Societal Culture in Iceland and Lithuania: Managerial Implications

This article contributes to cross-cultural management literature, by providing empirical data from two underresearched countries, to serve in the future as benchmark cultural shift research. Furthermore, it illustrates not only the insufficiency of mare statement of cultural dimension difference/sim...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:SAGE Open
Main Authors: Inga Minelgaite Snaebjornsson, Ingi Runar Edvardsson, Romie F. Littrell
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: SAGE Publishing 2017
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244017704023
https://doaj.org/article/622c7e53d1764122bfd2d9640545b982
id fttriple:oai:gotriple.eu:oai:doaj.org/article:622c7e53d1764122bfd2d9640545b982
record_format openpolar
spelling fttriple:oai:gotriple.eu:oai:doaj.org/article:622c7e53d1764122bfd2d9640545b982 2023-05-15T16:50:52+02:00 Societal Culture in Iceland and Lithuania: Managerial Implications Inga Minelgaite Snaebjornsson Ingi Runar Edvardsson Romie F. Littrell 2017-04-01 https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244017704023 https://doaj.org/article/622c7e53d1764122bfd2d9640545b982 en eng SAGE Publishing 2158-2440 doi:10.1177/2158244017704023 https://doaj.org/article/622c7e53d1764122bfd2d9640545b982 undefined SAGE Open, Vol 7 (2017) manag hisphilso Journal Article https://vocabularies.coar-repositories.org/resource_types/c_6501/ 2017 fttriple https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244017704023 2023-01-22T19:05:37Z This article contributes to cross-cultural management literature, by providing empirical data from two underresearched countries, to serve in the future as benchmark cultural shift research. Furthermore, it illustrates not only the insufficiency of mare statement of cultural dimension difference/similarities but also a need to contextualize them. Results indicate that Icelandic and Lithuanian societal cultures are different on three out of seven of Hofstede’s dimensions; however, these differences have considerable effect on management practices. Results also present how a similar score of the same dimension fails to explain big differences within societies regarding a particular aspect (e.g. gender gap) and suggest that societal cultural differences have implications on management practices regarding work–life balance, motivational system, organizational structure, and level of formalization. Icelanders will put more importance on leisure and will feel happier in general, whereas Lithuanians will have higher work ethics. Lithuanians will be inclined to higher need for achievement (particularly for expatriate management). More structure, formalization, hierarchy, and direct following of the regulations can be expected in Lithuania. This contribution fills the gap in the literature by comparing societal cultures of two countries that have been neglected in cross-cultural research. Both countries are undergoing societal changes and the results of this research can serve in the future as a benchmark for indication of cultural swift. Furthermore, this article outlines the practical implications of societal cultural differences for management. Article in Journal/Newspaper Iceland Unknown SAGE Open 7 2 215824401770402
institution Open Polar
collection Unknown
op_collection_id fttriple
language English
topic manag
hisphilso
spellingShingle manag
hisphilso
Inga Minelgaite Snaebjornsson
Ingi Runar Edvardsson
Romie F. Littrell
Societal Culture in Iceland and Lithuania: Managerial Implications
topic_facet manag
hisphilso
description This article contributes to cross-cultural management literature, by providing empirical data from two underresearched countries, to serve in the future as benchmark cultural shift research. Furthermore, it illustrates not only the insufficiency of mare statement of cultural dimension difference/similarities but also a need to contextualize them. Results indicate that Icelandic and Lithuanian societal cultures are different on three out of seven of Hofstede’s dimensions; however, these differences have considerable effect on management practices. Results also present how a similar score of the same dimension fails to explain big differences within societies regarding a particular aspect (e.g. gender gap) and suggest that societal cultural differences have implications on management practices regarding work–life balance, motivational system, organizational structure, and level of formalization. Icelanders will put more importance on leisure and will feel happier in general, whereas Lithuanians will have higher work ethics. Lithuanians will be inclined to higher need for achievement (particularly for expatriate management). More structure, formalization, hierarchy, and direct following of the regulations can be expected in Lithuania. This contribution fills the gap in the literature by comparing societal cultures of two countries that have been neglected in cross-cultural research. Both countries are undergoing societal changes and the results of this research can serve in the future as a benchmark for indication of cultural swift. Furthermore, this article outlines the practical implications of societal cultural differences for management.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Inga Minelgaite Snaebjornsson
Ingi Runar Edvardsson
Romie F. Littrell
author_facet Inga Minelgaite Snaebjornsson
Ingi Runar Edvardsson
Romie F. Littrell
author_sort Inga Minelgaite Snaebjornsson
title Societal Culture in Iceland and Lithuania: Managerial Implications
title_short Societal Culture in Iceland and Lithuania: Managerial Implications
title_full Societal Culture in Iceland and Lithuania: Managerial Implications
title_fullStr Societal Culture in Iceland and Lithuania: Managerial Implications
title_full_unstemmed Societal Culture in Iceland and Lithuania: Managerial Implications
title_sort societal culture in iceland and lithuania: managerial implications
publisher SAGE Publishing
publishDate 2017
url https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244017704023
https://doaj.org/article/622c7e53d1764122bfd2d9640545b982
genre Iceland
genre_facet Iceland
op_source SAGE Open, Vol 7 (2017)
op_relation 2158-2440
doi:10.1177/2158244017704023
https://doaj.org/article/622c7e53d1764122bfd2d9640545b982
op_rights undefined
op_doi https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244017704023
container_title SAGE Open
container_volume 7
container_issue 2
container_start_page 215824401770402
_version_ 1766040992628080640