Ever wondered why people across the globe think, act, and live so differently? A few weeks ago, we started unraveling this mystery by introducing the intriguing world of cultural taxonomies, starting with an introduction to Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck’s “Value Orientation.” If you missed it, don’t worry, I’ll explain¹ even as we dive deeper into that taxonomy today.

How a society views human nature, people’s relationship with the natural world, time, activity, and social relationships create fascinating and aggravating cultural differences. Fortunately, a cultural taxonomy can help pull back the curtains of our understanding, thereby transforming our experiences in business, personal relationships, marriage, or just with a travel agent.

Articles on The Prepared Expat may contain affiliate links that help support this site at no cost to you. The Prepared Expat articles do not constitute legal, medical, or financial advice and should not replace consultation with a qualified professional. See full disclosures & disclaimers.

A quick refresher

In today’s article, I’m assuming you’ve read the previous one, but here’s a quick refresher in case you didn’t, have forgotten, or just don’t want to click back to it.

Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck believed that there are at least five questions that all cultures must answer, and each answer falls into one of three patterns. Remember that these are descriptive statements, not moral or judgmental statements about a culture. Here’s a graph that summarizes these:

Orientation	Possibility 1	Possibility 2	Possibility 3
Human Nature	Good	Mixed	Evil
Human & Natural World	Dominant	Harmony	Subordinate
Time	Past	Present	Future
Activity	Being	Growing	Doing
Social	Hierarchy	Group-oriented	Individual

That introduction, I trust, was helpful in helping you not only understand what can differ in a culture, but also why and how cultures differ. That deep understanding of a culture, including how your childhood culture differs from your host culture, brings immense benefits in your relations with locals, business dealings, and even marriage! Remember that no cultural taxonomy can fully describe a culture and individuals don’t always share the same orientation as their culture—but these comparisons are still quite helpful for all the reasons detailed in the first article in this series

Today, in part 2 of this series, we’ll go deeper into Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck’s taxonomy, with deeper explanations and examples to help you more understand the possible variations for each question and, in turn, better understand your host culture or even your passport culture!

Human Nature Orientation:

Whether you believe human nature is inherently good, evil, or a mix dramatically affects how you approach life and the way a culture functions. Of all the orientations, I think this is easier to understand (though that may be because I was raised in a culture with a mixed orientation, so I see both the good and the evil perspectives on human nature).

Good

The idea that human nature is inherently good has appeared in various cultures and various philosophies across history. Think of a video of a toddler meeting their baby brother or sister for the first time and how innocently and sweetly they meet a sibling. People and cultures who view humans as inherently good would say that this innocence is the “natural” state of humanity. They don’t ignore evil in the world and explain that it is the corrupting influence of society and one’s social environment which causes people to do evil things. Change society, often through technology or government, and you’ll allow human’s good nature to flourish.

An example of these beliefs in action is much of Silicon Valley wherein the idea of enabling people to have more power² or information³ is viewed as inherently good. Often, the earliest versions of a product have no safeguards whatsoever to prevent evil—it’s as if people with this belief can’t fathom that people could use a product for evil. This simply betrays how deeply this mentality is in many Western companies.

Societies that believe human nature is inherently good tend to have a high degree of trust amongst people,⁴ prioritize the freedom of individuals over safety of a group, look go external factors to explain evil, and give repeated second chances to criminals.

Evil

The inherent evil nature of humanity has also been a common belief in cultures around the world. Christianity is a major influence in this, not because it teaches that humans are incapable of good but because it teaches that evil comes from inside a person, not from society. The child who so innocently greets their newborn sibling will selfishly hurt that same sibling…without ever being taught how to be aggressive or selfish. Even if somehow you could build a perfect government, perfect society, and have perfect technology…the moment humans are introduced into the equation, there would be evil.

The movie The Village, directed by M. Night Shyamalan, is a great depiction of this belief; even though the village elders constructed a “perfect world,” evil still came into it, not from outside forces but evil came out of the people inside the village.

Societies that believe human nature is inherently evil tend to require verified proof in order to trust someone’s word,⁵ prioritize “law and order” rather than freedoms, and have harsher discipline or punishments for offenders.

Mixed

The “middle” answer in the chart above does not always represent a mix of both sides (see, for example, social orientation), but in this case the mixed orientation truly is a mix of both the evil and the good perspectives. People and cultures with a belief in the mixed nature of humanity see that people are capable of evil and of good and can be led astray by society or by themself. At the same time, though, society can help people do good and individuals can learn to do good as well. What distinguishes a mixed orientation from the good or evil view is not so much that a culture believes good and evil are balanced but that human nature is changeable. Those with alternate views see human nature more as fixed into either good or evil, whereas the mixed orientation sees humans as changing repeatedly between those.

A society that believes human nature is mixed often has conflicting values that influence policies. They seek to trust what people say (and reduce red tape to verify claims) and yet protect people against someone who lies (and so some verification is needed). They value human freedom to do good, yet also see a need to limit that human freedom to prevent evil. They value laws which prevent evil but also decry laws which add burden to good people. They tend to value education so that people can develop and grow.

Human and Natural World Orientation:

Cultures tend to view humans as subordinate to nature, a dominant over nature, or living in harmony with the natural world.

Subordinate to Nature

In this view, nature is seen almost as “fate,” an unpredictable force that is more powerful than human beings. Since humans are subject to that power and can’t control it, they must respect, or even fear, nature. This orientation often arises in cultures that have unpredictable or harsh environments: frequent storms, monsoons, droughts, floods, etc. It may appear in connection with superstitious practices or religious elements that control the forces of nature and thus must be appeased, but the belief can exist without a superstitious element.

People and cultures that view humans as subordinate to nature will build structures that adapt to natural disasters (e.g. stilted homes above the floods rather than thicker walls to keep the floods out), often value knowledge of how to survive difficult environments, and tend to face natural challenges as a collective society of mutual help rather than as individuals. You’ll also find that societies with this view are often flexible and pragmatic, valuing a practical solution in the moment over a far-off future “ideal” solution.

Harmony with Nature

The view that humans need to live in harmony with the natural world is another common one around the world, particularly with indigenous cultures that live off the land. The harmony with nature orientation sees that human beings have a powerful, active, shaping influence on the natural world and thus must use this influence wisely and for the good of both humans and the natural world. A culture with this orientation often is spiritual, seeing a spiritual or religious connection between humans and land or the natural world, though cultures can have this view without being explicitly religious.

Whereas the subjugation to nature orientation sees nature as more powerful than humans and the dominant over nature orientation sees humans as more powerful than nature, the harmony orientation sees humans as an equal, active, and integral part of the natural order.You can see a fictional representation of this orientation in the Na’vi in James Cameron’s Avatar (the humans, in contrast, have a dominant orientation).

Societies that function with a harmony with nature orientation emphasize coexistence with nature, sustainable use of the natural world with a mind towards future generations, and keeping ecology balanced. This harmony with the natural world often produces a deep connection of a people to a specific area, the rhythms and seasons of which are intimately known.

Dominant over Nature

In this view, common in the West particularly in 18th and 19th centuries, the natural world is a resource that should be used for human benefit. Plants, animals, minerals, etc., have benefits to humans and so humans should use those resources for human benefit. The efficient use of natural resources is a high priority and so animal farms, landscaped agricultural fields, etc. are used in order to efficiently gain benefit to humans from the natural world. Whether these practices are the most suited to an animal or a piece of land is a secondary concern.

People and societies holding to a dominant over nature orientation don’t necessarily exploit or destroy their natural environment. They often do want to protect the natural world. However, unlike the harmony orientation which seeks to protect the natural world for the benefit of the natural world, the goal of protecting the natural world to the dominant over nature orientation is so that it can continue to benefit human beings. If chickens were extinct, for example, then humans could no longer eat them, and so they must be protected.

Societies and peoples with this approach often use technology to change the natural world—levees, landscaping, irrigation, dams, weather control, genetic modification of plants and animals, etc. People’s homes often also reflect this belief, being built with imported material, decorated with plants that aren’t indigenous, and air-conditioned or heated to human comfort levels, regardless of the weather outside.

Time Orientation:

One of the most striking and obvious differences people will encounter when traveling to other countries is how differently people experience and value time. Some cultures are past-oriented, others are present-oriented, and others are future-oriented, with radical implications for daily life.

Past-Oriented

In a past-oriented society, who one’s ancestors were, what they did, and what they value, has an ongoing and powerful influence on who one is, what one does, and what one values today. Traditions are treasures to be maintained, not restraints to be broken.

I remember an occasion at a funeral where a child didn’t like the music played from a radio in the ceremony. The elder’s response was “This music has been played for hundreds of years, it’s very hard to stop.” It would have been easy to stop the music—just turn off the radio—but to a past-oriented culture, it isn’t that simple. The traditions of the past, and expectations of society to continue those traditions, have an inevitable momentum to them which cannot be opposed.

Societies and peoples that are past-oriented often have days to remember, celebrate, or grieve the dead. Many such cultures have shrines or memorials in the home of ancestors, even multiple generations past, and have rituals to honor or give gifts to the ancestors. A past-oriented society is often wary of change, instead valuing the time-tested practices of the past. Typically, elders are highly valued, even revered, and their decisions are often binding for multiple generations of younger people. There may also be highly typified gender or familial roles which people are expected to follow.

Present-oriented

A present-oriented society values “living in the moment” without concern for traditions or the past or the implications of such living for the future. Great value is placed on being fully present and “seizing the day” to enjoy each moment of life in the here and now. I came across a great example of this mentality in Your Intercultural Marriage by Marla Alupoaicei. She quotes this story from Ken Gire in his book The Reflective Life, where he writes:

In a shady corner of the great market in Mexico City was an old Indian named Pota-lamo. He had twenty strings of onions hanging in front of him. An American from Chicago came up and said: “How much for a string of onions?” “Ten cents,” said Pota-lamo. “How much for two strings?” “Twenty cents,” was the reply. “How much for three strings?” “Thirty cents,” was the answer. “Not much reduction in that,” said the American. “Would you take twenty-five cents?” “No,” said the Indian. “How much for your whole twenty strings?” said the American. “I would not sell you my twenty strings,” replied the Indian. “Why not?” said the American. “Aren’t you here to sell your onions?” “No,” replied the Indian. “I am here to live my life. I love this marketplace. I love the crowds and the red serapes, the sunlight and the waving palmettos. I love to have Pedro and Luis come by and say: ‘Buenas dias’…. and talk about the babies and the crops. I love to see my friends. That is my life. For that I sit here all day and sell my twenty strings of onions. But if I sell all my onions to one customer, then is my day ended. I have lost my life that I love—and that I will not do. Marla Alupoaicei, Your Intercultural Marriage, Kindle location 1350.

Societies with a present-orientation tend to be relaxed, unhurried, and unscheduled, with a great emphasis on quality time with family and friends. They see time as a flexible thing and don’t want a future appointment to get in the way of a present experience, and so may arrive hours after the “starting time” of an event. There’s often less concern with planning for the future, but a high degree of flexibility enables people to adapt to what the future brings.

Future-oriented

People who are future-oriented live with a view that what happens in the future is more important than what has happened in the past or what one is doing in the present. Planning for the future is critically important, so that one may anticipate and prepare for problems which may arise. Punctuality is measured by the minute, if not the second, and failing to be at an appointment before it begins is highly impolite.⁶ Time is viewed as money and it should not be wasted.

Rather than enjoying each moment (present-orientation), delayed gratification is highly valued, giving up joy in the present for the sake of more pleasure, presumably, in the future. Rather than valuing traditions of the past (past-orientation), a future orientation views past patterns as things to be challenged and broken so that one may progress towards the future. Innovation and change are prized, and sometimes changes are made just for the sake of changing something.

Societies with a future-orientation are often highly mobile (without attachment to a particular area), voraciously searching for a better way to do something, and quick to give up a present pleasure for the sake of a better one in the future. Identifying and planning for risks is highly valued, and businesses are expected to have plans to mitigate any anticipated risks.

Activity Orientation:

One of the hardest orientations to grasp is that of activity orientation, as it is quite abstract. However, despite, or perhaps because of, that abstraction, it has one of the greatest impacts upon a society and culture. Different cultures give different answers as to what humans should be or do in order to be valuable. Some value being, others value growing, and others value doing.

Being

A being orientation is one that focuses on having a quality inner life and harmonious relationships, rather than achieving particular milestones or gaining financial “success” or material possessions. In a being culture, individuals are content to simply be together, without the need to “fill” time with activities or tasks. In many being cultures, there is an emphasis on gaining spiritual fulfillment or meditative practices that enable one to reflect on oneself and achieve inner peace. Since success in a being culture is seen as personal and relational harmony, not accomplishments or financial gain, individuals won’t sacrifice time with family and community relationships in order to attain specific accomplishments or goals.

I remember first celebrating a holiday with my wife’s family, who is decidedly a being-oriented culture. After four days with their family, I asked my wife when we were going to start celebrating the holiday. She looked puzzled and said “we’ve been celebrating for four days!” I realized that I, coming from an action-oriented culture, expected to do things in order to celebrate the holiday—go to a specific place, open a gift, perform a ceremony, etc.—whereas her family was celebrating just by being together all day long. They didn’t even necessarily talk that much, but everyone was together in the same room at the same time, that’s what was important.

Growing

This orientation, also know as being-in-becoming, values one’s growth to become one’s fullest, self-actualized self. Continuously growing and improving are some of the chief values of a growing-oriented culture, so individuals are not content just to be or do unless those things are helping them become a better person. There’s a deep belief in the potential of each person to grow and change in their journey towards their best self.

Whereas a being orientation values just being with other people and an action orientation values doing things with others, a growing orientation values how one is continuously developing throughout one’s life. A being-oriented culture values being content in the present and an action-oriented culture values accomplishing tasks, but a growing-oriented culture will value setting goals so that one can become a better person and continuously improve.

Societies that have a growing orientation will often be flexible, willing to adapt and change as a society even as individuals adapt and grow themselves. They often have a more holistic view of life, refusing to sacrifice physical, emotional, mental, or spiritual growth in order to gain finances or monetary possessions.

Doing

A culture that is doing-oriented values activity, even if it is activity that accomplishes nothing. People have a strong sense of their need to use their time or fill their time with activity and are discontent to just “be”. Societies and people with a doing orientation see success in meeting goals and achievements, prioritizing accomplishing tasks over relationships, their growth, or even sometimes their own enjoyment. There’s a high refusal to “waste” time, and often a high recognition of the “cost” of doing nothing.

I find a great example of a doing-orientation in the frequent stories of entrepreneurs who are unwilling to take vacations. To them, the idea of stopping their activity to just rest or to have fun is unthinkable. One friend of a friend who was self-employed said that he couldn’t stand to take vacation because he knew every hour of vacation was an hour he wasn’t earning x amount of money. The money he could earn, the tasks he could accomplish, and the goals he could achieve by working were more important to him than having time with his family, enjoying the beach, or reading a book to grow.

Societies that are doing-oriented tend to have short holidays which are celebrated by taking particular actions (giving gifts, going to a party, having a cookout, etc.). Social relationships revolve around activities and rare it is for individuals to just be with each other without doing something (even if the something is talking). Events or holidays are often full of scheduled activities so that time is used well.

Social Orientation:

The way social relationships function among cultures is often one of the more obvious observations one makes when going to a different culture, yet it is often hard to understand these differences at a deep, intuitive level. Some cultures are hierarchical, others are group-oriented, while others are individualistic in their orientation.

Hierarchy

Also known as a lineal orientation, a hierarchy-oriented culture places immense importance on submitting to and following the directives of the person who is superior to you in position, age, gender, or social status. What is particularly important in a hierarchical culture is that one knows one’s exact role and responsibilities, which often depend more upon one’s age, gender, or social status than one’s abilities, experience, or education. Typically, hierarchies look to elders as an absolute authority who has the right and responsibility to give direction to anyone else who is lower than that person.

A distinct “chain of command” exists across society, often even between two complete strangers who have nothing in common. I remember a story told by a Muslim friend, who, as a boy, was directed to go somewhere by a complete and total stranger. Since the stranger was a man older than him, he obeyed the man’s directives without question. Another example of this hierarchy can be seen in North Korean photos where Kim Jong-un is always surrounded by people taking notes. Why? Because his input, no matter what it’s on, is to be followed because he is at the top of the hierarchy of all North Korean civilization.

A hierarchy-oriented society values stability, with predictable roles and responsibilities, and submissiveness to authorities above you. Roles and responsibilities are clearly understood and expected to be followed. Often there is strong social cohesion and a collective sense of unity amongst the people, who value the group more than an individual. These traits all tend toward a resistance to change in general…unless signaled from the person at the top, in which case change can be quite rapid.

Group-orientation

A group orientation, also known as collateral or collectivist, places value on the needs and decisions of a group of people, typically one’s family, tribe, or community. The sense of identity here is in being part of a group that acts together to accomplish what is best for the group. One’s individual needs or concerns are less important than the needs or goals of the group to which one is bound. Oftentimes, a group-oriented culture will share responsibilities or even roles in a society such that, for example, any adult may discipline any child in the group, regardless of birth status.

It’s easy to consider group-orientation as “halfway” between hierarchy and individualism on a continuum, but that is not quite accurate. Whereas a hierarchy-oriented society values above all what the one individual at the top chooses, and an individual-oriented society values the choices of individuals, a group-oriented society values what the entire group collectively chooses.

Societies and people that are group-oriented often turn to the group to make choices, rather than making them individually. Since they see themselves as a collective whole, choosing to do something “for myself” is unthinkable. Even decisions like the number of children one has or what religion to follow may be made collectively, by the group. A high value is placed on cooperation and harmony within the group, and being cast out from the group is considered one of the worst punishments anyone could endure.

Individual

An individual-oriented society is one in which the needs or choices of an individual are valued more than the directives of an authority or the desires of a group. In an individual-oriented society, one person’s choices, rights, and self-expression are considered inviolable, even if they contradict the desires of one’s superior, family, or friends. Individuals are told that they can be whatever they want to be and identify as the person or gender they want. To tell someone else that they cannot be who they choose to be is considered one of worst actions one can take. Instead, people around an individual are supposed to support that choice.

A great example of this individual-orientation can be found in many Disney movies, but it is especially prevalent in the movie Frozen. Elsa defies her late parents’ wishes and her birth-given role as queen, goes against her people’s expectations that she lead them, and journeys off alone, declaring by herself and to herself, “I don’t care what they’re going to say” and “No right, no wrong, no rules for me—I’m free!” It’s hard to imagine a clearer display of an individual-orientation than that.⁷

A society that is individual-oriented places a high degree of importance on allowing individuals to make their own choices, to have their own opinions, and to determine their own lifestyle. Being self-reliant and achieving success (as one defines it for oneself) are critically important, coupled with an expectation of personal responsibility for one’s choices and life.

Conclusion

And there you have it – a deeper understanding of the intricate and fascinating world of cultural taxonomies! Through our exploration of human nature, our stance towards nature, time, activity, and social structures, we’ve seen just how multifaceted and dynamic cultures can be. This isn’t just academic, either—even as I wrote this, I gained insight into how the different cultures my wife and I experienced growing up continue to shape us and our marriage. I’m sure you’ll find that your most recent joy or frustration with your host culture likely is rooted in one of the differences detailed in Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck’s taxonomy.

Whether you’re an expat, a globetrotter, a businessperson, or simply a curious soul, understanding these cultural dimensions opens doors to richer, more empathetic interactions with people from all walks of life. Subscribe or follow The Prepared Expat to get more resources like these to help you survive and thrive as an expat!

Footnotes

1. No, there is too much. Let me sum up. ↩︎
2. Meta’s (Facebook) mission statement is: “Giving people the power to build community and bring the world closer together.” If people are all good, then giving them more power to build community is fantastic. If people are all evil, then doing so is horrible. It’s interesting that Meta has consistently faced problems in trying to enable people to use their products for good while preventing them from using them for evil. If Meta believed people were inherently evil, you can bet their products would have been designed differently. ↩︎
3. Google’s mission statement is “to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful”, betraying the assumption that people are good and will use information for good. If people were inherently evil, though, then giving them more information would be bad. It’s safe to say that Google would look immensely different if the founders believed people were inherently evil. ↩︎
4. For example, when I applied for a job in the US, my employer accepted that my resume was accurate and true. They didn’t ask to see my diploma to prove my degree, let alone a transcript. They didn’t require a letter stating I had worked for my previous employers, they merely accepted I was telling the truth on the resume. ↩︎
5. For example, when I applied for a job at one such culture, I had to get my diploma notarized, apostilled, and then certified by my host’s embassy in the US. For every job listed on my resume, I had to get my former employers to issue a letter certifying that I had, indeed, worked at that company. ↩︎
6. I grew up in a future-oriented society but currently work in a past-oriented society (with some present-orientation mixed in). I was shocked to find that my school marks student as “tardy” only when they arrive to class more than 10 minutes after it started. In the US, a student is marked as “tardy” when one or two minutes late. Here, arrived at 1:09 for a class that starts at 1:00 is considered “on time.” ↩︎
7. Curiously, Elsa’s song in this moment was the “high point” of the movie in US culture and this song was celebrated by many. However, in the story, this is actually the low point of the film. The problems Elsa faces were not solved by her rugged individualism and rejection of others’ expectations. Instead, it was her sister Anna who, motivated by love for Elsa, sacrificed her love and life in order to save her sister. Love, which Olaf defines as “putting someone else‘s needs before yours” is what solved Elsa’s challenges, not her choice to put her own needs above that of her kingdom. It’s a fascinating interplay of these different cultural values. ↩︎