Hofstede’s Theory
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Hofstede’s theory is one of the organizational theories that explain industrial and organizational psychology (Suwanti et al., 2018). The theory evaluates organizational psychology on five different elements. Each element defines where an organization’s culture lies. The first element in this theory is individualism and collectivism. An organization’s culture can be evaluated using these two elements on the basis of how well people look after themselves while still maintaining their group integration. If an organization leans more on looking after oneself and less on group integration, it is considered an individualistic culture. Alternatively, if the organization is more focused on group integration than individuality, it is considered a collectivist culture.
In the second evaluation, organizational culture is evaluated based on power distance. It refers to how much those with less power are permissive or expect unequal distributions of power in the organization. The next element of evaluation is uncertainty avoidance. It refers to the level at which employees in an organization are comfortable with unstructured situations. In the masculinity/femininity evaluation element, the organization is defined by how it distributed emotional roles between gender (Landy & Conte, 2016). Suppose an organization focuses more on technical performance and achievements; it is considered masculine. More feminine cultures are defined by their focus on interpersonal relationships and communication. The last evaluation element is short-term versus long-term. The evaluation for this element advises on the extent to which employees in an organization expect gratification. It can be material, emotional or social needs gratifications.
The concept of person-organization evaluates how well a person fits into the organization they hope to join. There are different ways to evaluate how well a person fits the organization, including whether they have the skills for the job. Their personality must also fit the organizational culture, and they should be willing to learn skills that they do not have (Suwanti et al., 2018). The concept of person-job evaluates how well an employee fits their job description. Employees are evaluated based on their abilities and skill and whether they fit all the job requirements. Organizations must therefore begin by developing a comprehensive job description. They should evaluate the level of technicality of an organization. It will lead them to define the type of skills required for the job.
Organizations should evaluate which is the best type of fit to use for different positions. Most office jobs, managerial positions, and administration positions need the person-organization fit. Even though the focus is on how well the candidates fit into the culture, they must also be adequately skilled. The negative impact of this fit is that it might cost more and take more time when employees have to be trained on the extra skills they might not have. Using the person-job fit ensures that the organization has greater productivity (Suwanti et al., 2018). These people have the right skills and do not need further training to fulfill their tasks. However, if these people do not fit the culture, their productivity might be reverse. Employees who do not fit in culture have negative experiences that affect their motivation and their performance. We realize that it is important for organizations to balance these two types of fit to ensure they get the best out of both worlds. It is possible to find highly qualified people who, at the same time, fit the organizational culture.
References
Landy, F. J., & Conte, J. M. (2016). Work in the 21st century: An introduction to industrial and organizational psychology. John Wiley & Sons.
Suwanti, S., Udin, U., & Widodo, W. (2018). Person-organization fit, person-job fit, and innovative work behavior: The role of organizational citizenship behavior.