Collectivism and individualism both were originally just different assortment of behaviors adopted in different regions around the world. Similar to the concept of customs and traditions, it’s almost impossible to identify a specific date to when a culture started. Basically, the emergence and prominence of international media was one of the strongest factors that helped in introducing and illustrating different political, intellectual, social, economical and many other differences in approaches to the public. As proposed by Loveless (2009) “International media are more informative of the global environment, focusing on events outside the region that enlarge the scope of issues and events. International media then provide information and exposure to a wider range of political and social phenomena.
” With raising awareness and openness to the world came along fear of normalization and Rebellion.That’s when collectivism and individualism evolved from differences in behaviors, to become one of the most up-to-date controversial issues. According to Thomas et al. (2003) the definition of individualism and collectivism are as following “Individualism refers to the tendency to view one’s self as independent of others and to be more concerned about consequences of behaviors for one’s personal goals, while the other end of the continuum, collectivism refers to the tendency to view the self as interdependent with selected others, be concerned about consequences of behavior for the goals of the in-group, and be more willing to sacrifice personal interests for group welfare”. The United States of America, Australia and France are the most recognized countries that adapt the individualist’s ideology.
On the other side, countries like Japan, china and New Zealand adapt collectivism. The core of the existing debate is on deciding which ideology is erroneous and which’s impeccable. At the end, it’s not a matter of which one is wrong and which is right, because certainly both approaches were derived and based on good intentions, definitely as well both show advantages and flaws. So this issue is better discussed based on which approach has proven to be more successful on the long term.
Even if one promotes a healthier life style, it’s still a nonnegotiable matter that neither collectivism nor individualism should be abandoned in favor of the other: As maintaining balance between these two extremes might be the best adopted solution, which is exactly why it’s important to go into depth of both ideologies; as once the picture gets clearer, most disagreements might come to an end. Individualism based on a series of well-developed and credible premises has proven to be more successful in providing a healthy, sustainable society.Though there is a greater chance of committing mistakes or falling into wrong decisions in individualist societies due to the expanded capacity of freedom; yet this is specifically why individualistic societies are progressing in a high pace, because failures give the most effective lessons and experience to humans. Other than that, the priority given to full-filling self-desire is not a sign of selfishness; in fact, if individuals are not satisfied then they would be unmotivated and in this case how much of positive impact can they leave in a society? Individualism allows more capacity for unconventional approach in the workplace; referring back to the (Merriam Webster Dictionary, 2013) unconventional is defined as “being out of the ordinary”. Individualist societies appreciate those who stand-out for their exceptional potential and personal achievements are encouraged through social and financial rewards.
Lam, Baum and Pine (2001) Found that “positive relationship between job satisfaction and rewards exists and rewards are considered key factor in determining job satisfaction of employee.” In companies that adopt individualistic ideology, employees who contribute with considerably fine ideas and who work efficiently usually won’t be given any privilege over their co-workers, as efficiency is an obligatory requirement. So for individuals who strive to reach higher positions in their career, they should aim for originality of ideas and matchlessness in the quality of their work. When employees keep in mind that good is not good enough to make them distinguished, this will be their incentive to start thinking outside the box and will raise a good spirit of competitiveness in the work place; leading to innovation.In contrast, Collectivist societies are group-oriented.
As Jackson, Colquitt, Wesson & Zapata-Phelan (2006) Mentioned in their journal that “collectivists (a) use groups as the units of analysis in their social space, preferring to draw meaning from group memberships; (b) emphasize a sense of collective responsibility and common fate.” This indicates that accomplishments or failures both will eventually be attributed to the group as a whole, but it’s well-known that people show disparity when it comes to ingenuity, knowledge, proficiency and qualifications. So how come all are rewarded and condemned equally? This suggests that in some cases inactive, dependent members will get more than they deserve and in other cases diligent, distinguished individuals will receive less privilege than what they actually deserve. In both cases this proposes a flaw in the collectivist’s ideology. Firstly, because an individual of an extraordinary standard who is constantly under-evaluated for the sake of a supposed obligation of commitment to the group, at certain point will end up becoming unmotivated or will develop feelings of bitterness.
Secondly, lazy members will never recognize their weaknesses or may find no urge to improve because they know that their weaknesses will kind of get disguised and masked by the groups’ strengths. According to a comparative study conducted by Jun, Z. and Chen, L. (2008) the following was concluded about a Chinese sample representing collectivism and an American sample representing individualism “There’s also a significantly negative association between tenure and rank for this sample (The Chinese sample), indicating that the longer an individual stays with the same organization, the more likely they would be holding a higher position in the hierarchy. Interestingly, these associations are not observed in the US sample.
” This suggests that in individualistic society, the rank and salary of the individuals are based only upon their performance and efforts, unlike collectivist societies where factors such as age and years of belonging to the company or any external factors that might lead to unfair decisions in the work place.Whereas implementation of individualism in the workplace, helps employees discover their weaknesses and stresses on improving them. As decisions and tasks are carried individually this means that any mistake in the process or end result of the work, there will be one individual to clearly refer to and be directly blamed for that flaw. As a consequence, this enhances sense of responsibility because each employee is now very cautious not to commit mistakes, to avoid being blamed or expelled from their work and to also maintain a good reputation for themselves. As Natadecha-Sposel (1993) mentioned that “Although the parents father and mother were near by, they paid no attention to their fallen and crying baby.
However, as students were trying to help comfort him, the parents told them to leave him alone; he would be right on his own; the baby did get up and stopped crying without any assistance”.This proves that individualism helps to teach independence; and though having someone to always give support in adversity is a blessing like in collectivist societies. Yet it’s better to learn to be independent and not to count on someone to help you overcome obstacles, because no one knows the circumstances that might take place and force individuals to travel or make them face hardships alone. Individualist societies will still cooperate with others and get involved in group work, but only derived by mutual exchange of benefit, so individualism doesn’t make people egocentric nor detached and uncooperative; it only insists on guaranteeing that each is treated and rewarded, precisely according to the potential and extent of effort they’ve given. One more thing is the prominence of freedom of speech in Individualist societies and this is matched with acceptance of opposing views in such societies.
This gives more space for constructive argumentations to take place between employees and their bosses.Some employees may light up some issues that managers might not have noticed and in this way the performance of the company will improve and will progress. From another view, freedom of expression might generate benefits to the work place, as managers will make sure to provide their employees with their full rights and will prepare a workplace that satisfies the employees and motivates them to work, in order to avoid criticism or revolt from their employees’ side. This concept even applies to greater aspects of the society, like politics; in a free country like America, the president is chosen by the will and votes of the citizens, so people in authority are fully aware that if they are not up to the expectations of the citizens and if they fail to commit to the promises made in their speeches.
Then the free media will address this and will represent the sound of rage of the people; and in order to avoid such chaos or chance of revolution, people in authority would stay devoted to the comfort and luxury of the general public.Some might comprehend that individualist societies are psychologically-less-stable and undergo higher stress levels due to the pressure accompanied with the prominence of competitiveness. Though this assumption may seem rational, yet it’s not necessarily valid. According to Individualist’s ideology, ones’ commitment to their own wellbeing and desires is rated as a first priority.
To demonstrate a clearer image, individuals for instance can openly express their unpreparedness to host guests at certain times, the other side would accept this attitude with openness and consideration; here individualistic behavior serves the convenience of not only the host but the guests as well, as honesty in expression of feelings is the guests’ indicator to avoid burdening others unintentionally; this behavior adopted by individualist societies should neither be categorized as rudeness nor selfishness, It’s simply a matter of self-appreciation.Self appreciation diffidently applies to more crucial issues like choosing a career that expresses the true-inner-self of an individual rather than reflecting the parents’ vision, or even deciding to quit college, for believing that they were born for a deed greater than just ordinary studying at college. Steve Jobs illustrates a perfect example, if he didn’t quit college and was held back by fear of being marginalized or looked at as a fruitless individual, he most probably wouldn’t have became the owner of Apple Company which is indeed one of the world’s top leading companies of the contemporary time. In other words individualism deplores sacrifices for the sake of others and discourages conforming to something unwillingly just to fit within the society’s customs or meet other’s expectations. On the contrary, Collectivism’s primary motivation is meeting the groups’ expectations; this group can be the society, family or workplace.
Pleasing the collective’s wishes is simply pressurizing, overwhelming and most importantly unjustified, as it can lead up to one of three scenarios. Firstly, smashing self-desires and living unhappily for the sake of satisfying the group’s desires.The second scenario would be refusing to conform, yet unfortunately still having to worry about dealing with the criticism they’ll receive from the society. Lastly, the best case scenario would be when the collective’s desire, fortunately match the individual’s own desire or benefit.
So the clash between personal appeals and culture demands adds one more threat on the psychological and mental well-being of individuals in a collectivist society. This is supported by a research conducted by Defrank (1985), “In examining the results of the Stress and Tension Discharge Scale comparisons, it is apparent that the Japanese CEOs experience greater stress and have more trouble discharging it than the American CEOs. We can only speculate at this time as to what the sources of the differences are; several major sources, however, seem plausible. Because of the high level of personal commitment in Japan to one's organization and job, it is likely that the Japanese CEOs have more difficulty than the American CEOs in detaching themselves from their work.
The data indicate that the Japanese CEOs have more difficulty in getting away from their job, both physically and psychologically”. Acceptance of diversity is another behavior inhibited by individualists’ ideology, which in return has a positive effect in the psychological welfare of people. For Every situation there is more than one choice offered, so people in both collectivist and individualist societies have nearly equal opportunities but credit goes for individualism due to the greater degree in acceptance of diversity. Therefore an individual doesn’t fear going for unusual choices. With diversity of life style, people will have a greater chance of finding one life style that suits their needs.
For instance, an individual who’s mother has developed Alzheimer's, there are two possible choices, either send her to Hospice Care House or take care and serve her personally. Individualists have more capacity to pick the choice that suits them more. While collectivists would most probably pick the second choice even if they are financially incapable of providing patient care to their mothers just to avoid social criticism.While in collectivist societies, there are massive boundaries to the way a person develops and live, this leads to increased misfits and friction between personal needs and social demands. As decisions and actions are influenced by social obligations and dedication to fulfilling the group’s expectations, in such environment individuals will avoid any action or behavior that might not appeal to people around them, so in this case, the ones’ freedom is always restricted by fear of criticism. Based on experiments held by Zhang, Lowry, Zhou, & Fu (2007), it was indicated that “Collectivists typically hesitate to speak up in a group, try to coordinate their actions with those of others to minimize social friction, and have an abiding fear of being separated or disconnected from the group.
Collectivists are accustomed to conforming and restricting their ideas”. Other than the pressure accompanied with such fear, this also means that great chances might be missed and individuals’ wild dreams may never come to reality. In conclusion, individualism promotes better environment and a more sustainable one. Firstly, there is a prominence of self actualization in individualist societies; according to Cambridge dictionaries online (2013) self actualization is defined as “a person's desire to use all their abilities to achieve and be everything that they possibly can.The expression is used by Maslow in his theory of human motivation”. This freedom of self-expression is the exploder of potential and energy within each individual and it’s the incentive to creativity and innovation.
Secondly, the behavior of acceptance of diversity is the birth-giver to an array of different life styles in a society, this diversity doesn’t only add a delightful, exhilarating touch to a society but also gives a greater chance for individuals to fit in and feel accepted which consequently reliefs stress accompanied with fear of criticism or rejection and accordingly contribute to the psychological welfare of the individuals. The best solution would simply be adoption of positive behaviors and forsaking of negative behaviors from both approaches, according to the comfort of each individual; without the need to aggressively defend one approach over the other.While this paper has tried to cover as many aspects of the issue, it remains limited in its scope. For further exploration and dilation on the subject of individualism Vs collectivism, looking at the issue from other aspects like social, intellectual, education and others would coordinate in a better understanding of the issue.
As well as relevant topics such as studying the great ancient civilizations like ancient Greece and ancient Egypt and examining which ideology they adopted and how did this approach help in the contribution of their great historical accomplishments.
