tion. Van Oudenhoven (2001) states that there is a difference
between organizational cultures and national culture. The
national culture is linked with the values, beliefs, and
practices shared by the group of individuals related to a
nation, while the organizational culture is concerned with
beliefs, values, and practices shared by most individuals of
an organization. The individuals together make a culture
(Zakour, 2004) which affects adoption and usage behaviors,
and it must be considered when studying the adoption of any
technology.
4.5 Culture Theories
Many approaches have been considered to investigate the
effects of cultural dimensions including Hofstede’s (1980a)
cultural dimensions, social identity theory (Straub, 2002),
and Triandis’s (1982) cultural dimensions. Hofstede’s
(1980a) cultural dimensions are the most widely recognized
and accepted for comparison of cultures on national levels in
multiple countries. Many researchers adopted Hofstede’s
questionnaire to study culture at the individual level. Baptista and Oliveira (2015) used Hofstede’s (1980a) cultural
dimensions to understand the individual and situational
characteristics in the adoption of mobile banking, adding
new understandings into how culture impacts an individual’s
behavioral intention. Further, Hofstede’s work has also been
well appreciated and accepted in investigating the influence
of culture on technology acceptance (Straub, Keil, & Brenner,
1997). Several studies are available in which researchers
have developed different types of cultural classification systems. There are similarities in some cases and there is also
overlap in a few cases. Three well-known cultural classification schemes are: (a) Schwartz’s value inventory, (b) Inglehart’s world values survey, and (c) Hofstede’s value survey
module.
• Schwartz’s Value Inventory: A different approach was
used to determine the values of a culture. Hofstede’s
survey asked for a preferred outcome, but Schwartz asked
to rank the importance of certain values from 60,000
participants, not just from business areas, but from all
areas of endeavor and outlined ten cultural values in two
groups (Schwartz, 1992). Group 1 was named ‘Individual
Interest’ and included power, hedonism, achievement,
self‐direction, and stimulation. Group 2 was named
‘Collective Interest’ and included universalism, tradition,
benevolence, security, and conformity. The results from
Schwartz’s study were not widely dispersed and did not
have as appropriate a population sample as Hofstede
(1980a).
• Inglehart’s World Values Survey: This study collected
and analyzed the data from 80 countries for two indices.
The first category was named ‘Traditionalto-Secular/Rational values’ and shows the difference in
countries from traditional family ties, religion, and deference to authority points of view. The second category
was named ‘Survival-to-Self-Expression values’ and
reflects the desire of countries for basic survival (i.e.
shelter and food) against the desire for equal rights and
self‐expression.
• Hofstede’s Value Survey Module: Hofstede’s value
survey is one of the most prominent cultural classifications that involved more than 100,000 IBM employees
from more than 50 countries between 1967 and 1973. The
initial IBM questionnaire was developed into the form
called VSM 80 (Values Survey Module, developed in
1980) that was further updated into VSM 81 and VSM
82. The initial versions of VSM included questions
related to business populations. For instance, the word
‘boss’ was used in early versions; this word was invalid
for the general population and later it was corrected in
VSM 94. A later version of VSM includes VSM2008 and
VSM 2013.
4.6 Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions
and Saudi Arabia
Hofstede (1980a) identified four indices by which a culture
can be measured (later more dimensions were included). The
description of all dimensions is described as follows:
• Power Distance Index (PDI): The PDI refers to
inequality among the people of the country’s culture.
The PDI explains the degree to which the individuals of a
society accept less power (Hofstede, 2011). Greater PDI
means that inequalities of power and wealth are evident in
a culture (Al-Gahtani et al., 2007). The cultures with a
greater PDI index have authority differentials and unequal
distribution of power, and centralized decision shapes
their main societal culture (Hofstede, 1980a). High PDI
cultures exhibit a hierarchical structure where the individuals are very much concerned about agreeing with
their bosses’ opinions. In cultures having high power
distance, some individuals will be seen as more influential
or important. The employees in an Arab culture demonstrate a significant relationship between the variables of
social influence and behavioral intention, compared, for
instance, with the US (Al-Gahtani et al., 2007).
• Individualism (INDV) versus Collectivism: The Individualism (INDV) describes the amount of individualism
of a society. In individualistic cultures, the relations
between people are not strong enough and the individuals
of the society are supposed to take care of themselves;
22
4 Technology Adoption in Saudi Arabia
between organizational cultures and national culture. The
national culture is linked with the values, beliefs, and
practices shared by the group of individuals related to a
nation, while the organizational culture is concerned with
beliefs, values, and practices shared by most individuals of
an organization. The individuals together make a culture
(Zakour, 2004) which affects adoption and usage behaviors,
and it must be considered when studying the adoption of any
technology.
4.5 Culture Theories
Many approaches have been considered to investigate the
effects of cultural dimensions including Hofstede’s (1980a)
cultural dimensions, social identity theory (Straub, 2002),
and Triandis’s (1982) cultural dimensions. Hofstede’s
(1980a) cultural dimensions are the most widely recognized
and accepted for comparison of cultures on national levels in
multiple countries. Many researchers adopted Hofstede’s
questionnaire to study culture at the individual level. Baptista and Oliveira (2015) used Hofstede’s (1980a) cultural
dimensions to understand the individual and situational
characteristics in the adoption of mobile banking, adding
new understandings into how culture impacts an individual’s
behavioral intention. Further, Hofstede’s work has also been
well appreciated and accepted in investigating the influence
of culture on technology acceptance (Straub, Keil, & Brenner,
1997). Several studies are available in which researchers
have developed different types of cultural classification systems. There are similarities in some cases and there is also
overlap in a few cases. Three well-known cultural classification schemes are: (a) Schwartz’s value inventory, (b) Inglehart’s world values survey, and (c) Hofstede’s value survey
module.
• Schwartz’s Value Inventory: A different approach was
used to determine the values of a culture. Hofstede’s
survey asked for a preferred outcome, but Schwartz asked
to rank the importance of certain values from 60,000
participants, not just from business areas, but from all
areas of endeavor and outlined ten cultural values in two
groups (Schwartz, 1992). Group 1 was named ‘Individual
Interest’ and included power, hedonism, achievement,
self‐direction, and stimulation. Group 2 was named
‘Collective Interest’ and included universalism, tradition,
benevolence, security, and conformity. The results from
Schwartz’s study were not widely dispersed and did not
have as appropriate a population sample as Hofstede
(1980a).
• Inglehart’s World Values Survey: This study collected
and analyzed the data from 80 countries for two indices.
The first category was named ‘Traditionalto-Secular/Rational values’ and shows the difference in
countries from traditional family ties, religion, and deference to authority points of view. The second category
was named ‘Survival-to-Self-Expression values’ and
reflects the desire of countries for basic survival (i.e.
shelter and food) against the desire for equal rights and
self‐expression.
• Hofstede’s Value Survey Module: Hofstede’s value
survey is one of the most prominent cultural classifications that involved more than 100,000 IBM employees
from more than 50 countries between 1967 and 1973. The
initial IBM questionnaire was developed into the form
called VSM 80 (Values Survey Module, developed in
1980) that was further updated into VSM 81 and VSM
82. The initial versions of VSM included questions
related to business populations. For instance, the word
‘boss’ was used in early versions; this word was invalid
for the general population and later it was corrected in
VSM 94. A later version of VSM includes VSM2008 and
VSM 2013.
4.6 Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions
and Saudi Arabia
Hofstede (1980a) identified four indices by which a culture
can be measured (later more dimensions were included). The
description of all dimensions is described as follows:
• Power Distance Index (PDI): The PDI refers to
inequality among the people of the country’s culture.
The PDI explains the degree to which the individuals of a
society accept less power (Hofstede, 2011). Greater PDI
means that inequalities of power and wealth are evident in
a culture (Al-Gahtani et al., 2007). The cultures with a
greater PDI index have authority differentials and unequal
distribution of power, and centralized decision shapes
their main societal culture (Hofstede, 1980a). High PDI
cultures exhibit a hierarchical structure where the individuals are very much concerned about agreeing with
their bosses’ opinions. In cultures having high power
distance, some individuals will be seen as more influential
or important. The employees in an Arab culture demonstrate a significant relationship between the variables of
social influence and behavioral intention, compared, for
instance, with the US (Al-Gahtani et al., 2007).
• Individualism (INDV) versus Collectivism: The Individualism (INDV) describes the amount of individualism
of a society. In individualistic cultures, the relations
between people are not strong enough and the individuals
of the society are supposed to take care of themselves;
22
4 Technology Adoption in Saudi Arabia