This is a cultural difference that, at least according to one theory, actually reflects an authoritarian culture rather than an egalitarian one. It comes down to why people follow orders. In egalitarian societies, people see the ability of one person to tell another person what to do as role-based, purely for the sake of efficiency. In authoritarian societies, people see it as based on the personal superiority or privilege of the person giving the order.
This can cause friction when two people from different cultures step on each other's sensibilities. A person with an egalitarian mentality working in a corporation in a less egalitarian country may be shocked at the way his "superiors" speak to him -- as if they were any better than him! A person from an authoritarian country may be offended when someone who is not his "superior" tries to "order him around," because "giving orders" presumes a hierarchical relationship between the two.
From my point of view, it's quite convenient that I feel free to tell other people what to do, or do what other people tell me, without worrying about whether that implies a power relationship between us (+). But then, I would feel that way about my own culture, wouldn't I?
For one analysis, see this book, which is oriented towards management and business communications:
The author identified five dimensions that he thinks are the most informative about national cultural differences. This how France and the United States compare:
Note that France scores much higher on the Power Distance dimension, which attempts to measure "the extent to which the less powerful members of organizations and institutions (like the family) accept and expect that power is distributed unequally. This represents inequality (more versus less), but defined from below, not from above. It suggests that a society's level of inequality is endorsed by the followers as much as by the leaders."
Obviously it's a gross oversimplification to measure national differences on just five dimensions, but it's also a gross oversimplification to presume anything about France merely from its embrace of "liberté, égalité, fraternité." The United States also officially and quite ostentatiously embraces equality, yet in the eyes of many, the United States is a leading exporter of inequality. The "equality" we celebrate in the United States can seem hollow or even trivial or useless from another perspective. Different cultures have notions of equality and inequality that appear simple to them while appearing complicated or contradictory to people from other cultures. I took a few semesters of French in college, but I don't have a clue what "égalité" means to them, only what it means to other Americans.
(+) I just have to worry that if I'm consistently taking orders instead of giving them, then I must not be coming up with many good ideas!
This can cause friction when two people from different cultures step on each other's sensibilities. A person with an egalitarian mentality working in a corporation in a less egalitarian country may be shocked at the way his "superiors" speak to him -- as if they were any better than him! A person from an authoritarian country may be offended when someone who is not his "superior" tries to "order him around," because "giving orders" presumes a hierarchical relationship between the two.
From my point of view, it's quite convenient that I feel free to tell other people what to do, or do what other people tell me, without worrying about whether that implies a power relationship between us (+). But then, I would feel that way about my own culture, wouldn't I?
For one analysis, see this book, which is oriented towards management and business communications:
http://www.amazon.com/Cultures-Organizations-Software-Geert-...
The author identified five dimensions that he thinks are the most informative about national cultural differences. This how France and the United States compare:
http://www.geert-hofstede.com/hofstede_dimensions.php?cultur...
Note that France scores much higher on the Power Distance dimension, which attempts to measure "the extent to which the less powerful members of organizations and institutions (like the family) accept and expect that power is distributed unequally. This represents inequality (more versus less), but defined from below, not from above. It suggests that a society's level of inequality is endorsed by the followers as much as by the leaders."
Obviously it's a gross oversimplification to measure national differences on just five dimensions, but it's also a gross oversimplification to presume anything about France merely from its embrace of "liberté, égalité, fraternité." The United States also officially and quite ostentatiously embraces equality, yet in the eyes of many, the United States is a leading exporter of inequality. The "equality" we celebrate in the United States can seem hollow or even trivial or useless from another perspective. Different cultures have notions of equality and inequality that appear simple to them while appearing complicated or contradictory to people from other cultures. I took a few semesters of French in college, but I don't have a clue what "égalité" means to them, only what it means to other Americans.
(+) I just have to worry that if I'm consistently taking orders instead of giving them, then I must not be coming up with many good ideas!