Page 260 - Cultures and Organizations
P. 260

What Is Different Is Dangerous  233

        1950 the relationship reversed as they were catching up. All in all, the sta-
        tistical analysis does not allow us to identify any general sources of weak
        or strong uncertainty avoidance, other than history. 71


        The Future of Uncertainty-Avoidance Differences
        UAI scores based on the IBM studies are not available over time, and we
        know of no studies that have measured equivalent scores longitudinally
        for any population. Interesting historical information about the develop-
        ment of anxiety over time was supplied by Richard Lynn, whose national
        anxiety scores were shown earlier in this chapter to correlate with UAI.
        Lynn was able to follow national anxiety levels for eighteen countries from
                    72
        1935 to 1970.  The fi ve countries with the highest anxiety scores in 1935
        were Austria, Finland, Germany, Italy, and Japan (the World War II Axis
        powers and two countries that got involved in the war on their side). From
        1935 to 1950 all countries that had been defeated or occupied during World
        War II (1939–45) increased in anxiety level, while six out of the nine coun-
        tries not defeated or occupied decreased. The overall average was highest
        in 1950, shortly after the war, and then sank to an overall low in 1965, to
        increase again after that.
            Lynn’s data suggest that national anxiety levels fluctuate and that high

        anxiety levels are associated with wars. It seems a reasonable assumption
        that a similar wave of anxiety earlier accompanied World War I and the
        various wars before it. The process could be as follows: When anxiety lev-
        els in a country increase, uncertainty avoidance increases. This is notice-
        able in intolerance, xenophobia, religious and political fanaticism, and all
        the other manifestations of uncertainty avoidance presented in this chapter.
        Leadership passes into the hands of fanatics, and these may drive the coun-

        try toward war. War, of course, pulls in other countries that did not show
        the same fanaticism but that will develop increasing anxiety because of the
        war threat.
            In countries experiencing war within their territory, anxiety mounts
        further. After the war the stress is released, first for the countries not directly

        touched and some years later for the others, which start reconstructing.
        Anxiety decreases and tolerance increases, but after a number of years the
        trend is reversed, and a new wave of anxiety sets in that could be the prelude

        to a new conflict. Economic processes play a role; increasing prosperity
   255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   264   265