Individualism vs collectivism Australia / Brazilia

The dimension of individualism versus collectivism is the most representative psycho-

sociological dimension, with transcultural resources, able to provide assessments on national
cultures of intercultural variations
The fundamental issue addressed by this dimension is the degree of interdependence a society
maintains among its members. It has to do with whether peoples self-image is defined in terms
of I or We. In Individualist societies people are supposed to look after themselves and their
direct family only. In Collectivist societies people belong to in groups that take care of them in
exchange for loyalty.

This describes the position that a person places in relation to others in his or her environment.
Individualism characterizes cultures that encourage the individual to be motivated primarily by
personal goals and preferences, being associated with equality and flexible roles, as well as with
private property.
Collectivism characterizes cultures that encourage the individual's tendency to see part of a
social group, representing the need for affiliation or relationship.
Collectivism promotes adherence to norms, respect for the authorities, the elderly, conformism,
being associated with stable, hierarchical roles, but also with the encouragement of collective
property.(we can say that this kind of countries encourage people to have a more traditional way
of life).
Australia, with a score of 90 on this dimension, is a highly Individualist culture. This translates
into a loosely-knit society in which the expectation is that people look after themselves and their
immediate families. In the business world, employees are expected to be self-reliant and display
initiative. Also, within the exchange-based world of work, hiring and promotion decisions are
based on merit or evidence of what one has done or can do.

An individualistic culture indicates that people are more direct verbal in communication and
people are logic to point out their argument in confrontation (Reisinger, 1997). Australian
people, for example, do not irritate to say the word no if they disagree with someone and make
negative request using verbal communication directly when the situation discomforts them.

With a score of 38/90 this country people from birth onwards are integrated into strong, cohesive
groups which continues protecting its members in exchange for loyalty. This is an important
aspect in the working environment too, where for instance an older and powerful member of a
family is expected to help a younger nephew to be hired for a job in his own company. In
business, it is important to build up trustworthy and long lasting relationships: a meeting usually
starts with general conversations in order to get to know each other before doing business. The
preferred communication style is context-rich, so people will often speak profusely and write in
an elaborate fashion.

In conclusion, in Australian cultures, it is acceptable to disagree with someone using logic argument and
do not have to resist with uncomfortable situation if you do not like it.While in Brazil,they will do the
exact opposite when its about a family or a work situation,because of their loyalty principles.