Gender Egalitarianism, What Can Be Learned From Differences Between Anglo American and Eastern European clusters? - A Case study of a Multinational –

(1)

Gender Egalitarianism, What Can Be Learned From

Differences Between Anglo American and Eastern

European clusters?

- A Case study of a Multinational –

By

Leonie van Liere

S1802658

University of Groningen

Faculty of Economics and Business

Master of Science International Business and Management

Landleven 5

9747 AD Groningen

050-363 9111

August 2010

Supervisors:

(2)

Acknowledgements

As students we were warned for this period of thesis writing; do not take it too lightly, it is a stressful period. You will encounter problems, with your writing, data gathering and most of all with yourself. Of course, all these difficulties in one way or another have crossed my path, however, all in all it has been a great experience and it has passed rather smoothly. Therefore, I would like to thank, first of all, my family and close friends for their everlasting support all the way through. Secondly, my supervisors Dr. Mrs. M.A.G. van Offenbeek and Dr. N. Lillie for their wise words and considerations and finally, Company x , the country head HR managers and top female leaders for their wonderful cooperation during the interviews, and a special thanks to mrs. X and mr. X, without whom this thesis would not have been possible.

I hope you will enjoy reading!

Leonie van Liere

(3)

Abstract

This thesis examines whether or not there are differences with regard to Gender Egalitarianism between Anglo American and Eastern European clusters. The concept of Gender Egalitarianism, GE, has been a topic much more debated in literature. However, it is clear that in recent years the topic has gained interest. Especially, since many Anglo American corporations are finding it difficult to employ females higher up in

management. In a study by Lidell (2005) it became apparent that in Eastern European countries, Gender Egalitarianism is much further developed than in Anglo American nations. This has triggered my study and has therefore, examined whether or not there are differences with regard to Gender Egalitarianism between Eastern European and Anglo American clusters, what these differences are, and what has caused these

differences. Answers to the research questions are found through a literature review and a case study of Company x. Where country head HR managers and top female leaders were consulted on the Anglo American and Eastern European differences.

It is proven in literature that having a diverse workforce is benefiting

organizations, and that the cultural background of a nation and or cluster is imperative for its development. The cultural background of Eastern Europe is heavily influenced by socialism and therefore, the Eastern European cluster has seen more turmoil in their economical and political development that the Anglo American cluster.

The socialist banner was equality for everyone, and the impact of socialism is observable in many of the institutional forces in Eastern Europe. Which together have led to a further developed Gender Egalitarianism in the Eastern European cluster than in the Anglo American cluster. Furthermore, the differences in development of the Anglo

American and Eastern European cluster have led to intra cluster differences. For the Anglo American cluster, this exception is the United Kingdom, where the rate of Gender Egalitarianism is more developed than in the other Anglo American nations. For the Eastern European cluster, the exception is Greece where they encountered most of the same difficulties in GE as the Anglo American cluster.

The biggest differences between Anglo American and Eastern European countries can be found in the mindset of both clusters, furthermore, there is no real vast cluster for the Anglo American or the Eastern European cluster with regard to Gender Egalitarianism. The education level of top female leaders shows discrepancies and besides this, in the Eastern European cluster there are more childcare possibilities in the form of a social net.

The results show a paradox: the mindset needs to be changed, but women do not want to feel specially privileged, they want to be equal. So, how to reach this? Company x should try to change the mindset, which will be difficult to do, because of the paradox. However, equality might be possible through establishing a female management quota. Another possibility is to learn from the United Kingdom and their higher developed Gender Egalitarianism by consulting HR managers and several males and females from different layers of the organization on the higher GE of the United Kingdom.

(4)

List of Figures

Figure 1: Conceptual model

Figure 2: Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck’s variations in value orientations Figure 3: Hofstede’s cultural dimensions

Figure 4: Schwartz’s value theory

Figure 5: Motivational types of Schwartz’s value theory Figure 6: World Value Survey dimensions

Figure 7: World Value Survey Map Figure 8: Schwartz’s values map Figure 9: Context chart

Figure 10: OECD chart of female professionals and technical workers Figure 11: Matrix checklist: is there a need to do something about GE Figure 12: Causal map

List of Tables

Table 1: Hofstede’s dimensions for the Anglo American nations Table 2: Hofstedes’s dimensions for the Eastern European nations Table 3: Working hours in Anglo American nations

Table 4: Working hours in Eastern European nations Table 5: Maternity leave overview

List of Abbreviations

GE Gender Egalitarianism VoC Varieties of Capitalism LME Liberal Market Economy CME Coordinated Market Economy CEE Central Eastern Europe

HRM Human Resource Management

UNDP United Nations Development Program

OECD Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development IDV Individuality

MAS Masculinity

UAI Uncertainty Avoidance LTO Long Term Orientation

(7)

1. Introduction

Gender Egalitarianism is a hot topic these days, and it is a topic with which many multinationals struggle. For example, in a recent publication of Royal Phillips Electronics NV in a Dutch newspaper, they announced; that they wanted more females in the top of the organization (Algemeen Dagblad, 2010). However, this has appeared to be an impossible task in which they did not succeed. Phillips planned to have fifteen percent female executive by the end of 2009 but only reached a mere ten percent. Another large multinational, Heineken, has also mentioned, in their company presentation, the wish to hire more female managers, but also encounter difficulties in doing so. These are just some examples of multinationals having difficulties with Gender Egalitarianism. This has struck me as an interesting fact to research further as a topic for this master thesis. The fact that multinationals are more than eager to hire more females in higher

management, but encounter difficulties in doing so. Furthermore, Lidell (2005) states that in the Anglo American cluster, which is known for its advanced economy, women still occupy a secondary role compared to men, specifically in leadership positions in

organizations. In contrast to this, the same study reports a relatively high Gender Egalitarianism in the Eastern European cluster compared to the other researched

clusters. The Anglo American cluster consists of Australia, Canada, England, Ireland, New Zealand, South Africa (white sample), and the United States. The Eastern European cluster includes Albania, Georgia, Greece, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Poland, Russia and Slovenia. Gender Egalitarianism is conceptualized as: ‘the degree to which a collective minimizes gender inequality’ (as cited in the GLOBE research by House 2003).

These matters mentioned above indicate the problem that multinationals voice the willingness and need to hire more female executives, but they are not succeeding in this. In the European Union rules and regulations are set out and adjusted in order for Gender Egalitarianism to further develop. The EU has hard laws triggering this matter, such as founding or supplementary treaties and EU regulations, directives and decisions, which are legally binding for member states. Apart from that there are soft laws including recommendations by the commission and council opinions and resolutions. The charter of Fundamental Rights (European Union, 2000) states that any discrimination based on any grounds such as sex…shall be prohibited (chapter III, Art. 21) and more importantly, equality between men and women must be ensured in all areas (chapter III, Art. 23) (as cited in Gerhards, Shafer and Kampfer 2009). So the rules are firmly set, but still

(8)

Since the Globe study (2002) has found a differing rate of Gender Egalitarianism in the Eastern European cluster than in the Anglo American cluster, it has tickled the interest to study where this difference comes from. The dissimilarity between both clusters is

striking, especially because the Anglo American cluster is found to be more economically developed in comparison with the Eastern European cluster.

Therefore, in this research it is analyzed, what is different with regard to Gender Egalitarianism between the Eastern European and Anglo American cluster, and moreover, why this is different. It ought to be manifested in literature whether the Eastern

European cluster still has a higher rate of GE and if so, how they have managed to keep up the level of Gender Egalitarianism. Furthermore, I wanted to find out what the western world can learn from the ways and manners the Eastern European cluster has managed it’s Gender Egalitarianism. The main focus and aim for this study were, describing what the difference in Gender Egalitarianism actually is between Anglo American and Eastern Europe countries and what the reason is for this difference, and what the western world might learn from these differences.

It is likely that the change from socialism has had a large impact in the matter. As cited by Gromec-Broc (2006), to be able to participate in the labor market, women in socialist countries had significantly fewer barriers to overcome than women in the western world.

Nowadays, more and more research is done on the matter of Gender Egalitarianism and where differences come from, however, little empirical evidence is delivered. Lange (2008) has looked at GE, but only with a focus on job satisfaction in five Central and Eastern European labor markets, Lubatkin (1998) has researched the influence of gender on managerial work in Eastern Europe, Martins and Parsons (2007) have studied former PhD students and the effects of gender diversity in management, Eylon et al. (2006) have done a survey on gender and gender influences, but with a main focus on culture. Besides this, Ashkanasy et al. (2002) and Gromec-Broc (2006) have described the equality issues in the Central and Eastern European countries. No case study of

(9)

whether or not there are differences persistent in these career paths developments. These differences can have many reasons, and can be caused by many factors, therefore, the focus is on both the country level and organizational regulations and culture as is set out in section 1.2.

1.1 Problem Statement

Eylon et al. (2006) have stated that although their understanding of gender differences in organizations has resulted in a significant body of work, international management

researchers have yet to empirically address the pertinent global issue of how women climb the proverbial corporate ladder. Moreover, there is an article by Lange (2008), which has researched the potential legacy effects of a communist gender role, and he has found that there are substantial differences between male and female employees. Some of the differences appear to reflect the persistent influence of a communist gender order. He states that the evolving character of the Central and Eastern European gender

(10)

The studies mentioned above strengthen the argumentation for the present study and suggest that the former socialist countries of the Eastern European cluster,

have or at least had a higher Gender Egalitarianism. It is interesting to find out what has enabled this cluster to obtain a higher Gender Egalitarianism. Therefore, the aim in this study is: Describing what the difference in GE actually is between Anglo American and Eastern European clusters, what the reason is for this difference if it exists, and what the western world in business can learn from these differences.

In order to gain insight into what extent, and to what degree, and what form of knowledge is necessary, the problem statement ought to be transformed into a conceptual model. A conceptual model gives the outline and marks out the research element, in this case, Gender Egalitarianism, and it yields the selection of the variables and the relationships between them.

1.2 Conceptual Model

Country Level Company level

Institutional forces

(11)

The conceptual model states the dependent variable of the study in the middle; Gender Egalitarianism. The independent variables are culture and institutional forces, since this is a broad variable interpretable in many ways, the institutional forces are broken down to; economic, legal and political. As is visible in the model the variables organizational culture, HRM policies and gender distribution in management are the independent

variables. The independent variable institutional forces; legal is linked and influences the HRM policies of the organization. The units for research will be; institutionalism as a concept of both Anglo American and Eastern European clusters, broken down into

following three variables; economic, law, and political. Moreover, the internal institutional factors of the organization are represented in HRM policies. Using the conceptual model as a guideline, the research question was created as is stated in the next section 1.3.

1.3 Research Question

How can differences in the development of Gender Egalitarianism in the Anglo American and the Eastern European clusters be explained?

1.3.1 Discussing the difference

The existing literature shows differences between Anglo American and Eastern European nations. Titles such as; East-West comparisons (Tang & Cousins 2005), Incorporating post communist countries in a welfare regime typology (Fenger 2007), Developments of family law in Western and Eastern Europe (Antokolskaia 2003), Changes in equality in Eastern European countries (Fodor & van der Lippe 1998), States’ compliances with international requirements (Avadayeva 2010), and EU enlargements and East-West differences (Watson 2000), show that researchers acknowledge that there are differences between East-West nations in some form or another.

Furthermore, Avadayeva (2010) states that despite the strong interest in

achieving membership within the EU, national reforms on gender equality demonstrated variation in terms of scope, comprehensiveness, and implementation. Avadayeva has made clear that the governments of post communist states have responded differently to EU pressures, to adopt policies and establishing governmental institutions to oversee implementations. Fenger (2007) has shown that the post-communist welfare states differ significantly from the types that are distinguished as welfare regimes by Esping

(12)

transformation, as well as legislative and social policy changes in the accession countries of the former Soviet-block according to Watson (2000). Again this shows that large differences occur with regard to Anglo American and Eastern European countries. Watson also finds that in post war, state socialist countries, sexual equality policies represented an explicit and central ideological and administrative concern and in this respect, state socialist policy differs from the situation in the West. This conclusion strengthens the position that there exists a difference between Anglo American and Eastern European clusters.

According to Fodor & van der Lippe (1998), Eastern European societies are trying to find their way ‘back to Europe’ and with that their boundaries, peripheries, and

divisions within the continent are also shifting. This statement again shows that the literature has established a strong difference between the nations. Pollert (2005)

additionally, concluded that the sexual segregation in Eastern Europe has a different form to it than the West, but is no less extreme. With regard to motherhood and earnings, Sigle-Rushton & Waldfogel (2007) have found that countries cluster into three groups, a Continental European group, a Nordic group and an Anglo American group. This

clustering also shows that research has established differences between Anglo American and Eastern European countries. These authors clearly show that differences exist between Anglo American and Eastern European clusters, which has led to the first research question:

1.3.2 Valuation of Gender Egalitarianism

The vast majority of studies of women in management are from a Western, industrialized perspective. Therefore, Lubatkin & Powel (1998) conclude that findings as a result are not applicable to the former socialist countries in transition. Lubatkin & Powel find that most managers in Eastern European nations have been brought up under a socialist-style, with a centrally planned set of institutional forces. These forces construct a

different view of reality than the market driven view that Anglo American countries have. Apart from that, the socialist framework that has characterized much of the former socialist block, affected an ideology based on equality and equal participation of its women and men, in all aspects of society. Which means that concepts based on the empowerment of women have no meaning in Eastern European societies according to Puffer (1994). Just as, North (1990) notes that the informal constraints embodied in customs, traditions, and codes of conduct are much less penetrable trough deliberate

(13)

policies. In addition, sexual segregation in Eastern Europe has a different shape to it than the West (Pollert 2005). Furthermore, Tang & Cousins (2005) see a clear East-West divide between the United Kingdom and Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania and Slovenia in the diverse routes to flexibility and different mixes of social policies and gender cultures. This divide has led to considerable differences in the integration of work and family life (Tang & Cousins 2005). This subdivision leads me to the following contrast. The majority of welfare state researchers classify the United States, Australia, United Kingdom and New Zealand as liberal welfare states, these nations tend to depend on market solutions to social problems rather than government intervention (Bozendahl & Olafsdottir 2008). Whilst the Eastern European nations have been depending, during socialist regime, on governmental intervention in everyday life. Therefore, it is clear that inhabitants of the Eastern European and Anglo American clusters might experience gender egalitarianism differently. In order to fully comprehend differences between the Anglo American cluster and the Eastern European cluster, it is essential to research the perception of Gender Egalitarianism within the different nations. This has resulted in following second sub-research question:

1.3.3 Impact of socialism

Post socialist countries have a common communist history, which has influenced their countries’ political, economic, and social development in a prominent way. All post communist countries have had some form of provisions on gender equality in the labor market as a legacy of the communist state (Avadayeva 2010). Additionally, Avadayeva states that after the collapse of communism across central and Eastern Europe in 1989, the prospects of achieving membership in the EU became a strong incentive for these countries to implement social, economic, and legal chapters of community law. That study shows that the socialist regime has left it’s marks on the Eastern European nations. Watson (2000) discusses explicitly the sexual equality policies under communism and shows that despite the limits to their success, sexual difference was nevertheless not experienced as the source of political inequality during communist regime. Moreover, she states that for Eastern European countries after the downfall of communism,

convergence with the West meant rise of ‘masculism’. Watson has also concluded that the effects of democratization in Eastern Europe was most striking in the newly formed parliaments, which became far more exclusively male institutions than they had been before. Furthermore, it is argued that under state socialism stimulation was high for

(14)

women to join the labor force with special incentives. However, after the fall of socialism the governments in the newly democratized states assumed that the societies would opt for a male breadwinner model (Szelewa & Polakowski 2008). Additionally, Gromec-Broc (2006) concludes that the collapse of the socialist regime dramatically remodeled public and private relations. Stating that the newly introduced market economy originated in insecurities, revamped the social structure, and deepened the gender distinctions. All in all the abandonment from socialism has caused some drastic disruptions. In contrast to this when looking at the originating of family laws throughout East and West Europe, according to Antokolskaia (2003) several resemblances are showing. Stating that the stereotypical argument that harmonization and unification are unfeasible can be scrutinized. However, Fodor & van der Lippe (1998) share a different opinion, Eastern European societies had a tradition for strong conservative patriarchal structures, which were suppressed during state socialism, but resurfaced immediately after the collapse of the regime. Next, Rose (1990) and Siklova (1993) mention that everything that the communist parties advocated is discredited after the ‘velvet’ revolutions. Pollert (2005) adds to this discussion that post communist transformation has brought about the

common experience of a structural adjustment program. Overall literature shows that the transition of socialism has left some kind of mark, which is interesting to further explain the differences between Eastern Europe and Anglo American cluster countries, and questions arise if has there been an important changing factor in the Anglo American cluster, therefore the third sub-research question was developed:

1.3.4 Cultural effect

National culture is a potentially important contextual factor that can influence decisions (Aycan & Kanungo 2001; Kirkman, Lowe & Gibson 2006). This is also assumed by Fernanda Garcia, Posthuma & Roehling (2009), who used several cultural values to expand the relational models theory. Moreover, Lubatkin & Powel (1998) realized that they first had to operationalize the concepts of culture before anything else, in their research towards gender influences, since culture pertains to an individual’s

values, beliefs, and or expectations. Furthermore, they believe that the role of the organizational culture within the societal context also needs to be taken into

consideration when researching gender issues. Besides this, Javidan, Dorfman, Luque and House (1999) state that people are not aware of the tremendous impact that national culture has on their vision and interpretation of the world. In the words of

(15)

Javidan et al. “Culture colors nearly every aspect of human behavior, a working knowledge of culture and it’s influences can be useful in multinational environments”. Although some researchers are skeptical concerning culture, these authors have clearly stated why culture needs to be considered in research. Therefore, the fourth sub-question was created:

1.3.5 Learning opportunity

Since the striving of some of the Anglo American country clusters might be to improve their Gender Egalitarianism, these countries need to take into consideration what other countries, which are further developed with regard to GE, have done or are doing which has resulted in their higher GE rating. Research by Rubery, Grimshaw, Fagan, Figueiredo & Smith (2003) has concluded that the momentum for Gender Egalitarianism to grow has not yet disappeared from the gender equality agenda in Europe. Nevertheless, the impact of that agenda is patchy. Furthermore, there was no conclusive evidence found by Miller (2009) in her study of equality mainstreaming in the United Kingdom, that women have benefited from any of the UK government gender mainstreaming initiatives. Apart from that, according to Bolzendahl and Olafsdottir (2008) in comparison with the other Anglo American nations, the United States lags behind in institutionalizing welfare policies in general and family policies in particular. Whilst such measures have proven to have a strong positive relationship to support these policies. The effect of the institutionalizing of welfare policies in the US is substantially weaker that in other liberal nations. Which shows that the US is also struggling with the Gender Egalitarianism concept.

Furthermore, as early as the 1980’s Australia and New Zealand have been restructuring policies away from the ‘male breadwinner’ model. Both countries coming into 1999, barely approaching the levels of restructuring found in Europe and North America (Shaver 1999). Taking into consideration the struggle of the Anglo American nations concerning Gender Egalitarianism this fifth sub-question, was constructed:

The differences in Gender Egalitarianism can be caused by many factors, therefore a focus is needed. The focus in this research will be on economical, political, legal and cultural factors. Within the scope of one multinational, this study analyses the

4. How does culture play a part in the degree of Gender Egalitarianism of Anglo American and Eastern European countries?

(16)

organizational regulations and culture. Is this different in the diverse countries of the clusters, or does Company x has one single policy as a large global multinational? Is this policy adapted in the same way in both parts of the Eastern European and Anglo

American clusters, or is there an individual method/procedure? Furthermore, the opinions on how Gender Egalitarianism has influenced the career paths of the top female

managers might differ between the clusters, which would also give an insight in how both clusters are identical or differ from one another.

I will use these sub-questions since, I want to find out where the differences in Gender Egalitarianism between these two clusters comes from. This, in order to see what is possible to improve in the matter of GE in the Anglo American countries. Since they are the ones not succeeding in hiring more female managers in the top. Literature suggests that in former socialist countries women are more equal, so it is imperative to find out how this was possible, and how and what the ‘western’ world can learn from this. Are there special organizational rules or has institutionalism, or public opinion caused the difference? Vecernik (2003: as cited by Lange 2008) notes that ‘the economic transition cannot be accomplished without involving the value and cultural dimensions too’.

Therefore, I have incorporated culture in the study. Accordingly, in the research will be looked at hard law, (rules and regulations) soft law, (opinions, believes) culture, and in the case of the Eastern European cluster, the transition of socialism will be incorporated. Were, for the Anglo American cluster, the overall economical development and what this has meant for Gender Egalitarianism, will be taken into consideration.

1.4 Structure of the Paper

(17)

2. Literature Review

Having discussed the research questions and sub-research questions, this study continues stating the relevant literature. Since the study of Gender Egalitarianism deals with a broad range of issues, the literature is classified according to the main subjects of the research; economical/political, legal, cultural and Human Resource Management, with a short introduction on gender diversity within management.

2.1 Gender Diversity Within Management

At present, more and more research is executed on the subject of gender diversity in management, and its benefits. The value-in-perspective by Cox (1993) debates that diversity in the workforce, relative to a homogenous workforce is generally more beneficial for business. Including but not limited to corporate profits and earnings. Additionally, an ever-growing body of scholars are claiming that ‘diversity pays’ and that diversity represents a captivating interest, an interest that meets customers needs, enriches ones understanding of the pulse of the marketplace, and improves the quality of products and services offered (Cox 1993, Cox & Beale 1997, Hubbard 2004, Richard 2000, Smedley, Buter & Bristow 2004). In addition, Herring (2009) has found in his research that gender diversity is associated with increased sales revenue, more customers and greater relative profits. Furthermore, Rosener (1990) claimed in Harris (2001) that the interactive leadership style of women, is particularly well suited to the versatile and rapidly changing business environment of today. Wrentling (1992) and Sharma (1990) also attribute to the matter that women’s ability to work well with people, developing smooth and cooperative relationships and see the main attributes of women’s approach as collaboration and cooperation, team work, intuition and creativity. However, albeit overall trends in increasing labor force participation of women, according to Harris (2001)

considerable variations exist between countries. These results are all results from

differences culturally, socially, legally, economically and in political history. Lubatkin and Powel (1998) have found that gender, in transitions economies, does not make a

(18)

2.2 Economical / Political / Legal

For Gender Egalitarianism the economical, legal and political institutional factors play an important role. The way in which the economic situation is arranged has a large influence on the workforce and thereby on the female workforce as well. The political situation influences the rules, laws and regulation which are set in a cluster or country concerning gender and thereby also have a consequence for the matter.

The Varieties of Capitalism systems developed by Hall and Soskice (2001) uses the economic and political situation of a country to come to a conceptual framework to understand the institutional variations across nations. The VoC focus on variation among national political economies (Hall & Soskice 2001). The authors draw on a core distinction between two types of political economies; Liberal Market Economies, LME, and

Coordinated Market Economies, CME. In Liberal Market Economies firms coordinate their activities primarily via hierarchies and competitive market arrangements, work with

supply and demand, and are based on competitiveness and profitability. There tends to be a higher inequality in incomes and it appears to have less skilled and lower cost labor. In Coordinated Market Economies, firms depend more heavily on non-market relationships to coordinate their endeavors with other actors and to construct their core competencies. Network monitoring and collaborations are of importance here, there are shorter working hours and more equal pay, next there are shorter working hours and more equal pay and higher skilled higher cost labor Hall & Soskice (2001).

The central focal point in the literature of VoC has been on grasping the nature of ‘complementarities’ between social protection systems and production regimes. In other words, the ways in which they may complement one another. Producing reinforcing feedback effects- rather than, on thinking about the ways in which those relationships may become dysfunctional, and generate institutional change, following the seminal work of Hall & Soskice & Rhodes (2005).

(19)

Besides the Varieties of Capitalism approach another possibility to typologizing countries economically is the Welfare regimes of Esping Andersen (1990). His central argument is that welfare states cluster around three distinct welfare regimes; liberal, conservative-corporatist and social-democratic welfare states. Liberal welfare states are distinguished by means-tested assistance, modest universal transfers or model social insurance plans. The conservative-corporatist type is distinguished by a moderate level of

decommodification, the direct influence of the state is restricted. In the last type the social-democratic type, the level of decomodification is high, the generous universal and highly redistributive benefits do not depend on any individual contribution (Esping

Andersen (2002). This typology has been a focus point for both further development and intense criticism.

Fenger (2007) has researched whether or not the Central and Eastern European countries, CEE, can be linked to the typology. He believes that the concept CEE (Central and Eastern European countries) wrongfully suggest a basic similarity whilst there are such a varied range of countries with varying degrees of development. Whether or not influenced by the EU member institutional framework requirements. Fenger quotes Fajth (1999) who stated that social security in Eastern European countries had three big pillars; old age pensions, health related transfers and family benefits supported by employee benefits and consumer subsidies. In Fenger’s analysis the Eastern European welfare states can be clearly distinguished from the traditional European Welfare states. He groups the Eastern European counties as a separate cluster, with no striking differences between the EU admitted countries and other countries. The differences in the western counties and the post communist countries lie primarily in the social situation not so much in

differences in the governmental programs. Therefore, according to Fenger (2007) the post communist welfare states cannot be reduced to any of the Esping Andersen’s typology of welfare states.

(20)

legal developments of the EE cluster has separated them internally as a cluster, which is important to take into consideration researching the distinct countries.

2.3 Cultural

Culture according to Hofstede (1988) has a social anthropological meaning, it refers to the way people think, feel, and act and Hofstede has defined it as; ‘the collective

programming of the mind, distinguishing the members of one group or category from another’. The ‘category’ mentioned can refer to nations, regions within or across nations, ethnicities, religions, occupations, organizations, or the genders. A simplified definition is ‘the unwritten rules of the social game’ (Geert Hofstede personal website 2010).

Culture is defined by Ferraro (2002) as ‘everything that people have, think and do as members of a society’.

Culture can be used to explain differences in business behavior and its meaning. To be able to observe how culture can influence organizational behavior it is significant to apprehend what culture is. A common way of researchers to try to explain what culture is and how complex it is, is to look at culture as an union or iceberg. This helps to

conceptualize the different levels/layers of culture; some elements of culture are more evident, just as the outer layers of an union or the top of the iceberg. These ‘outer’ elements are the manifest culture (Sathe 1985 in Fairholm 1994) which represents the first contact with a new culture, the ‘visible’ part. For example; peoples speech, how they dress, interact with each other, and their possessions. Observing a culture only shows the outer layers/levels but the deeper meaning of culture is developed by peeling away the outer layers of the union or looking further below the top of the iceberg. These are the expressed value levels which explain how people themselves explain the culture. The core of the union or the submerged section of the iceberg depicts the level of basic

assumptions. These are the foundations of a culture, shared ideas and beliefs about the world and society as a whole that guides people’s thoughts and actions. To be able to describe or explain a culture it is necessary for researchers to look at both aspects, the outer and inner levels/layers.

In order to describe the different cultures at hand in the Anglo American and Eastern European clusters, several of the most influential authors and their methods will be defined and used further on to specify the different cultures. Starting with one of the first methods of evaluating cultures; variations in value orientations by Kluckhohn and

(21)

2.3.1 Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck’s variations in value

orientations

The American anthropologists Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck have developed a framework of six dimensions to describe the different values orientations of a culture (Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck 1961). The value orientations represent how different societies cope with various issues or problems, in their framework a culture may favor one or more of the variations of approaches associated with a particular values orientation.

Values Orientation Postulated range of Variations Relation to Nature Subjugation to

nature

Harmony with nature Mastery over nature

Time Orientation Past Present Future

Basic Human Nature Evil Neutral/Mixed Good

Activity Orientation Being Containing/Controlling Doing

Relationship Among People

Individualistic Group Hierarchical

Space Orientation Private Mixed Public

Figure 2: Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck’s variations in value orientations

2.3.2 Hofstede’s cultural values dimensions

Hofstede is a Dutch social psychologist, and believes that people carry mental programs that are developed in the family in early childhood, and reinforced in schools and

organizations, and that these ‘programs’ contain a component of national culture

(22)

Dimension Explanation

Power Distance Index PDI Extent to which power is accepted and expected, defined from below

Individualism IDV Individualistic societies with opposite collectivistic societies.

Masculinity MAS Refers to distribution of roles between genders, with opposite femininity assertivity against modes caring Uncertainty Avoidance Index UAI Deals with a societies tolerance for

uncertainty and ambiguity.

Long Term Orientation LTO Opposite is short term, dealing with thrifts and perseverance vis-à-vis traditions and protecting ones ‘face’.

Figure 3: Hofstede’s cultural dimensions

2.3.3 Schwartz’s value theory

Schwartz argues, that values reflect the basic issues or problems societies confront in order to regulate social activities (Schwartz 1992). Influence heavily by Rokeach and Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck, Schwartz developed a theory, which defines values as a desirable, trans-situational goal, varying in importance that serve as a guiding principle in peoples’ lives. His dimensions are founded on three themes that confront all societies: (1) the nature of the relation or boundaries between the individual and the group, (2) how to guarantee responsible behavior, and (3) how to regulate the relation of people to the natural and social world. Of these three universal requirements, ten motivationally distinct types of values were derived, which are stated in the figures 4 and 5.

Values Explanation

Embeddedness versus Autonomy People are inherently part of collectives or bounded entities who find meaning in their uniqueness

Hierarchy versus Egalitarianism Social system with clearly defined roles to people seeing each other as equals sharing basic human interests

Mastery versus Harmony Encouraging members to master, change and exploit the natural and social

environment for personal goals versus understanding and fitting in with the environment.

(23)

Following ten definitions of motivational types of values were used to classify countries: Power, Achievement, Hedonism, Stimulations, Self-direction, Universalism, Benevolence, Tradition, Conformity, and Security. These definitions are displayed in figure 5 by David Baker.

Figure 5: Motivational types of Schwartz, (Source: Baker, D. in changing mind.org accessed 22-05-2010)

The results of the country classification using Schwartz’s values system can be found in the inter cluster differences section 3.5.

2.3.4 The world value survey

The world value survey is a long term, large scale study of socio-cultural and political change that is investigating basic values and beliefs of people in more than 65 societies on all continents. According to the world value survey the two most important

dimensions of societal values are traditional versus secular, rational orientations toward authority and survival versus self expression values. The world value survey map which incorporates and classifies the countries entered in the survey can be found in the inter cluster differences section 3.5.

(24)

Dimensions of societal values Explanation

Traditional versus Secular-rational orientations towards authority

Values reflecting pre-industrial society and centrality to the family and opposite Survival versus Self expression values Priority on economic and physical security

over self expression and quality of life and opposite

Figure 6: World Value Survey

2.4 Human Resource Management Policies

As the conceptual model has shown, Gender Egalitarianism within a company is highly influenced by internal institutions. Since, management of HR has a direct link with the workforce and therefore, indirectly the female work force.

In recent times, Brewster (1999) has made clear that the study of HRM needs an international perspective, through his research two ideal paradigms have been classified. The universalist and the contextual approach, which are build on the significant United States and Northern European traditions. The universalist approach considers all context with regard to HRM in an overall fit, and the contextual approach sees multiple

uniquenesses.

Much research has produced evidence which suggest that Human Resource

(25)

McMahan (1992) states: “HRM is the pattern of planned human resource deployments and activities intended to enable a firm to achieve its goals”.

The contextual paradigm is by contrast idiographic, searching for an overall understanding of what is contextually unique and why it is assumed that HRM can be applied to societies, governments or regions as well as firms (Brewster 1992). This paradigm stresses the importance of the actions of management within the organization as well as external factors. Thus, it explores the importance of multiple factors such as; culture, ownership structure, labor markets, role of the state and trade unions

organizations as different aspects of the subject. This paradigm is widespread in the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and Northern European countries (Brewster 1992). Additionally Hendry, Pettigrew & Sparrow (1988) and Hendry and Pettigrew (1992) rationalize that HRM should not be labeled as a single form of activity since organizations may follow numerical distinct pathways in order to achieve the same results. Which is above all due to the existence of a number of linkages between the outer environmental context (e.g. socio-economic, technological, political/legal, and competitive) and the inner organizational context (such as culture, structure, leadership, task technology and business output). According to Hendry & Pettigrew (1992) these linkages directly contribute to the forming of the content or an organization’s HRM. In recap Brewster (1992) and Hendry & Pettigrew (1992) and many others see two paradigms in Human Resource Management; universalist with its practices converged and matched to its competitive environment and the contextual approach which stresses the importance of the multiple external factors.

2.5 Conclusion

This literature review has shown what is already known about the research question and its four main pillars; (1) Gender diversity within management, (2) economical/political/legal, (3) cultural, and (4) Human Resource Management policies.

The literature on the first pillar, gender diversity in management, suggests that having a diverse workforce is benefiting organizations (Cox ’93; Hubbard ’04, Buter & Bristow ’04; Sharma ’90; and Wrentling ’92). However, many variations exist between countries. Lidell (2005) has found that gender does not make a difference in

(26)

“Research of this kind will increase the knowledge about the influence of gender in different societal contexts as well as different employment situations”. For the second pillar economical/political/legal literature argues that the existing theories of the Varieties of Capitalism with Liberal Market Economies and Coordinated Market Economies (Hall & Soskice 2001), and the Welfare regimes of Esping Andersen (1990) do not cover the entire field, and that these models of political economies do not fit to all nations (Lane 2005; Fenger 2007). With regard to the third pillar culture, theory states that the cultural background of a nation and or cluster is imperative for its development. Four of the most acknowledged authors in literature and their works were discussed; Kluckhohn &

Strodtbeck, Hofstede, Schwartz, and the World Value Survey. Their theories can be used to classify nations in order to better grasp their culture with regard to gender. For Human Resource Management policies, which is the fourth pillar, theory describes different approaches based on the significant United States and Northern European traditions. There are two different approaches, the universalist and the contextual approach. This comes down to, that fitting and consistent HR practices, in addition to internally

consistent HR systems, or compilations of HR practices can in fact, influence organizational performance.

Since literature has shown many variations and possibilities within economies, cultures and HRM policies, it is expected that many differences will show up when

comparing the Anglo American and Eastern European nations. The following descriptions and analyses of both clusters will provide the basis for the answers on the proposed research and sub-research questions. Furthermore, since the literature has shown, for the first pillar of the study; gender diversity within management, that this is benefiting for organizations, this research will further on in the inter cluster differences only

(27)

3. Inter Cluster Differences

This chapter will start with a short introduction of both clusters, to remind the reader which countries fall in which cluster and how these Anglo American and Eastern European clusters have originated. This is done in order for a basis to be developed, to understand where both clusters have come from and how they have developed economically. Then, it is followed by the discussion of the inter cluster differences, these differences will be divided according to three main focus points of the research; economical/political and legal, cultural and on Human Resource Management policies.

3.1 The Anglo American Cluster

This cluster comprises of Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, South Africa (white sample) and the United States of America. All of these countries are considered well-developed nations, with populations in main, speaking English. Moreover, they have all belonged once or are still belonging to, to the British Colonies. The seven countries in this cluster share three important characteristics; (1) their national language is

predominantly English, (2) they were all once member of the British empire, and (3) they all have developed ‘western’ economies (Ashkanasy, Trevor-Roberts & Earnshaw 2002). The Anglo Saxon culture of the United Kingdom can be attributed to the migration of northwestern European communities in the beginning of the fourth and fifth centuries, and their subsequent conversion to Christianity (Stenton 1971). The English power grew westwards first capturing Ireland, which took over its culture. The British then moved on towards the Americas in the seventeenth century, nevertheless the early Americans still grappled with inherent conservatism (Hartz 1964 in Achkanasy, Trevor-Roberts & Earnshaw 2002). By the end of the eighteenth century Canada came under British hegemony and British colonists have been arriving in South Africa since 1795 which explains their belonging to the Anglo American cluster (Ashkanasy, Trevor-Roberts & Earnshaw 2002). In short, the Anglo American cluster is a contemporary heirloom of the vast power of the British Empire, based on an Anglo American culture which has

developed in England in the early centuries of the first millennium. These cultural values have spread across the globe and today the Anglo American cluster exists of some of the most advanced economies in the world. The group of democracies, comprising amongst others the United States, United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand emphasize private solutions to social issues rather than public government provisions (Bolzendahl &

(28)

The United Nations Decade for Women conference in Beijing was the initiator, which has made gender mainstreaming a public sector policy tool. That has become important not only in developing countries, but also in Canada, Europe, New Zealand and Australia (Eveline & Todd 2009). Gender mainstreaming/equality/egalitarianism, are all results of what has been and still is occurring in family law. Family law in Western Europe before remunerations was mainly, uniform canon law, consisting of two separate systems, the Catholic and Orthodox system. Which in fact were very much alike (Antokolskaia 2003). According to the author Antokolskaia (2003) the axis of difference is the modernity of family law, does not lie East-West, as is the case with other parts of civil laws that are more directly linked within the economy, but instead a more general north-south direction.

In conclusion of the Anglo American cluster, the members all share the same language origin, are all developed ‘western’ economies and the development of the cluster can be attributed to the migration of Northwestern European communities. They emphasize private solutions to social issues and the initiator for Gender mainstreaming was the 1995 conference of the UN in Beijing. Gender mainstreaming and all that it entails, is a results of the development of family law.

3.2 The Eastern European Cluster

The Eastern European cluster consists of; Albania, Bulgaria, Georgia, Greece, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Poland, Romania, Russia and Slovenia. This cluster did not receive as much in-depth attention in research as the Anglo American cluster. The ‘rest’ of the world has only been considering this cluster at its fullest since the abolishment of socialism in the early nineties. The difficulty right now is, that fifty percent of the cluster belongs to the European Union (Greece, Hungary, Poland and Slovenia) and the other fifty percent (Albania, Georgia, Kazakhstan and Russia) do not. Therefore, looking in more depth at the Eastern European cluster, this divide is something to most certainly take into consideration.

(29)

was already divided into two. One part being a coherent Roman-Germanic world in the West, and a Byzantine-Islamic world in the East. Practically all historians according to Ivan (1986) see an incontestable change at about the turn of the 15th to 16th century, with a serious decline in the development of Eastern Europe that persisted onwards until the mid way of the 20th_century.

To fully understand Eastern Europe and its history, it is important to comprehend the term socialism and which countries have dealt with it. Socialism is according to me explained precise by Schumpeter (1950) as “That the organization of society, in which the means of production are controlled, and the decisions on how and what to produce, and on who gets what, are made by public authority, rather than by privately-owned and privately managed firms”. Countries which have dealt with socialism and the

abandonment of it in the Eastern European cluster are Albania, Bulgaria, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Russia. However, Greece was only confronted with socialism for a very short period.

The political and economic reforms in Eastern Europe have had a thorough impact on the daily lives of both women and men. At the end of the ’90 debates sociologists theorized about the specific institutions of transitions’ economies (Nee ’91; Walder ’96) As Eastern European societies are trying to find their way towards Europe, the boundaries,

peripheries, and divisions within the continent are also shifting (Lippe & Fodor 1998). According to Gromec-Broc (2006) women’s position in the labor market before 1989, was far more complex and needs to be considered in its specific context. In the state socialist countries, post war, sexual equality policies were portrayed and explicit, central

ideological and of administrative concern. It was in this respect different than the situation in the ‘West’. Sexual equality measures were a priority that found reflection in state constitutions, and in family and labor codes (Ferge 1997). According to the family code the equality of spouses within the family was predicated on the economic activity of women outside marriage (Watson 2000). The first family law reforms were as soon as the 1917’s revolution in Russia, and family law issues has been perceived as matters of the highest political priority since the end of the nineteenth century (Antokoskaia 2003).

(30)

3.3 Economical / Political

In the Central Eastern European countries population varies widely, ranging from 38,6 million in Poland to 1,3 million in Estonia. In all countries more females than males are present. Life expectancy on average is 10 years less than Western Europe (UNDP 2003).

The key aspects of the communist gender equality legacy are women’s high education levels, high labor force participation rates and state support for childcare and working mothers. Another characteristic of the communist development was the early integration of women to the labor force. Whilst in the 1980’s the labor force participation in OECD countries was around 35-45 percent this percentage was already reached by the central Eastern European countries in the 1960’s (Pollert 2005).

3.3.1 Heritage

Inheritances from state socialism are high rates of female economic activity, highly developed childcare services and quite generous systems of support for maternity and family by the state (Szelewa & Polakowski 2008). Even though the state involvement and subsidy of childcare provided is high in all countries, throughout Eastern Europe cross-country differences have been found over the years ’89 – ’04 with regard to the

annotation. Quality with regard to childcare services in Poland is low, whilst in Hungary it has been low but developed into a mediate rate of quality. In contrast in Slovenia quality was high and towards 2004 it was found low, so overall the quality of childcare has been found low (Szelewa & Polakowski 2008).

In the socialist countries, it was ‘normal’ that almost every single member of the potential work force population was engaged in full-time paid work. After finishing school, most men and women entered the labor force and remained there, until their retirement age. In the end of the 1960’s all of the state socialist countries had established a form of paid leave which allowed mothers and later on fathers to stay at home for 1 up to 3 years after a child was born, and parents had a guaranteed job back position after their leave (Anker 1985).

(31)

treatment and general protection from discrimination (Gromec-Broc 2006). Therefore, the participation rates were much higher in these countries, in 1980 for example the participation rate for women in Poland was 83,2% and 92,5% in Bulgaria compared to 35,7% in the South of Europe (Gromec-Broc 2006). However, not all authors are positive with regard to the ban of socialism and the influence this had on women and labor

participation.

When researching what was available in the literature on Gender Egalitarianism some authors came with negative statements concerning the gender equality and the development of it after the drop of socialism. Ergo, although most researchers and therefore, the scheme of my research are directed in the fact that in Eastern Europe the Gender Egalitarianism was and has been higher, the emerging picture from the ever growing body of literature on Gender Egalitarianism is not always a very positive one. The following negative quotes have emerged throughout the beginning of the nineties:

‘The trends seen are not encouraging with respect to prospects for women’s participation in the new democratic system’ (Wolchik 1994).

‘In general terms of women’s needs in the workplace and in terms of childcare, it is clear that even on the broadest level, these do not fit in

with the modernizing desire of the current administrations’ (Corrin 1994).

‘In the short run at least, women in Central and Eastern Europe stand to lose economic-, social welfare and reproductive rights’

(Einhorn 1993).

‘After the break with the communist past, women have lost a great deal of their higher advanced gender equality legacy. Because of the decline in social support for families, drop in the real value of social benefits, rising costs of childcare and the absence of work-family harmonization policies’

(32)

These quotes show that there are different opinions with regard to the fall of socialism and the labor participation of females in the rules, regulations, policies and the

inheritance of these. Besides this, there has been found a striking lack of feminist consciousness throughout Eastern Europe (Kaldor ’91; Einhorn ’91; Dolling ’91; Watson ’92). Accordingly, these authors were also taken into consideration in the development of the case study.

3.3.2 Sought solution to establish Gender Egalitarianism

In order to let the labor participation of females grow, the answer in Anglo American nations has been part-time working hours, which is not a case often seen in Eastern European countries. In 2002 33,5% women in the EU (former fifteen) worked part-time and only 8,6% in the CEE countries (Gromec-Broc 2006). Childcare policies are perceived to be the main instrument of the state to influence its gender relations and women’s economic independence (Daly ’94; Jenson & Sieau ’01). Part-time work in the former socialist countries has been enacted under new laws, which does not give them the same rights, rules and regulations as full-time employed. The employment protection is less high, it is lower paid and does not obtain the same social benefits (Gromec-Broc 2006). Besides this, parental leave provisions and day-care arrangements are two elements which have been recognized as the most important pillars in childcare policies in Central and Eastern Europe (Szelewa & Polakowski 2008).

3.3.3 Other differences

Differences within the Eastern European cluster can also be found with regard to the joining to the European Union. The joining countries of Eastern Europe can be classified into two groups; the early and late joining states (Avadayeva 2010). The counties were classified, by the EU, depending on their readiness for accession. Which also accounted for the fit between domestic polices and EU requirements. The first round of negotiating accession in 1998 was with Hungary, Slovenia and Poland, which were more further prepared for accession. The second round in 1999, was with the less prepared countries of Slovakia, Romania and Bulgaria, this means that these countries were less developed according to EU standards. In addition, this shows a clear difference in between Eastern European countries.

(33)

states. All post communist countries had some provisions on gender equality in the labor market as a legacy of the communist state (Avadayeva 2010). All states, before the ban on socialism, had some form of maternity and parental leave, either fully or partially paid by the government with job protection. Most of the countries had some form of labor protection for women. Nevertheless, several authors have rejected the clustering of the Eastern European countries since they are found to difficult and different to cluster together. This is due to a lack of stability in policy outcomes and their temporary character (Esping Andersen 1996; Haney 2002) Besides that, Szelewa & Polakowski (2008) believe that the region of Central and Eastern Europe should no longer be discussed about as a monolith, but rather as a separate entities with cross country variation of childcare policies within the region. These authors see differences between Slovenia which has according to them a, explicit familiarism policy model, Hungary pursuing the comprehensive support model and Poland resembling the implicit family model. Within the explicit familiarism, the responsibility for care within the family is high, in the implicit family model, policies are residual and family neutral and there is a lack of policies leaving care to family. In the explicit familiarism model there are many child care services and there is also extra support for dual earners, care is not the sole

responsibility of the family. Furthermore, the common tendency towards reforming childcare policies in the familiarist direction, moving care more towards family, is not present in the post communist countries.

Another difference is evident between Anglo American and Eastern European clusters when considering the Varieties of Capitalism approach. Using this approach and taking into consideration both historical backgrounds, Eastern Europe can be considered more of a Coordinated Market Economy, were firms depend more heavily on non market

relationships to coordinate their efforts. Anglo American countries can be seen as more of a Liberal Market Economy, where firms are more based on competitiveness and

profitability. However, the fit to the different economies is not complete, Lane (2005) agrees with the Anglo American countries being LME’s but feels that the approach does not capture the dynamics of the economic systems in the countries in Eastern Europe undergoing transformation. He says that a necessary condition for the emergence of capitalism is a money economy, with the possibility of making profits, which is not

(34)

Another type of economic classification is the welfare type of Esping Andersen (1990) discussed earlier, he has made a tri-polar typology of liberal, conservative-corporatist and social-democratic welfare states. Fenger (2007) using Esping Andersen’s types believes that neither typology fits towards Eastern European clusters. After doing some extensive research, he has placed Greece, in the Conservative-corporatist type, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, the United States in the liberal type and Russia in a new former USSR type followed by Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia in a new type named post communist European type, and Georgia, Romania and Moldavia, in a type called developing welfare states. However disagreeing with Esping Andersen and therefore in a certain degree with Hall & Soskice, Fenger (2007) comes to a resembling conclusion as Lane (2005).

3.4 Legal

Differences on a legal basis can also be found between Anglo American and Eastern European clusters. One of the differences being, the fact that in former state socialist countries, gender is not specifically mentioned in policies, rules, laws and or regulations. In some Anglo American countries there are specific rules, regulations or laws existing. However, the compliance is not controlled sufficiently according to some authors. As Rubery et al. (2003) put it, the momentum for the gender equality agenda has not disappeared from the agenda, but the impact of the agenda is patchy. According to Goetchy (2001) this is caused by the replacement of the specific equal opportunities pillars as one of the four building blocks of the European Union’s policies. Since each of the member states of the European Union is obliged to draw up a National Action Plan, following the agreed guidelines under the four building blocks. Certainly, there exists more attention towards policy dilemmas and labor market analysis remains lacking (Rubery et al. 2003). These authors state that there are noticeable differences between the Anglo American and the Eastern European clusters but furthermore, there are also large differences found within the Eastern European cluster.

Before the state socialism was abolished in Eastern Europe there were extensive maternity leave policies, child care availability supplied by the state at low costs,

subsidized lunch at the workplace and low costs of health care (Lippe & Fodor 1998). Motherhood was incorporated into employment, according to Gromec-Broc (2006) the state provided the paradigmatic infrastructure that assisted working women in bringing up their children, places in nurseries, kindergartners and after school clubs were

(35)

statements are also made by Lippe and Fodor (1998) who state that women have been the victims of the social and economic transformations. Overall several researchers are agreeing on the fact that the ban of socialism has left women in some kind of

predicament when it comes to family law.

3.5 Cultural

Since culture is generally recognized as a potential important contextual factor, which can influence everyday decision making (Schwartz ’92; Hofstede ‘88; Aycan & Kanungo; ‘01; Kirkman, Lowe & Gibson ’06). It is a subject which needs to be researched when looking at gender differences. What are the cultures of the Anglo American and Eastern European countries and clusters, on what grounds do they base their direction in life? Which has its reflect on everything; how people believe, act and think. Earlier on in this report the four most influential authors when speaking of culture; Kluckhohn &

Strodtbeck who can be seen as the founding fathers of culture were mentioned. Schwartz who has used the work of Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck as a foundation for his values,

Hofstede who has done very valuable research and is cited in many studies and finally the World Value Survey which has been conducting research based on cultural values throughout many years. These authors and their studies will be discussed here.

There are not many results to mention with regard to Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck when comparing Anglo American and Eastern European countries. These authors have studied several cultural groups that shared geographical proximity. The five cultural groups that they have studied, resided all in the southwestern part of the United States, since the US is only one part of the Anglo American cluster, their results cannot be used to classify entire clusters. However, their work is mentioned since they were the ground layers of research towards culture, and many other researchers such as Hofstede and Schwartz have based their work on the findings of these men. Hofstede on the other hand can be used to mention cluster differences.

Aust ralia Can ada Uni ted Kin gdom _Irelan d New Zeal and Sou th Afr ica Uni ted Sta tes Ave rag e IDV 90 80 89 70 79 65 91 80,6 PDI 36 39 35 28 22 49 40 35,6 MAS 61 52 66 68 58 63 62 61,4 UAI 51 48 35 35 49 49 46 44,7 LTO 31 23 25 43 28 n.a. 29 29,8

Gender Egalitarianism, What Can Be Learned From Differences Between Anglo American and Eastern European clusters? - A Case study of a Multinational –