| Course | OGL 350 Diversity and Organizations |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 4 |
| Paper type | Interview analysis paper |
| Length | About 853 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Arizona State University |
| Program | BA in Organizational Leadership |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for OGL 350 Module 4
Respect, Family and the Long Way Up: An Intercultural Interview Through Hofstede's Lens
Student Name
BA in Organizational Leadership, Arizona State University
OGL 350: Diversity and Organizations
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Respect, Family and the Long Way Up: An Intercultural Interview Through Hofstede's Lens
Introduction
I interviewed Lucía (a pseudonym), 41, a shift supervisor at a logistics company in Phoenix. She was born in Hermosillo, Sonora, moved to Arizona at 19, became a U.S. citizen at 30 and now leads a team of 22 warehouse associates. I grew up in a small Ohio town and have no family ties to Mexico. Our hour-long conversation, held over video with her permission, focused on work, family and the moments when she noticed cultural differences most. This paper analyzes her experiences using Hofstede's cultural dimensions, examines how several dimensions of identity shaped them and connects her account to published research.
Hofstede's Dimensions: Mexico and the United States
Hofstede and colleagues describe national cultures on six dimensions, scored roughly from 0 to 100 (Hofstede et al., 2010). The scores describe national tendencies, not individuals, but they offered a useful starting point.
The largest gaps, power distance and individualism, matched what Lucía raised first. In her first job, she waited to be told what to do and avoided disagreeing with her supervisor, behavior her American manager read as a lack of initiative. "In Mexico," she said, "you show respect by not putting your boss on the spot." Her experience fits Hofstede's description of high power distance cultures, in which subordinates expect to be told what to do (Hofstede et al., 2010). Today she deliberately asks her team for disagreement, explaining, "I had to learn that here, the boss wants to hear no."
Collectivism appeared in her decisions about work. She turned down a promotion that would have required moving to Texas because her parents, who had joined her in Phoenix, depended on her. Her American colleagues saw the decision as a career mistake; she saw it as obvious. Research on Hispanic cultural scripts describes simpatía, an emphasis on warmth and harmony in relationships, as a strong expectation in social interaction (Triandis et al., 1984). Lucía described feeling that early American meetings were "cold," with business discussed before anyone asked about family.
The framework fit less well on long-term orientation, where the scores are nearly identical and Lucía noticed no difference, and it could not capture how her views changed over two decades. National scores also hide regional and generational variation; she described her younger siblings, raised in Arizona, as "more American than me."
| Dimension | Mexico | United States | What Lucía described |
|---|---|---|---|
| Power distance | 81 | 40 | Calling her first U.S. manager by his first name "felt rude for a year" |
| Individualism | 30 | 91 | Sending money home and including family in every major decision |
| Masculinity | 69 | 62 | Similar drive to achieve in both places |
| Uncertainty avoidance | 82 | 46 | Preferring clear procedures; surprised by "figure it out" instructions |
| Long-term orientation | 24 | 26 | Little difference noticed |
| Indulgence | 97 | 68 | Celebrations at work mattered; she organizes the team's birthday lunches |
Dimensions of Identity
Language shaped her early career most. Although she studied English in school, she was placed in jobs that did not require speaking with customers until her English became fluent, and she believes that delayed her advancement by several years. Gender intersected with culture: on the warehouse floor, some older male associates from Mexico initially resisted taking direction from a woman, while some American managers assumed she was an interpreter rather than a supervisor. Socioeconomic status mattered because she paid for community college while working nights. Citizenship changed how secure she felt; before naturalizing, she avoided raising complaints at work. Religion, she said, was a source of community rather than a barrier, since her Catholic parish connected her to job leads. Race was the dimension she discussed least, although she noted that customers sometimes spoke to her slowly before she said a word.
Connecting the Interview to Research
Quantitative data place Lucía's story in context. People of Mexican origin are the largest Hispanic origin group in the United States, at about 37.2 million in 2021; about 29% were immigrants, 74% of those ages 5 and older spoke English proficiently and 15% of adults 25 and older held a bachelor's degree (Moslimani et al., 2023). Lucía is unusual in having completed a degree, which she earned at 35. Qualitative research points the same way: an interview study of Hispanic women managers and professionals found that their career possibilities were shaped by both cultural and personal perspectives, a framework that excluded neither family nor ambition (Hite, 2007). Lucía described exactly that balance.
What I Learned
I had assumed that cultural differences at work would show up as misunderstandings in language. The interview showed me they appear more often in expectations about authority and family. As a future manager, I will ask new team members how they prefer to receive feedback, and I will not read silence in meetings as a lack of ideas.
Conclusion
Hofstede's dimensions explained much of what Lucía experienced, especially around power distance and collectivism, but her story also showed the limits of national averages and the importance of language, gender and citizenship. Combining the framework with her own account and published data produced a fuller picture than any one source alone.
References
Hite, L. M. (2007). Hispanic women managers and professionals: Reflections on life and work. Gender, Work & Organization, 14(1), 20-36. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2007.00330.x
Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Moslimani, M., Lopez, M. H., & Noe-Bustamante, L. (2023, August 16). 11 facts about Hispanic origin groups in the U.S. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/08/16/11-facts-about-hispanic-origin-groups-in-the-us/
Triandis, H. C., Marín, G., Lisansky, J., & Betancourt, H. (1984). Simpatía as a cultural script of Hispanics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(6), 1363-1375. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.47.6.1363
Reading the OGL 350 Module 4 assignment instructions
The Intercultural Interview and Paper is due November 15 in Module 4 of OGL 350, Cultural Value Frameworks and Inclusion, and it carries one tenth of the course total; a 10-point interview proposal is due earlier, in Module 2. Interview someone who identifies as having heritage from a culture outside the United States and different from your own. Analyze cultural differences using Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions. Explore how race, gender, socioeconomic status, religion, language and citizenship shape the person's experiences, and connect their insights to qualitative and quantitative research on cultural and global issues. Detailed rubrics are posted in the module, and the Module 4 chapters on cultural value orientations and cultural dimensions supply the framework. Keep the interviewee's identity private.
How the OGL 350 Module 4 example is put together
Lucía's pseudonym, the setting of the call and her consent are given in the opening paragraph. A table places Hofstede's published scores for both countries beside the interviewee's own examples, and the analysis tests where the scores match her story and where they miss it. A separate section addresses each identity dimension the prompt names, noting where they intersect. The research section uses a quantitative source with specific figures and a qualitative interview study, which meets the requirement for both kinds of evidence. A short section on what the student learned connects the interview to future management practice. Margin notes explain why the score table and the separate identity sections make the analysis stronger.
Where the marks sit in the OGL 350 Module 4 rubric
Graders evaluating the interview paper look for a real conversation analyzed with Hofstede's dimensions, attention to every identity factor in the prompt and a clear connection to both qualitative and quantitative research. Papers lose points when they report the interview as a narrative without analysis, when Hofstede scores are listed without being applied, when one identity factor is ignored or when research is cited only in general terms. Respecting the interviewee's privacy matters, so use a pseudonym and avoid identifying details. Instructors also reward papers that question the framework's limits, since national averages never describe one person fully. Specific quotations from the interview, used as evidence for each point, usually earn more credit than paraphrase.
OGL 350 Module 4 help: mistakes that cost marks
Draft interview questions that touch every identity factor in the prompt. Ask for stories and examples, not opinions about culture in general. Take notes or record with permission. Look up Hofstede scores for both countries before you analyze. Compare the scores with what the person actually said. Find one quantitative and one qualitative source. Use a pseudonym and remove identifying details. If your notes feel scattered, the desk can help you organize them by dimension. Leave room to reflect on what surprised you. Send the interviewee a short summary afterward to confirm you understood their stories correctly. Thank them in writing.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Arizona State University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More OGL 350 and BA in Organizational Leadership sample papers
- OGL 350 Module 6: Cultural Immersion Paper: A Vietnamese Lunar New Year Celebration in Phoenix
- OGL 343 Module 7: Final Dream Team Paper: Becoming a Better Teammate and Team Leader
- OGL 300 Module 7: Crisis Action Plan: Five Interventions That Could Have Stopped the Boeing 737 MAX Slide
OGL 350 Module 4 questions, answered
Where can I find a free OGL 350 Module 4 sample paper?
The full intercultural interview paper analyzed with Hofstede's dimensions is on this page.
What does the OGL 350 interview paper require?
An interview analyzed with Hofstede's dimensions, attention to identity factors and links to research.
What are Hofstede's six cultural dimensions?
How a society handles hierarchy, the pull between self and group, competition, ambiguity, time horizons and restraint versus enjoyment.
How do Mexico and the United States differ on power distance?
Widely: in the published scores Mexico sits at 81, roughly double the U.S. figure of 40.
How many people of Mexican origin live in the United States?
About 37.2 million in 2021, according to Pew Research Center.