I went on a class trip to Kenya with my Global Engagement in Practice class in March. This trip gave me the opportunity to buttress my theoretical knowledge with practical experience, especially in global engagement. I found myself reflecting at length on intercultural theorists we had engaged with in Introduction to Global Engagement, as well as other theories we had encountered. One of these theorists was Geert Hofstede. In 205, we examined the 6 dimensions used to classify national culture (Hofstede, 2011). I thought back to which classifications Kenya fell under and whether I experienced them during my time there.

In my reflections, a critique I had of Hofstede’s classification system is that it risks undermining cultural diversity within national borders. Classifying a country as masculine, feminine, or whatnot risks obscuring the nuance that exists on the ground.

Through our engagements with students and mentors of the Kenya Education Fund program, I had the opportunity to learn more about the rich cultural diversity within the “Kenyan” identity label. I heard about some stereotypes concerning different ethnic groups. Some of these stereotypes reflected more individualistic than collectivist ideas, and vice versa. This speaks to the danger of classifying the entire country as a collectivist or individualistic culture.

Another thing we noticed was how life in the city was vastly different from life in other, more remote parts of Kenya. Each setting came with its own unique set of values, traditions, and whatnot. During the Scramble for Africa, borders were drawn with little regard for pre-existing ethnic groups and boundaries.

This places colonized countries in Africa and around the world in a unique position compared to other regions. Therefore, categorizations such as Hofstede’s assume a degree of uniformity in traditions and values that may not accurately represent a post-colonial world.

Reference

Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online readings in psychology and culture, 2(1), 8.