← Explore Masculinity by country

Hofstede Masculinity · Country comparison

Hofstede Masculinity: Japan (95), Germany (66) and Brazil (49) country comparison

What do these masculinity scores mean? Compare each country’s index score, then read the dimension in context—not as a prediction about any person.

95Japan 66Germany 49Brazil

These are broad, national-level comparison signals. Regional, generational, organizational, and personal differences matter.

Basemap tiles © Esri · Country boundaries © Natural Earth contributors.

Compare this dimension

Compare Masculinity across countries

Choose two or three country profiles to compare their scores and what the differences may mean.

Country 1 Country 2 Optional third country

The cultural picture

What the masculinity comparison may mean

The relative emphasis on achievement and competition over cooperation and quality of life.

Brazil has the lowest observed score, while Japan has the highest. The observed spread is 46 points on the 0–100 scale. A higher score does not mean “better”; interpretation depends on the dimension’s definition and the situation.

MAS · HOFSTEDE

Japan

95/100

Very competitive · #2 of 197

Japan scores 95 on Masculinity, ranking #2 of 197 in the dataset. That is 45.6 points above the global average and 31.2 points above the East Asia regional average. A very competitive profile on this dimension points toward competition, performance, ambition, and visible achievement. In practical analysis, this dimension is useful because it connects broad values to visible patterns in workplaces, classrooms, public institutions, and family expectations. Use Masculinity as a comparison signal, not a stereotype. Hofstede scores describe national-level tendencies; individuals and organizations inside Japan can differ sharply by region, class, generation, profession, and local history.

Explore Japan’s full masculinity index

MAS · HOFSTEDE

Germany

66/100

High masculinity · #12 of 197

Germany scores 66 on Masculinity, ranking #12 of 197 in the dataset. That is 16.6 points above the global average and 10 points above the Western Europe regional average. A high masculinity profile on this dimension points toward competition, performance, ambition, and visible achievement. In practical analysis, this dimension is useful because it connects broad values to visible patterns in workplaces, classrooms, public institutions, and family expectations. Use Masculinity as a comparison signal, not a stereotype. Hofstede scores describe national-level tendencies; individuals and organizations inside Germany can differ sharply by region, class, generation, profession, and local history.

Explore Germany’s full masculinity index

MAS · HOFSTEDE

Brazil

49/100

Moderate masculinity · #92 of 197

Brazil scores 49 on Masculinity, ranking #92 of 197 in the dataset. That is 0.4 points below the global average and 2.3 points below the Latin America regional average. A moderate masculinity profile on this dimension points toward consensus, quality of life, care, and modest achievement norms. In practical analysis, this dimension is useful because it connects broad values to visible patterns in workplaces, classrooms, public institutions, and family expectations. Use Masculinity as a comparison signal, not a stereotype. Hofstede scores describe national-level tendencies; individuals and organizations inside Brazil can differ sharply by region, class, generation, profession, and local history.

Explore Brazil’s full masculinity index

Treat national scores as prompts for better questions, not assumptions about individuals. The dimension summarizes broad cultural patterns and should be read alongside the dataset’s methodology and limitations.

Country profiles

Explore the selected countries

Open any country’s full culture profile.

In-depth country report

There is more to learn about Japan!

Download our full Japan cultural analysis for only $9.99.

A full report covers:

All six Hofstede dimensions and their practical meaning
Country-specific insights and recommendations
Methodology, limitations, and references

Download the free sample View the sample report online

For teams and organizations

Practical cultural intelligence

Custom cultural intelligence reports from $50, tailored to your market, team, and goals.

Market-entry briefings
Cross-cultural training
Organization-specific analysis
Business etiquette guidance
Negotiation and communication analysis

No account or sign-up required. Tell us what you need in chat and we’ll discuss the brief.

Sources and methodology

Sources adapted from the Hofstede and Hall references used in the shared dataset. The communication-context score shown on this site is a transparent proxy calculated as 0.70 × (100 − IDV) + 0.30 × PDI; it is not a score directly measured by Hall.

Hofstede dimensions and country data

Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations Across Nations (2nd ed.). Sage.
Minkov, M. (2007). What Makes Us Different and Similar: A New Interpretation of the World Values Survey and Other Cross-Cultural Data. Klasika i Stil.
The first four Hofstede dimensions draw on IBM employee studies. Long-term orientation and indulgence draw on later cross-cultural survey research, including the Chinese Value Survey and World Values Survey, as summarized in the sources above.

Hall’s communication-context framework

Hall, E. T. (1976). Beyond Culture. Anchor Books.
Hall, E. T., & Hall, M. R. (1990). Understanding Cultural Differences: Germans, French and Americans. Intercultural Press.
Kittler, M. G., Rygl, D., & Mackinnon, A. (2011). Beyond Culture or Beyond Control? Reviewing the Use of Hall’s High-/Low-Context Concept. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management.
Cardon, P. W. (2008). A Critique of Hall’s Contexting Model: A Meta-Analysis of Literature on Intercultural Business and Technical Communication. Journal of Business and Technical Communication.
Broeder, P. (2021). Communicating Distances and High- and Low-Context Cultures. Language and Intercultural Communication.
Lamino, P. P., & Diaz, J. (2025). Intercultural Competencies: Understanding High- vs. Low-Context Cultures. University of Florida IFAS Extension (AEC813).

Limits and critical perspectives

McSweeney, B. (2015). Hall, Hofstede, Huntington, Trompenaars, GLOBE: Common Foundations, Common Flaws. In Transculturalism and Business in the BRIC States.
Country scores and the communication-context indicator are broad, national-level summaries. They do not predict an individual’s behaviour and should be interpreted with attention to local, organizational, regional, and personal variation.

Hofstede Masculinity: Japan (95), Germany (66) and Brazil (49) country comparison

Compare Masculinity across countries

What the masculinity comparison may mean

Japan

Germany

Brazil

Explore the selected countries

There is more to learn about Japan!

Practical cultural intelligence

Hofstede dimensions and country data

Hall’s communication-context framework

Limits and critical perspectives

What can we help you figure out?

Get the complete country analysis

There is more to learn about Japan!