Cross-Cultural Cognitions and the Venture Creation Decision

A quarter century of Culture's Consequences: a review of empirical research incorporating Hofstede's cultural values framework

“…Nooteboom et al (1997) found that UA was negatively related to the probability of a potential loss by transaction partners, but unrelated to the size of loss among 97 firm-supplier alliances in the Netherlands. Mitchell et al (2000), using Hofstede's (1980a) country scores at the individual level and assessing business professionals' cognitive scripts, found that IND and PD were positively related to 'ability' scripts (i.e., given resources, the person is able to carry out a goal); IND was positively related to 'willingness' scripts (i.e., given resources, the person will want to carry out a goal); and the relationship between 'arrangements' scripts (i.e., access to required materials) and starting a new business was stronger for individualists than for collectivists in the US, Mexico, China, Japan, and Chile. Using country scores, entrepreneurs from seven countries (Australia, Finland, Greece, Indonesia, Mexico, Norway, and Sweden) viewed cooperative strategies with other firms as more acceptable when they were lower in IND and MAS, but higher in UA (Steensma et al, 2000a).…”

The Tiv Socio-Cultural Environment and Entrepreneurship Emergence

“…Power distance has been described as the extent to which people in a society accept differences in power and status between its members (Hofstede, 2001; Mitchell et al, 2000). Cultures with high power distance tend to be more hierarchical and centralized in their decision-making; whereas cultures with relatively low power distance tend to be more egalitarian and democratic.…”

“…Cultures with high power distance tend to be more hierarchical and centralized in their decision-making; whereas cultures with relatively low power distance tend to be more egalitarian and democratic. Low power distance has been associated with entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial cognition and activity (McGrath, MacMillan, & Scheinberg, 1992; Mitchell et al, 2000).…”

Social progress orientation and innovative entrepreneurship: an international analysis

“…Hofstede (1980Hofstede ( , 2005 6 and Hofstede et al (1997) devised a set of dimensions through the study of a multinational firm's cultural setting. Although with mixed results (Bruton et al 2010;Hayton et al 2002;Salimath and Cullen 2010;Spencer and Gomez 2004), cultural dimensions have been extensively applied to the study of entrepreneurial activity at regional and country levels (Baum et al 1993;Beugelsdijk 2007;Bosma 2009;Davidsson 1995;Davidsson and Wiklund 1997;Feldman 2014;Hofstede et al 2004;Mitchell et al 2000;Shane 1992Shane , 1993Vinogradov and Kolvereid 2007, among others). Extant research tends to depict the entrepreneur profile as individualistic, featuring a high power distance, masculinity and low uncertainty avoidance (Busenitz and Lau 1996;Hayton et al 2002;McGrath et al 1992aMcGrath et al , 1992b.…”