Page 236 - Culture Technology Communication

Preserving Communication Context 219

significant differences across national cultures. Among a number of
typologies of cultures, the most widely cited and one of the most
thorough is that of Geert Hofstede. In an attempt to identify cultural
4
predispositions that Bourdieu has called habitus , Hofstede (1980)
administered standardized questionnaires to some 116,000 people
working for IBM in a variety of professions in over fifty countries in
1968 and again in 1972. On the basis of this data, Hofstede defined
5
several dimensions of culture. This and other similar studies clearly
indicate that people from different cultures bring different attitudes
to their work and that this results in national differences in the way
work is organized and work practices.
Japan, for example, can be characterized as a group-oriented so-
ciety with a long-term orientation, strong uncertainty avoidance,
and highly differentiated gender roles, and which accepts the un-
equal distribution of power. North American society, on the other
hand, is highly individualistic and less tolerant of the unequal dis-
tribution of power, with a short-term orientation, and medium de-
grees of uncertainty avoidance and gender role distinction. The four
Scandinavian countries form a relatively homogeneous group, with
few gender distinctions and generally low power distance, more
group-oriented than North America but less so than Japan.
Another body of literature has examined differences in atti-
tudes, values and practices between professions. A person’s occupa-
tion or training undoubtedly has a major influence on how he or she
approaches the world. For example, computer scientists likely draw
on a similar pool of knowledge and techniques relative to systems
development, which in turn calls for and constitutes a particular
6
way of looking at the world. Similarly, social scientists may not al-
ways share common frames of reference but most will share certain
elements of common knowledge. In the case of CSCW, it is probably
justifiable to distinguish a third general professional group, com-
posed of managers and end-users.
Professional culture becomes a central concern as soon as com-
munication between communities of practice becomes necessary.
Systems engineers may be operating from one set of assumptions,
while those studying the work practices the system is designed to
support or supplant may have a fundamentally different perception
of the task at hand, and those who initiated the project (upper man-
agement, unions, etc.) yet other objectives and perceptions. The ne-
gotiation of shared meanings is a key research issue in CSCW. 7
Ulf Hannerz (1992, 249) has coined the term transnational cul-
tures, which he defines as “structures of meaning carried by social