{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03494975972040192, 'fraction_numerical': 0.027959807776321538, 'mean_word_length': 5.56160458452722, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 1, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
How National Culture Influences Judgment and Decision Making (JDM)

Research using a variety of frameworks has shown that national culture and the values they espouse influence workplace behaviours, attitudes, and other organizational outcomes. (Kirkman, Lowe, and Gibson, 2006). Other frameworks used in studies relating national culture and workplace behaviours, attitudes, and other organizational outcomes include, Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck (1961), Hall (1976), Trompenaars (1993), Schwartz (1994), and Ronen and Shenkar (1985). The most influential of these frameworks is that of Hofstede (1980 and 2001), and it has had by far the greatest impact in studies relating national cultural values to workplace behaviours, attitudes, and other organizational outcomes. (Sivakumar & Nakata, 2001). For example, the Social Science Citations Index (SSCI) indicates that Hofstede’s work is more widely cited than others (cited 1,800 times through 1999). (Hofstede, www1980 and 2001). Trompenaars (1993), who has a competing framework, credits Hofstede for ‘opening management’s eyes to the importance of the [cross-cultural management] subject’.In Part A of this essay, the details of Bonner’s model for JDM research is evaluated in terms of the role national culture plays in the JDM quality of Accounting Professionals, and suggestions are made to enhance Bonner’s Model to better incorporate different national cultural perspectives.In Part B a comparison is made between the accounting scandal involving Bernard Madoff in his firm in the United States of America, and the accounting scandal in Olympus Corporation of Japan. In the process the JDM assessment differences, which could be attributed to cultural differences between the United States of America and Japan, are discussed.Finally in Part C an evaluation is made of the impact of national culture in a globalized decision making environment; what implications there might be for judgment and decision making in such a globalized decision making environment; how appropriate the model espoused by Hofstede (1980 and 2001) is when evaluating the potential national culture impact on JDM quality according to Bonner’s model; and what recommendations can be made to account for national cultural influences in JDM quality assessments.