Study smarter with Fiveable
Get study guides, practice questions, and cheatsheets for all your subjects. Join 500,000+ students with a 96% pass rate.
The GLOBE (Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness) Project represents one of the most comprehensive cross-cultural research initiatives ever conducted, spanning 62 societies and examining how cultural values shape leadership and organizational practices. You're being tested on your ability to understand why cultures differ in their approaches to hierarchy, risk, relationships, and achievement—not just memorize definitions. These nine dimensions appear repeatedly in exam questions about leadership effectiveness, team dynamics, negotiation strategies, and organizational design across borders.
What makes GLOBE particularly exam-relevant is its distinction between cultural practices (as is) and cultural values (should be), revealing gaps between how societies actually operate and their aspirations. When you encounter FRQ prompts about adapting leadership styles, designing global teams, or explaining organizational behavior differences, these dimensions provide your analytical framework. Don't just memorize what each dimension measures—know which dimensions cluster together, how they interact, and what management implications they create.
These dimensions address how societies organize authority and handle uncertainty—fundamental questions about who makes decisions and how much ambiguity people tolerate.
Compare: Power Distance vs. Uncertainty Avoidance—both create structure, but PD addresses who decides while UA addresses how decisions get made. High scores in both suggest bureaucratic organizations with clear hierarchies and extensive procedures. FRQs often ask how these interact in organizational design.
GLOBE distinguishes two forms of collectivism, recognizing that societal-level and group-level loyalty operate independently—a critical distinction for exam success.
Compare: Institutional vs. In-Group Collectivism—a society can score high on one and low on the other. Nordic countries show high institutional collectivism (strong social systems) but lower in-group collectivism (nuclear family focus). Middle Eastern cultures often show the reverse pattern. This distinction is heavily tested.
These dimensions address how individuals interact, express themselves, and relate to others—shaping negotiation styles, feedback practices, and workplace relationships.
Compare: Assertiveness vs. Humane Orientation—these often move inversely. High assertiveness/low humane orientation cultures prioritize competition and results; low assertiveness/high humane orientation cultures emphasize harmony and care. Consider how this affects performance feedback: direct criticism vs. supportive coaching.
These dimensions capture how cultures orient toward goals, time horizons, and success—critical for understanding strategic planning, motivation systems, and performance management.
Compare: Future Orientation vs. Performance Orientation—both drive achievement but differently. Future Orientation asks when rewards matter (now vs. later), while Performance Orientation asks what gets rewarded (results vs. relationships). A culture can be high on one and low on the other, creating distinct management challenges.
| Concept | Best Examples of Dimensions |
|---|---|
| Authority & Hierarchy | Power Distance |
| Risk & Ambiguity | Uncertainty Avoidance |
| Group vs. Individual Focus | Institutional Collectivism, In-Group Collectivism |
| Communication Style | Assertiveness, Power Distance |
| Workplace Equality | Gender Egalitarianism |
| Interpersonal Relations | Humane Orientation, In-Group Collectivism |
| Strategic Planning | Future Orientation |
| Motivation & Rewards | Performance Orientation, Institutional Collectivism |
How do Institutional Collectivism and In-Group Collectivism differ, and why might a country score high on one but low on the other?
Which two GLOBE dimensions most directly influence how a manager should deliver critical feedback to an employee, and why?
Compare Power Distance and Uncertainty Avoidance: both create organizational structure, but what distinct aspects of organizational life does each address?
If an FRQ asks you to design a compensation system for a subsidiary in a high Performance Orientation, low Institutional Collectivism culture, which dimension takes priority and what would you recommend?
Explain how Future Orientation and Humane Orientation might create tension in organizational decision-making—what trade-offs might leaders face when both dimensions are highly valued?