Dear Editor,
As we craft a new course for Guyana for the next fifty years, it will become necessary for us to develop a more in-depth understanding of how our society is configured and how it functions. What are the factors which are not so obvious but are yet very important and influence the way we communicate internally and externally, verbally and non-verbally? What are our preferences for a more or less structured society and the way we raise our children and do family? How do we address conflicts; what is the role of tradition; how fast or slow do we walk; and where are we located on the cultural context spectrum, among other things?
This kind of information is useful for investors, generally foreigners, migrants, re-migrants, local leaders and the general citizenry. Even as we engage in a re-migration programme that seeks to attract Guyanese in the diaspora, developing a greater understanding of the differences in the cultural values in the societies that they are leaving and the one being entered, can assist in smoother transitions and reduce the impact of culture shock.
This is another part of the research work I am doing on the behaviour of the Guyanese society.
While human nature is inherited, culture is learned; however, individuals within all cultures vary based on differences, preferences, values, and experiences. Four of the five cultural dimensions which were identified by Geert Hofstede and are globally relevant reflected in all aspects of life are: power distance, individualism v collectivism, uncertainty avoidance and long term v short term orientation.
I have been working with internationals for more than a decade and have engaged Guyanese who reside in places like the US, Canada and the United Kingdom and have seen and heard of their struggles to understand and in some cases, get adjusted to the way the Guyanese society works. Some have even concluded that Guyanese are backward and some, based on their exposure to other societies, have concluded that the way the Guyanese society operates is the wrong way.
When it comes to business, promoting cultural sensitivity will help people work more effectively when interacting with people from other countries, and can be an essential factor to ensure that transactions are successful.
Power distance is a way to explain the handling of differences between groups existing in a system of inequality. It reflects a culture’s attitude towards human inequality which is defined, for example, in an organization through a manager/subordinate relationship. It is the extent to which the less powerful members of organizations and institutions in a society accept and expect that power is distributed unequally. Thus there are large and small power distance countries.
In large power distance countries hierarchy is clearly established and executed in society and importance is placed on social status. Another fundamental characteristic of a large power distance country is that power is centralized. In a small power distance country, seniors and subordinates have access to near equal levels of power, people question authority and there is an attempt to distribute power. A key point to note is that, power is decentralized.
As one examines the characteristics of the Guyanese society, one can conclude that Guyana is more a large power distance country; nevertheless, there is an interesting development where members of the society, the followers in this case, are moving towards a small power distance culture while the leadership seems to be more large power distance. The followership is moving more in the direction of wanting power to be distributed more equally and to be more decentralized while the leadership tends to accept that power should be centralized.
This, I believe is a positive shift for Guyana and could be one of the factors that is causing the shift in political governance since 2011. Using this scenario, it therefore means that the people of Guyana are a critical element that is causing the tide, so to speak, which is creating the wave that is shifting the political frontiers of Guyana.
Another dimension is individualism v collectivism. Individualism-collectivism relates to the characteristics of a society and identifies the extent to which people in a society are integrated into groups. In individualistic societies people have loose ties that often only relate an individual to his or her immediate family; there is an expectation that individuals look after themselves.
A collectivist society is one in which tightly integrated relationships tie extended families and others into in-groups which are very loyal and support each other; for example, when conflict arises with another in-group.
This dimension again is very interesting in the case of Guyana. Guyana is generally a collectivist society; however, some aspects of the society are shifting to more of an individualist culture. There could be several reasons, one of which could be the change in family structure – more single parent families and less extended families, another reason is, employment – more persons in families are now employed. Nevertheless, the sub-culture among Indians in Guyana seems to have maintained a higher level of collectivist culture than some other groups. Part of the reason for the collectivist culture among Indians is based on their historical cultural context which goes back to Asia and Asians being more high context than other regions.
Another dimension is uncertainty avoidance. Uncertainty avoidance indicates the level of comfort a society has with unstructured situations; it is society’s tolerance for ambiguity. It is the way in which people in a society embrace or avert an unexpected event, or one which is unknown or outside of what is usual. There are high and low uncertainty avoidance cultures. In high uncertainty avoidance cultures, unstructured situations and ambiguity is avoided, and strict behaviour codes, laws and rules are observed. Individuals from a strong uncertainty avoidance cultural background may feel a strong need to be definitive; time lines, and outcomes expectations are important.
Individuals from a low or weak uncertainty avoidance cultural background may feel more comfortable with the unknown and have less need to be definitive. Lower uncertainty avoidance cultures tend to impose fewer regulations, ambiguity is more customary, and the environment is more free-flowing.
Guyana in my view has more of a low or weak uncertainty avoidance culture; nevertheless, I do believe that there is need to be more definitive and for less ambiguity in areas such as the judiciary.
Another dimension is long-term-orientation and short-term orientation societies. This refers to whether a society exhibits a practical future-oriented perspective or a conservative, historical point of view. Long-term orientation societies are more focused toward the future; they view adaptation and circumstantial, realistic problem-solving as a necessity. In short-term orientation cultures, traditions are honoured and kept; steadfastness is valued.
Respect for tradition, preservation of ‘face,’ and personal steadiness and stability are important factors, and the connection of the past with the current and future actions and challenges is important. Guyana has more features of a short-term-orientation society.
Yours faithfully,
Audreyanna Thomas
