Page 52 - Crossing Cultural Boundaries - Cees den Teuling

and questioning the relevant norms, attitudes and behaviours concerning the KT process in their organisations. Organisations with a variety of ethnic backgrounds, widely spread over the vast territory of the Russian Federation are included to grasp a realistic blueprint of the process of KT all over the country and in a diversity of environments and circumstances.
To conclude from a management consultancy perspective, for being able to transfer knowledge to and from Russian organisations, commitment is mandatory. To accomplish the position of vital profitability and competiviness in the longer term, the openness, the willingness and the ability of the recipient’s culture is essential. To establish social interaction between actors is a decisive factor for an effective KT. The Hofstede’s dimensions, as the outcomes from the research in, and extracted from the overall Russian society will serve as a bottomline in the ongoing research. Despite the well-founded objections against Hofstede’s acceptance of the indentification of cultures with the concept of nation-states, data on cultural dimensions acquired in Russian society, other than Hofstede’s, are rather scarece or not available. Forced by circumstances, among other findings, Hofstede’s dimensions on Russia are accepted as a foundation for the field research, carried out in Russia.
2.3.3 The model of Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner
The Trompenaars (1998) framework is mainly based on the cultural and personal “value dilemma”, identified earlier by Parsons, Shils and Smelser (1965). It includes subjects addressing seven dimensions of cultural valuation, five of which, namely (i) Universalism versus Particularism, (ii) Individualism versus Collectivism, (iii) Achievement versus Ascription, (iv) Neutral versus Affective and (v) Specific versus Diffuse are derived from Parsons et al. (1965). The remaining two dimensions – (vi) Internal versus External communication and (vii) Time orientation are primarily mentioned by Kluckhohn and Strodbeck (1961) but derived from Rotter (1966) and Cottle (1968), respectively. The core idea on which the authors have constructed their model is that culture consists of basic human norms, values and assumptions. These norms, values and assumptions have been developed (and are being developed) inter- subjectively. Even if they must provide meaning for careers to be of any significance, they are still mainly unconscious. They have an impact on behaviour, organisational (or equivalent) climate, and other cultural manifestations, but they are non-material and non-behavioural in themselves (Bjerke, 1999). Acting as researchers and management consultants Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner (2005) argue that their model gives 50