This master thesis has been written at the faculty of Economics and Business Administration of Maastricht University, the Netherlands. To start with, I would like to say that I am really delighted that I have been given the opportunity to complete my Master of Science in
International Business at the University of Maastricht. The study in Maastricht, including the Bachelor of Science and the study abroad, has been an important phase of my life and I would like to express my elation of being a student at this University.
"Culture is more often a source of conflict than of synergy. Cultural differences are a nuisance at best and often a disaster."
(Prof. Geert Hofstede, Emeritus Professor, Maastricht University.)
This quote plays an important role in this master thesis because it stresses the ambiguity of culture and shows the importance of a well functioning cultural fit since synergy is defined as “the blending of individuals or groups that creates an emerging culture that has greater potential than the individual parts”. In the case that a firm correctly takes two cultures into account it can achieve higher returns and effectively perform in the intercultural context.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Culture as meaning
2.2. Hofstede’s cultural dimensions
2.2.1. Germany
2.2.2. The Netherlands
2.3. The impact of culture on the organisation and on strategy
2.4. Historical overview
2.4.1. Germany
2.4.2. The Netherlands
2.5. The relationship between the two countries
2.5.1. Mutual cultural perceptions
2.5.2. Intercultural tangency
2.6. The languages
2.7. The effects of cultural meanings on work style
2.8. Communication style descriptor list
2.9. Related academic precursors
2.9.1. Going beyond Hofstede
2.9.2. Czech-German work relation
3. Elaboration of research questions
4. Methodological devices and items to take into account
4.1. Semi-structured interviews
4.2. Data sample
4.3. Items to take into account
4.3.1. Cultural values
4.3.2. Practices and communication styles
4.3.3. Additional relevant factors
5. Results
5.1. Cultural values
5.1.1. MAS
5.1.2. UAI
5.1.3. IDV
5.1.4. LTO
5.2. Practices and communication styles
5.2.1. Formality
5.2.2. Compromise
5.2.3. Language
5.2.4. Negotiation strategy
5.2.5. Social relationships and competence in discussion
5.2.6. Criticism
5.2.7. Preparation
5.2.8. Technical language
5.2.9. Communication style descriptors
6. Analyses and conclusion
7. Limitations and future research
8. References
Research Objectives and Core Themes
This master thesis aims to examine the intercultural communication dynamics between German and Dutch employees within small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The primary objective is to identify communication differences, understand whether these differences lead to friction or synergy, and determine potential success factors to improve business cooperation in this cross-cultural context.
- Analysis of German and Dutch communication styles based on cultural dimensions and meaning systems.
- Examination of the impact of historical and educational factors on organizational behavior.
- Identification of critical communication friction points in business interactions (e.g., formality, negotiation, compromise).
- Development of managerial recommendations and success factors for enhancing intercultural cooperation.
Excerpt from the Book
2.5.1. Mutual cultural perceptions
First of all, it is important to note that most of the cultural characteristics assumed by people from one country to another country are subject to stereotypes and prejudices based on the before mentioned historical developments and complex reciprocal effects of media and rumours. According to Linthout (2006a and b), it is always the small and weak folk that projects their own bad characteristics on the big, in this case neighbouring, nation. That is why many Dutch people characterize their German friends as being not typically German (Linthout, 2006a). Another aspect which needs to be recognized is that most Germans hardly know more about the Netherlands than the stereotypes like tomatoes, windmills and Frau Antje, which is in contrast to the Dutch who know more about their bigger neighbour. This is mainly because of the unbalanced relationship between a country that is far bigger in size and number of inhabitants than the other: The bigger country is far more important to the smaller country than the other way around and therefore media and press in the Netherlands report more about German issues than the other way around (Linthout, 2006a; Müller, 1998; Schürings, 2003).
Some of the most common stereotypes about Dutch people state that they are tolerant, liberal, friendly and open-minded. Interesting is also that Dutch people also characterize themselves in this positive way (Linthout, 2006a). This has something to do with the Dutch selective way of dealing with history like the artificial identification with the victims of World War II and the Dutch role in that war, slave trade, colonial times and battles (Linthout, 2006a; Müller, 1998). Negative prejudices and stereotypes of Dutch do also exist. Linthout (2006a) states that, according to foreigners in the Netherlands, Dutch are selfish, know-it-all, hypocritical, self sufficient, have a chaotic traffic behaviour and especially for the Germans, the murders of Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh let the image of the Dutch deteriorate a bit (Linthout, 2006a).
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Introduces the research topic, emphasizing the importance of cultural fit for business success and stating the problem of Dutch-German communication.
2. Literature Review: Provides the theoretical foundation by defining culture as a system of meaning and exploring Hofstede’s dimensions, historical contexts, and communication styles.
3. Elaboration of research questions: Connects the theoretical background to the research framework, establishing the core question regarding how Dutch and Germans communicate differently.
4. Methodological devices and items to take into account: Details the qualitative research approach, specifically the use of semi-structured interviews and the criteria for the stratified data sample.
5. Results: Presents the findings from 22 semi-structured interviews, categorized into cultural values and specific communication practices.
6. Analyses and conclusion: Synthesizes the results to draw final conclusions and provides managerial success factors for intercultural business interactions.
7. Limitations and future research: Discusses the boundaries of the study and suggests paths for future research, such as expanding to other industries or using quantitative methods.
8. References: Lists the academic sources and literature used throughout the master thesis.
Keywords
Intercultural communication, German-Dutch business relations, Hofstede cultural dimensions, qualitative research, semi-structured interviews, SME, cultural values, communication styles, synergy, friction, cultural interface, organizational behavior, critical incident technique, negotiation strategy, Poldermodel.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this master thesis?
The research examines the intercultural communication challenges and dynamics specifically between Dutch and German employees working in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).
What are the primary thematic areas explored in the study?
The study focuses on cultural values, historical influences, communication practices (such as formality, negotiation, and criticism), and the practical outcomes of these interactions in a business context.
What is the central research question?
The main research question asks to what extent Germans and the Dutch communicate differently in a business context and how these differences impact their professional collaboration.
Which scientific methodology is employed?
The author uses a qualitative research design involving 22 semi-structured, face-to-face interviews with a stratified sample of experienced German and Dutch professionals, utilizing the critical incident technique.
What does the main body of the work cover?
The main body integrates a literature review on cultural theories with the qualitative results of the interviews, providing detailed insights into how cultural values like masculinity (MAS) and uncertainty avoidance (UAI) manifest in daily business tasks and communication.
Which keywords characterize this work?
Key terms include Intercultural communication, German-Dutch business relations, Hofstede cultural dimensions, SME, and critical incident technique.
How does the Dutch search for consensus differ from the German approach?
The study finds that the Dutch typically prioritize finding a consensus or "loop way" to reach a solution, whereas Germans are often more focused on predefined rules, principles, and clear technical correctness, which can lead to friction.
What role does "formality" play in these intercultural interactions?
Formality is identified as a major source of misunderstanding; Dutch business people often adopt informal address quickly to build rapport, which Germans may perceive as unprofessional or lacking the necessary social distance required for formal business structures.
- Citar trabajo
- Michiel Aaldering (Autor), 2008, German and Dutch intercultural communication, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/158182
