Page 531 - Cultures and Organizations

496 Notes

48. The data are from Djankov, La Porta, Lopez-de-Silanes, & Shleifer, 2003, and
were obtained with the kind help of Professor Erhard Blankenburg, of the Free Uni-
versity of Amsterdam. We found across the sixty-seven countries a Spearman rank
correlation of 0.42 for the duration of check collection, 0.40 for tenant eviction, and
0.47 for the mean duration of the two procedures (all beyond the 0.001 level).
49. Almond & Verba, 1963.
50. In Hofstede, 1994a, Chapter 11, Geert published a real-life case study, “Con-
frontation in the Cathedral,” based on an event in 1972 in a secondary school in Lau-
sanne, Switzerland, in which Gert Jan was involved as a student. Another student, a
brilliant prize-winner, during a solemn ceremony uses his speaking time to criticize
the educational system. The local establishment is profoundly shocked, and the case
dramatically escalates.
51. Culture’s Consequences, 2001, p. 172.
52. Eurobarometer Young Europeans 2007. Have you done any of the following?
Across nineteen countries, correlation of UAI with “signed a petition” was r
0.54**; with “took part in a public demonstration” it was r 0.41*. (Calculations
courtesy of Marieke de Mooij.)
53. Aberbach & Putnam, 1977; Culture’s Consequences, 2001, p. 173.
54. Based on data from the 1990–93 World Values Survey and the 1994 Euroba-
rometer; see Culture’s Consequences, 2001, pp. 171 and 174.
55. Personal communication.
56. Levine, Norenzayan, & Philbrick, 2001; Hofstede, 2001b. Rank correlation with
UAI was 0.59**.
57. Culture’s Consequences, 2001, p. 172, and NRC Handelsblad, September 28, 2001.
Contrary to what was mentioned in Culture’s Consequences, there is no identity card
obligation in Austria; in the Netherlands it was reintroduced in 2005. This lowers the
correlation to 0.75**.
58. Culture’s Consequences, 2001, p. 129.
59. Georges Brassens: La mauvaise réputation; Pierre Chastellain: La recherche
infi nie; Catherine Leforestier: Normal; Henri Tachan: Serpents à sornettes.
60. The correlation between wealth and CPI was r 0.85***. Wealthier countries
were those with a PPP (purchasing power parity) per capita in 2005 above 13,300
U.S. dollars; cleaner countries were those with a 2008 CPI of 5.0 or higher. Poorer but

rated cleaner than average were Chile, Uruguay, Malaysia, and Costa Rica. Wealth-
ier but rated more corrupt than average were Italy, Greece, Lithuania, Poland, and
Argentina.
61. Countries with a 2005 PPP per capita of more than 18,000 U.S. dollars. The
correlation coeffi cient was r 0.73***.
62. Because of the wide gaps in wealth between rich and poor exporters, we used
rank correlations. Across the twenty-two countries, the rank correlation coeffi cients
(Spearman) of BPI 2008 with 2005 PPP per capita is 0.79***; with PDI,
0.72***. Wealth explains 64 percent of BPI differences; wealth plus PDI explains
76 percent.
63. Personal communication from “Anneke” and her parents.