the same line of thought, in Mexico having a bachelor from certain
universities can make a difference in being called to a recruitment process or not, says Diego, a 32-
year-old logistics specialist from Cabo San Lucas. But the feeling is that after that, people also have to
show what they are made of, and prove they are capable of earning other peoples respect, Says
Diego.
According to the results and the comments, people from Latin America evaluate both peoples
achievements and ascribed status. For earning a good status in the Latin American society, people
should show who they are and also what are they capable of doing. For example, it is common to the
three countries of the sample that having some title, or coming from certain family, would open certain
doors that are not reachable by everybody, e.g., some job opportunities. However, once the
opportunity is open, people need to show that they have enough merits for being there. Both things
tend to be important.
On the other hand, Dutch present a clear tendency on according status based on peoples
achievements. Indistinctly of gender, social connections or profession, among other characteristics.
Earning a status in the Netherlands depends almost entirely on the capacity of showing to others ones
merits. In this sense, hard-working could be enough for reaching some status in society, while in the
analyzed Latin American countries would be harder (or almost impossible).

8. Sequential versus Synchronic

Sequential versus synchronic dimension, relates to the conception of time and the order of events.
While in some cultures everything should have its time and its place, in others it is common to run
different activities in parallel, having a clear goal to follow, but not a particular order to accomplish.
The questions we used in order to measure sequential vs. synchronic were the following:
15. How comfortable would you be if, during a meeting, items are addressed randomly and
not as listed in the agenda?
16. If you were doing a task, how likely would you be to engage in another task
simultaneously?
Our results can be visually described as follows:

14


-100%
Sequential

100%

Colombia

Synchronic

3%

Brazil

Mexico

6%

4%

Netherlands
10%

All of the countries of the sample, including The Netherlands, have a relatively low inclination to be
synchronic. However, from the graph we can conclude that people from all the four countries can be
either sequential or synchronic.
When we asked Colombians whether they felt comfortable with addressing topics of an agenda in a
different order that the one listed, the results were diverse. I almost never have an agenda for my
meetings, answered Jorge, a 42-year-old psychologist from Medellin. On the other hand, Maria Paula,
a 28-year-old lawyer, was very emphatic on how annoyed she was with people that change the order
of the agendas or the bosses that ask her to engage in more than one activity without a clear set of
priorities or deadlines.
In Brazil, Marcela, a 26-year-old marketing and strategy analyst, answered that she prefers a linear
structure for meetings, but that in all honesty, I (she) was never in a meeting where that was possible.
Jose, a 54-year-old engineer from Rio de Janeiro, was also honest about his feeling with changes in the
order of the agenda: I would be pissed off. The scenario is similar in Mexico, where people complain
on how difficult it is to follow the order stablished in the agenda.
In general, people from the three listed Latin American countries agree on how much they disliked a
change in the order of the agenda, but most people answered they did not care about getting engaged
in two simultaneous tasks. The same results were obtained from the Dutch people, with fewer people
willing to get involved into simultaneous tasks.
How to understand the results, when both questions seem to point to different directions and when
the obtained results where almost opposite? The answer might be that for some activities people
prefer to follow a linear structure, like in the case of agendas, while for other activities they can
manage to stablish a new order to the chaos. In other words, people are likely to engage in different
tasks simultaneously, while also being able to give a certain order to the chaos so as to be able to finish
successfully all the tasks.

15

R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S : H O W L A T I N A M E R I C A N
N A T I O N A L S C O U L D W O R K M O R E E F F E C T I V E L Y
W I T H D U T C H N A T I O N A L S

After conducting the interviews, gathering the data and transforming it into understandable
information, we are able to suggest certain approaches on how a manager in charge of a team made
up of these 4 nationalities should behave to properly conduct them.
While translating the data into information connections and patterns seemed to emerge. These
patterns linked different dimensions to each other and positively correlated.
For instance, in Mexico, power distance correlated with being affective, employees would not show
emotions to their bosses or managers fearing consequences. Also in Mexico, power distance was
influenced by age. For this dimension it is recommended to assign a manager of equal age or more and
for him to let the team know that although he/she is manager they should feel comfortable in
confining in him/her.
These 4 nationalities would form a really synergetic team mostly because they will be affective in the
way they deal with each other, being emotionally supportive, and they would get the Dutch member
out of his shell and get the best out of him/her. For this aspect the manager should be happy but
should ensure that the quality of work is not get affected by bad mood display.
Synergy is of high importance in order for this team to get work done, and so as to achieve that the
manager should address matters in a clear concise and planned manner. The Latin American members
do not enjoy uncertainty so they would want to know what the plan is and what is expected. Although
the Dutch prefer the liberty, we believe Dutch could live with set agendas and goals, as required by the
Latin Americans.
An important aspect of this team is ease of communication and its readiness to address issues from
different perspectives. They are mostly from the same region of the world and they share a kind of
diffuse attitude about the workplace and would not mind engaging in activities sponsored by the
company. Actually, Brazilians and Mexican would enjoy spending time together and play sports but
Colombians and Dutch would keep to themselves. But for a team to really succeed they need to form a
bond that is more than just work related and this could be achieved with the right motivation from the
manager.
So here we have a team made of 4 completely different nationalities put together and set to achieve a
goal, they are not so different in the way they like to do business. But it is always essential to preserve
the synergy because the effectiveness of the team relies on the contribution each member gives also
because of the difference in behavior it might cause a problem for the Dutch team mate because

16

he/she is not used to being in a relaxed environment where working is not only about the task but also
about the experience and the exposure you get from it.
Final recommendation would be to allow them to be themselves and encourage communication
because in the end issues may take place but with proper communication of intent is crucial to
preserve continuity and positive attitude.

T E A M R E F L E C T I O N

We enjoyed the whole assignment, from designing the questionnaire to interpreting the data and
discovering that our findings were not much different from Hofstedes.
During the teams performance stage we interacted and worked very well, whether reviewing
Trompenaarss findings on the dilemmas analysis or matching the beliefs that each of us had regarding
their own countries.
Individually, some of the findings did not match the members expectations in respect to their own
countries and we could attribute that to the expertise and position of the individuals of the sample. It is
very interesting to see how all the themes reviewed during the sessions can be put together to discover
and understand the differences in cultures.
Being conscious that the following result is out of the scope of the study, we also found how there
might be differences in the culture that transcend the national features. For example, in the case of
individualism, apparently there exists a difference between genders. Latin American males are
apparently more individualistic than females, and Dutch females are apparently more individualistic
than Dutch males. Therefore, is important before making any strong conclusion about any countrys
culture, that besides national culture, there are other variables such as gender, profession, age, among
others, that could shape the culture.
Sample Size

Brazil
Female
Male
Colombia
Female
Male
Mexico
Female
Male
Netherlands
Female
Male

Low Individualism (0%) /

High Individualism (100%)

5
7

33%
57%

5
5

33%
47%

1
8

17%
46%

7
3

79%
39%

17

Also, in our interviews we included a question about how representative do people feel about their
national profile. The intention of this question was to identify if there were perceived differences
between the people being interviewed and their perception of national profile. An amazing 49% of the
total sample size answered they did not feel quite representative of their national profile. In most of
the cases, the reason given for not feeling representative was related to globalization (having worked
with multiple cultures, travelled around the world, having worked in different countries, and so on).

Brazil
Not Representative
Representative
Colombia
Not Representative
Representative
Mexico
Not Representative
Representative
Netherlands
Not Representative
Representative

Sample Size

5
7

7
3

5
4

3
7

%
42%
58%
70%
30%
56%
44%
30%
70%

Consequently, there is a strong feeling in our group that for future studies answers would differ if they
are asked in first person or about their perception of their national profile.

18

B I B L I O G R A P H Y

Silvio De Bono, Stephanie Jones, Beatrice Van der Heijden: Managing Cultural Diversity.
Meyer&Meyer 2008.

Trompenaars, Fons & Hampden-Turner, Charles (1998): Riding the waves of culture:
Understanding cultural diversity in business. 2 ed., Nicholas Brealey Publishing Limited,
London.

Web references:

Hofstede, Geert. The Hofstede Centre. Retrieved from http://geert-hofstede.com/

The Seven Dimensions of Culture: Understanding and managing cultural differences. Retrieved
from https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/seven-dimensions.htm

19

A N N E X 1 : Q U E S T I O N N A R I E

1. You are at the building you work at and you have been waiting for the elevator
for some time. It finally comes and it is almost full, there is enough room for
only one m ore person. Your boss arrives. How likely are you to give him /her
your place in the elevator?

Very Likely

Unlikely

- Would it make a difference if the boss had been your boss for two years or more?
- Would it make a difference if the boss were a woman (in case of a male responder)? Or a man (in
case of a female responder)?
2. You finally find a parking spot in a very full parking lot at a shopping mall. Your
boss arrives in his car. How likely are to you to give him /her you parking spot?

Very Likely

Unlikely

Would it make a difference if this were at the offices parking lot?

3. You are approaching a deadline and there is still a lot to be done. A colleague
from your own team, who also has a deadline approaching and a lot to do, asks
for your help. How likely are you to help him/her?

Very Likely

Unlikely

Would it make a difference if the colleague asking for help were a subordinate? What if you were
both the same level and joined the company together?
4. You are approaching a deadline and there is a lot to be done. How likely are
you to ask for help from a work colleague who is also very busy and with a
deadline approaching?

Very Likely

Unlikely
20

5. How likely are you to choose a fixed and stable pay over a lower fixed pay with
a commission earning potential?

Very Likely

Unlikely

6. The company you have been working for is underperform ing and there are
rum ours that cuts could happen. In that scenario, how likely would you be to
accept a proposal to work for a company in a better financial condition?

Very Likely

Unlikely

Would you consider looking for a new job in that scenario?

7. You notice that office supplies are m issing and you decide you are going to
report that. How likely are you to keep that decision if you find out that the
person taking the supplies is a friend of yours?

Very Likely

Unlikely

8. How likely would the relationship with your colleagues affect your decision-
making?

Very Likely

Unlikely

9. How likely are you to engage in small talk with your co-workers in the middle
of a busy working day?

Very Likely

Unlikely

10. How likely are you to establish personal relationships with your co-workers as
opposed to keeping the relationships with them strictly professional?

21

Very Likely

Unlikely

11. You are about to fire som eone. How likely would you expect them to show an
emotional reaction?

Very Likely

Unlikely

12. You are in a bad m ood and that does not make a difference to your work
perform ance. How likely would you show it?

Very Likely

Unlikely

13. You are about to hire som eone for a job position and there are two equally
qualified candidates. The father of one of them is an influential person. How
likely would you opt for the one with an influential father?

Very Likely

Unlikely

14. How confortable would you be working for a highly qualified boss who is 20
years younger than you?

Very Likely

Unlikely

15. How confortable would you be if, during a meeting, items are addressed
random ly and not as listed in the agenda?

Very Likely

Unlikely

16. If you were doing a task, how likely would you be to engage in another task
simultaneously?

22

Very Likely

Unlikely

General inform ation

How representative of your national profile do you feel?
Very Representative
1

Not representative

First Name:
Age:
Gender:
City of residence:
Field of experience:
Years of study:

23

A N N E X 2 : R A W D A T A

Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6
Q7
Q8
Q9
Q10
Q11
Q12
Q13
Q14
Q15
Q16

Colombia
A1
A2
High Power Distance
Low Power Distance
4
High Power Distance
Low Power Distance
4
High Individualism
Low Individualism
1
High Individualism
Low Individualism
3
High Uncertainty Avoiding Low Uncertainty Avoiding
3
High Uncertainty Avoiding Low Uncertainty Avoiding
1
Universalism
Particularism
4
Universalism
Particularism
2
Diffuse
Specific
1
Diffuse
Specific
3
Affective
Neutral
2
Affective
Neutral
3
Achieved
Ascribed
2
Achieved
Ascribed
4
Synchronic
Sequential
4
Synchronic
Sequential
3

FQ Very representative

Not Representative

First Name:
Age:
Gender:
City of residence:
Years of study:
Field of e xperience:

3
4
1
3
2
4
1
4
3
2
1
1
2
4
1
1

A3
1
2
3
4
4
1
1
2
4
4
2
3
1
2
4
1

A4
2
4
1
3
1
1
2
3
2
4
1
4
2
2
2
2

A5
1
1
3
2
1
1
1
2
3
2
1
2
3
3
2
1

A6
2
3
2
3
2
1
3
2
2
2
3
3
3
2
2
2

A7
1
2
2
1
1
3
1
3
3
2
1
2
2
3
3
3

A8
4
4
1
2
2
3
3
2
3
3
3
4
4
2
3
2

A9
2
3
2
3
1
2
1
3
4
2
1
3
4
2
4
3

A10
1
3
1
3
1
3
1
3
3
2
1
4
1
3
4
2

Average
2.1
3.0
1.7
2.7
1.8
2.0
1.8
2.6
2.8
2.6
1.6
2.9
2.4
2.7
2.9
2.0

2.7

Mara Paula Sebastin Felipe

Gabriel Luisa Fernanda Paola
Carmen
Paola Jorge
David
28
28
28
29
25
23
39
23
42
21
Female
Male
Male
Male Female
Female Female
Female Male
Male
Bogota
Bogota
Bogota Bogota Bogota
Bogota Medelln
Bogota Medelln
Medellin
20
18
18
19
18
18
17
18
21
16
Lawyer
Lawyer
Architect Lawyer Economist
Business Systems Engineer Lawyer Pshychologist Commercial Pilot

Brazil
A1
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6
Q7
Q8
Q9
Q10
Q11
Q12
Q13
Q14
Q15
Q16

High Power Distance

High Power Distance
High Individualism
High Individualism
High Uncertainty Avoiding
High Uncertainty Avoiding
Universalism
Universalism
Diffuse
Diffuse
Affective
Affective
Achieved
Achieved
Synchronic
Synchronic

FQ Very representative
First Name:
Age:
Gender:
City of residence:
Years of study:
Field of e xperience:

Low Power Distance

Low Power Distance
Low Individualism
Low Individualism
Low Uncertainty Avoiding
Low Uncertainty Avoiding
Particularism
Particularism
Specific
Specific
Neutral
Neutral
Ascribed
Ascribed
Sequential
Sequential

A2
1
4
2
1
1
1
4
1
4
1
2
1
1
4
4
1

Not Representative

4
Marcela

A3
3
4
2
3
2
3
4
2
3
2
4
4
4
2
2
1
4

Flavia

A4

A5

A6

A7

A8

A9

A10

A11

A12

Average

4
4
2
4
1
1
4
2
1
1
1
1
2
3
3
1

1
4
2
2
1
1
1
3
4
1
1
2
2
1
4
1

4
4
1
4
4
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
4
1
4
1

1
4
2
4
2
1
2
3
4
1
1
1
1
3
2
2

1
4
1
3
1
1
4
2
4
2
4
3
2
1
4
3

1
4
1
1
2
2
4
2
1
2
2
3
3
1
1
2

1
4
2
2
1
1
4
1
4
1
4
1
2
3
3
1

3
4
4
4
1
1
4
4
2
1
1
4
1
1
4
1

1
1
2
2
4
1
3
2
1
1
2
4
2
2
4
4

1
4
3
4
2
1
4
3
1
2
2
4
4
1
3
2

1.8
3.8
2.0
2.8
1.8
1.3
3.3
2.2
2.5
1.3
2.3
2.4
2.3
1.9
3.2
1.7

2.5

Ana

Fernanda Jos
Rogerio
Carlos
Carla
Bruno
Augusto
Rogerio
Ulisses
26
37
30
37
54
20
20
23
35
54
51
33
female
female
female
Female
Male
Male
Male
Female
Male
Male
Male
Male
So P aulo Curitiba
Rio de JaneiroRio de JaneiroRio de JaneiroMacei
Macei
Macei
Rio de JaneiroSo P aulo Arapiraca So P aulo
18
17
19
23
20
15
14
16
18
28
20
22
marketing and
fight
strategy
attendant
analyst
medical doctor
Public Lawyer
engineer
trainee in physiotherapy
trainee in engineering
trainee in physiotherapy
Engineer
physician/university
medical dlecturer
octor
Physiotherapist

24

Mexico
A1
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6
Q7
Q8
Q9
Q10
Q11
Q12
Q13
Q14
Q15
Q16

High Power Distance

High Power Distance
High Individualism
High Individualism
High Uncertainty Avoiding
High Uncertainty Avoiding
Universalism
Universalism
Diffuse
Diffuse
Affective
Affective
Achieved
Achieved
Synchronic
Synchronic

FQ Very representative

A2

A3

A4

A5

A6

A7

A8

A9

Average

Low Power Distance

Low Power Distance
Low Individualism
Low Individualism
Low Uncertainty Avoiding
Low Uncertainty Avoiding
Particularism
Particularism
Specific
Specific
Neutral
Neutral
Ascribed
Ascribed
Sequential
Sequential

1
1
3
4
4
1
4
2
1
4
1
3
1
1
2
3

1
3
2
4
2
2
3
2
2
2
1
3
3
2
3
2

2
3
1
2
1
2
1
3
1
3
3
4
3
2
4
2

1
1
2
3
3
2
3
2
3
2
1
3
2
2
2
3

4
4
2
2
2
1
1
4
2
3
4
2
2
3
3
3

1
3
2
4
3
1
4
2
1
2
1
1
1
3
2
3

1
1
1
1
1
3
4
4
2
1
2
4
3
1
3
2

3
4
1
4
2
1
4
3
1
1
1
4
1
3
4
1

1
2
1
2
1
3
1
2
2
2
1
4
4
1
1
1

1.7
2.4
1.7
2.9
2.1
1.8
2.8
2.7
1.7
2.2
1.7
3.1
2.2
2.0
2.7
2.2

Not Representative

2.2

First Name:
Age:
Gender:
City of residence:
Years of study:
Field of e xperience:

Daniel
Rodolfo
Ricardo
Arturo
Enrique
Hctor
Jacob
Denisse
32
29
26
26
30
33
30
38
30
Male
Male
Male
Male
Male
Male
Male
Male
Female
Cabo San Lucas,
Los BC.C.S.
abosMexico
Cabo San Lucas
Tijuana, B.C., Mexico
Mexico City Cabo San Lucas
Los Mochis Los Mochis Los Mochis
6
4
8
9
20
4.5
15
4
Organisational
Sales
P sychology,
Accounting
Human Resources
Tax, Work
& Taransportation
nd
Finance,
Corporate
Management
M
L
Real
aw
anagement
StateConsulting
Communication
GovermentAdministration
Diego

Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6
Q7
Q8
Q9
Q10
Q11
Q12
Q13
Q14
Q15
Q16

High Power Distance

High Power Distance
High Individualism
High Individualism
High Uncertainty Avoiding
High Uncertainty Avoiding
Universalism
Universalism
Diffuse
Diffuse
Affective
Affective
Achieved
Achieved
Synchronic
Synchronic

FQ Very representative
First Name:
Age:
Gender:
City of residence:
Years of study:
Field of e xperience:

Low Power Distance

Low Power Distance
Low Individualism
Low Individualism
Low Uncertainty Avoiding
Low Uncertainty Avoiding
Particularism
Particularism
Specific
Specific
Neutral
Neutral
Ascribed
Ascribed
Sequential
Sequential

Netherlands
A1
A2
1
4
2
3
4
1
4
1
2
1
2
3
3
3
1
1

Not Representative

A3

A4

A5

A6

A7

A8

A9

A10

Average

4
4
3
3
3
1
1
3
4
3
4
4
4
1
4
1

4
4
4
4
4
1
1
3
4
2
3
3
4
2
3
1

3
4
4
4
4
2
1
2
4
3
4
3
4
2
3
2

4
4
3
4
3
2
1
2
3
2
4
4
4
1
4
2

4
4
3
3
3
1
1
3
4
2
3
4
4
2
4
3

4
4
4
3
4
2
1
2
4
2
4
4
4
1
3
3

4
4
1
1
4
1
1
4
2
2
3
4
4
1
1
1

2
3
3
3
1
2
3
2
3
3
3
4
4
2
2
4

2
4
3
2
2
1
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2

3.2
3.9
3.0
3.0
3.2
1.4
1.7
2.4
3.2
2.2
3.2
3.5
3.7
1.6
2.7
2.0

2.1

*Not revealed*Not revealed*Not revealed*Not revealed*Not revealed*Not revealed*Not revealed Hanz

Luc Fransen
30
21
23
23
22
22
23
55
28
30
Female
Female
Female
Female
Female
Female
Female
Male
Male
Male
Amsterdam Maastricht Maastricht Maastricht Maastricht Maastricht Maastricht Maastricht Maastricht Maastricht
5
18
19
19
19
19
19
5
5
International University
Business &s tudent
RUniversity
etail
student
University student
University student
University student
University student
Public affairs
Service i ndustry
Marieke

25