Editing Power distance (section)

====Power Distance Index (PDI)====
The PDI is designed to measure the extent to which power differs within the society, organization, and institutions is accepted by less powerful members.<ref>{{Cite book|last = Hofstede|first = Geert H.|year = 1997|title = Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind |edition=second |location = New York |publisher = McGraw-Hill|isbn=978-0-07-707474-6|page= 27}} Originally published in 1991 as ''Cultures and organizations: software of the mind: intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival''.</ref> The index assigns a score to each country that indicates its level of power distance and dependent relationships. The PDI also represents society's level of inequality that is defined from below rather than from above. The PDI uses relative values; it is only useful when comparing countries.<ref name="Velo-26">{{harvnb|Velo|2011|page=26}}</ref>

Hofstede derived power distance scores for three regions and fifty countries from the answers given by IBM employees in the same type of positions to the same questions. The PDI was calculated by:

1. Preparing three survey questions:
* How frequently, in the employees' experience, were they afraid to express disagreement with their managers? (mean score on a 1–5 scale from "very frequently" to "very seldom")<ref name="GHH-25">{{harvnb|Hofstede|1997|page=25}}</ref>
* Subordinates' perception of their boss's actual decision-making style (percentage choosing either the description of an autocratic or of a paternalistic style, out of four possible styles plus "none of these alternatives")<ref name="GHH-25" />
* Subordinates' preference for their boss's decision-making style (percentage preferring an autocratic or a paternalistic style, or, as type based on majority vote, but not a consultative style)<ref name="GHH-25" />
2. Pre-coding the answers to be represented as numbers (e.g. 1, 2, 3, 4...)

3. Computing the mean score for the answers of equal samples of people from each country or percentage that chose particular answers

4. Sorting the questions into groups—known as clusters or factors—by using a statistical procedure

5. Adding or subtracting the three scores after multiplying each with a fixed number

6. Adding another fixed number

Hofstede found that the emotional distance is relatively small in lower PDI cultures. There are more democratic or consultative relations between expecting and accepting power. People are relatively interdependent to the power holders, and there is a relatively low inequality of power distributed among the people. Under these circumstances, the decentralized authority and flat management structure is common but not universal, which suggests that managers and subordinates will, on average, be relatively less concerned with status, and the distribution of decision-making responsibility is extensive. Policies like the "open door" policy are implemented more often, which influence higher-ranking individuals to be more receptive to lower-ranking individuals, and subordinates to be more likely to challenge or give suggestions to their superiors. Examples of countries with low PDIs include the [[Netherlands]], the [[United Kingdom]], the [[United States]], [[Germany]], and the [[Nordic countries]].<ref name="Smit">{{Cite web|author=Smit, Chris |date=26 April 2012 |title = Power Distance or PDI|url = http://culturematters.com/power-distance-or-pdi/|website = culturematters.com|access-date =14 September 2015}} (self-published)</ref>

In higher PDI cultures, the power relations are [[Paternalism|paternalistic]] and [[Autocracy|autocratic]], and centralized authority exists; there is a wide gap or emotional distance which is perceived to exist among people at different levels of the hierarchy. There is considerable dependence (also known as counter-dependence) on individuals who hold power. In the workplace, subordinates are willing to accept their inferior positions, and superiors may not ask for broad participation in the decision-making process. Higher PDI cultures usually adopt an autocratic leadership style, which means subordinates may be unlikely to approach and contradict their bosses directly.<ref name="GHH-25" /> Countries with high power distance cultures usually believe that there is nothing wrong with inequality and everyone has specific positions. [[China]], [[Belgium]], [[France]], [[Malaysia]], and the [[Arab world]] are regarded as examples of countries or regions with high PDI cultures.<ref name="Smit" />

Hofstede's study is limited by two factors: neutralization and analyzing non-Western countries with a Western [[methodology]]. Each stage of the research process makes the unneutral seem neutral. The questionnaire reflects a large power distance: its questions were explicitly designed to resolve the normative concerns of researchers; it primarily served the concerns of those who needed to do comparative analysis and created it through "coercing a culturally distinct axis of comparison" on a variety of employees.<ref>{{Cite journal|last = Ailon|first = Galit|year=2008 |title =Mirror, Mirror on the Wall: Culture's consequences in a value test of its own design|journal = Academy of Management Review |doi=10.2307/20159451 |jstor=20159451 |volume=33 |issue = 4|pages=885–904|doi-access=free}}</ref> Additionally, the questionnaire adopted a Western methodology to analyze non-Western countries and was relatively selective in representing the inequality within Western countries. For example, the PDI concentrated on the boss and subordinate relationship, which could be seen as biased, as it ignores other forms of western inequality. Apparently, the questions failed to measure the racial, colonial, and broader class inequalities that should be taken into account when measuring power distance.{{Citation needed|date=January 2021}}