Influence of Cultural Differences on Communication Process between Korean Culture and American Culture - Research Paper Example

Influence of cultural differences on communication process between Korean culture and American Culture The word culture has many different meanings.  For some it refers to an appreciation of good literature, music, art, and food.  For a biologist, it is likely to be a colony of bacteria or other microorganisms growing in a nutrient medium in a laboratory Petri dish.  However, for anthropologists and other behavioral scientists, culture is the full range of learned human behavior patterns.  The key to effective cross-cultural communication is knowledge. First, it is essential that people understand the potential problems of cross-cultural communication, and makes a conscious effort to overcome these problems. Second, it is important to assume that one’s efforts will not always be successful, and adjust one’s behavior appropriately. We all interact and communicate with fellow human beings and even animals most of the time. We all confront difficulties in communicating within own cultures. Communicating across a different culture is difficult and requires deep understanding. Culture is often at the root of communication challenges. Our culture influences how we approach problems, and how we participate in groups and in communities. When we participate in groups, we are often surprised at how differently people approach their work together. The main six fundamental patterns of cultural differences which influence on communication are as following 1. Different Communication Styles. The way people communicate varies widely between, and even within, cultures. One aspect of communication style is language usage with verbal and non-verbal communication. 2. Different Attitudes Toward Conflict. Some cultures view conflict as a positive thing, while others view it as something to be avoided. In the U.S., conflict is not usually desirable; but people often are encouraged to deal directly with conflicts that do arise. In contrast, Korea open conflict is experienced as embarrassing or demeaning; as a rule, differences are best worked out quietly. A written exchange might be the favored means to address the conflict. 3. Different Approaches to Completing Tasks. In USA and Korea, there are different ways that people move toward completing tasks. Some reasons include different access to resources; different judgments of the rewards associated with task completion, different notions of time, and varied ideas about how relationship-building and task-oriented work should go together. 4. Different Decision-Making Styles. The roles individuals play in decision-making vary widely from culture to culture. In the U.S., decisions are frequently delegated, an official assigns responsibility for a particular matter to a subordinate. In Korea there is a strong value placed on holding decision-making responsibilities oneself. 5. Different Attitudes Toward Disclosure. In some cultures, it is not appropriate to be frank about emotions, about the reasons behind a conflict or a misunderstanding, or about personal information. 6. Different Approaches to Knowing. Notable differences occur among cultural groups when it comes to the ways people come to know things. Korean and American Communication Practices Globalization due to internet use, international markets, and outsourcing has increased contact between people from different cultures. This contact highlights the divergence of perspectives between members of different cultures such as Korea and the United States. For example, in the American workplace, Caucasian colleagues often mistake Asian’s reserved manner for a lack of assertiveness. It is inevitable that differences in cultural perspectives will be channeled through communication; and if this communication is to be productive, interactions based on cultural knowledge and mutual respect will be needed to encourage Korean and American relations to progress. Following concepts are discussed briefly Individualism and Collectivism. Individualism is “the opposite of collectivism; together they form on of the dimensions of national cultures. Individualism stands for a society in which the ties between individuals are loose: everyone is expected to look after himself or herself and his or her immediate family only. Collectivism stands for a society in which people from birth onwards are integrated into strong cohesive in groups, which throughout people’s lifetime continue to protect them in exchange for unquestioning loyalty. USA has an Individualistic culture .The people in society are more self-centered and emphasize mostly on their individual goals. People tend to think only of themselves as individuals and as “I” distinctive from other people. They make just a little difference between in-group and out-group communication. They prefer clarity in their conversations to communicate more effectively and come in general directly to the point. People in individualistic cultures emphasize their success/achievements in job or private wealth and aiming up to reach more and/or a better job position. In USA the fight about jobs and trying to climb up in the hierarchy ladder is something very common. It just counts to get there less caring who will left behind one. In business, they try to improve their connections and to gain more value out of them, not for establishing a good relationship but just to be involved in a calculative way. Employees are expected to defend their interests and to promote themselves when ever possible. Korea follows a collectivist culture like other Asian countries. Koreans view others with less collectivistic philosophy as cold and not supportive. Korean culture has a great emphasis on groups and people think more in terms of “we”. Harmony and loyalty is very important and should always be maintained and confrontation should be avoided. In Korea, it is out of question to disagree with someone’s opinion in public. One will do that in a more private and personal atmosphere to protect a person from the “loss of face”. In collectivistic cultures, a direct confrontation will be always avoided. Expressions or phrases are used which describe a disagreement or negative statement instead of saying no. Saying no would mean to destroy the harmony in the group. The relationship between employer and employee or business partners is based on trust, harmony, and a deep understanding of moral values. The wealth of the company and the groups inside are more important than the individual one’s. Collectivistic cultures prioritize group welfare over the goals of the individual. The family's history often has an influence on the way people see an individual, whereas personal accomplishments will play a minor role. Individuals in collectivistic cultures tend to be interdependent with others and will usually have built a network of deep-rooted relationships and personal, loyal ties. Values in collectivistic cultures include training, physical condition, and the use of skills. The collectivism vs. individualism dimension was proposed by Geert Hofstede (Elizabeth Würtz) , and suggested as an alternative to the High context /Low context dimension. The two dimensions, however, correlate: HC cultures tend to be collectivistic while LC cultures tend to be individualistic. High- vs. Low-Context . The degree of context and amount of information in a culture effectively differentiates between communications in Eastern cultures as opposed to Western cultures. In particular, Hall in 1973 (Hall) categorized cultures into high-context cultures like USA (where the communication style in which most of the information is already shared by people in the society, leaving very little information in the explicit transmitted part of the message) and low-context cultures like Korea (where the communication style in which most of the information is incorporated into the message and detailed background information is needed in the interaction with others). Korean culture is a high-contest in nature whereas Korean culture is Low-context in nature. In Korean culture, messages are indirect and are delivered in an abstract implicit manner because the message is actually highly dependent on the context. In contrast, in low-context cultures, communication is direct and explicit. Accordingly, in USA culture, a large amount of in-depth background information is needed, because people express messages directly with little need for context. High-context cultures include Eastern cultures such as Korea, where people have widespread networks with family, friends, and organizations. Low-context cultures include the US, Germany, and other northern European individualistic cultures. Several intercultural communication researchers point out that Asian cultures have a strong orientation towards high-context information and that Asian languages reflect its high-context culture with an abundance of implicitness. Koreans create ambiguous messages to obscure their meaning furthermore, they have been known to prefer indirect and ambiguous communication in contrast to the direct and clear communication preferred in low-context cultures .Indirect communication is likely to appeal to Korean citizens because they tend to value Confucianism which emphasizes harmony and egalitarianism. Not taking a stand and obscuring one position on an issue that helps others save face and is, therefore, a preferred communication strategy for Koreans. High-context Korean citizens are more likely to employ indirect communication strategies than their low-context US American counterparts. Low-context US Americans are more likely to employ direct communication strategies than their high-context Korean counterparts. Hall (1976; 1982) discussed the concept of high context and low context cultures by considering meaning and context as "inextricably bound up with each other" (Everett ) .The difference between high and low context cultures depends on how much meaning is found in the context versus in the code. The U.S culture is one of the well know low-context cultures, where meaning is placed more in the language code than in the context; information is vested in the explicit code; and accordingly, communication tends to be explicit, specific and analytical (Ting-Toomey). On the other hand, Korean culture is a high-context culture, where meaning is embedded more in the context than in the code. Hall (1982) stated, "most of the information is either in the physical context or internalized in the person, while very little is in the coded, explicit, transmitted part of the message" (p.12). Explicit communication has traditionally been overlooked in Korea because, given its common race and culture, it has been assumed that everybody understands every one else without verbally communicating, and a special meaning is often found in the context rather than in the code. Thus, the contextual cues need to be understood to grasp the full meaning of the message. Polychronism-Monochronism Monochronism is when we are so much slaves to punctuality that our slavishness to schedules seems to be "puncturing" our very souls. When our organic minds and bodies are overly regulated; and, thus, in a very routine way, we become more and more detached from the natural world. For example, when we become disoriented and worse by forcing our selves to switch twice a year between Day Light Saving Time and the other mechanical measures of time invented to meet corporate requirements -- not human needs. Polychronism is when we are sufficiently in sync with the natural flows and ebbs of life and life's most important relationships -- and decisions. When you can instantly free yourself from the unnatural, and thus unhealthy way you have been conditioned by modern socio-economic forces to perceive time. According to Edward Hall there are two behaviors as far as time organization in cultures: Monochronism and Polychronism ( Hall’s cultural factors ). Korean communication differs from American communication in terms of subculture. Korean culture is oriented to polychronism where as American culture is oriented towards monochronism. US society is a Monochronic society and exhibit following culture (Alexa Dubreuil) :- 1. Time is perceived as a line going from the Past to the Future, which can be cut into numerous segments that correspond to a specific action or project. Therefore, only one thing is done at a time. 2. People try not to interrupt. 3. The agenda is strictly followed. 4. Being late is looked down upon and punctuality is very important. 5. Communicating generally implies very low reference to the context. 6. Carrying out a project has priority over human relations. 7. The concept of personal property is generally well-defined, this is why people lend personal items only when they have to. Korean society is Polychronic in nature like many Asian societies and exhibit following culture:- 1. Culture is characterized by the diversity & simultaneity of actions: people are tempted to do several things at once. 2. Being interrupted happens often. 3. Projects and appointments are frequently postponed. 4. Punctuality is relative. 5. Polychronism tend to give more importance to human relations: two persons having an interesting conversation will generally prefer continuing it rather than adjourning it, even if they know this might make them late for an appointment. 6. Communicating generally implies high reference to the context. 7. Lending or exchanging personal goods are common. Business lunches are a good example to show the difference between polychronism and monochronism. In the first case this lunch can be used to sign a contract (in Korea this happens between lunch and desserts) but even if it is the real object of the meeting it is not the only topic discussed: therefore pleasure and work take place at the same time. In monochronic, societies like USA this lunch will generally be arranged after the signature the contract: thus, pleasure and work are not mixed. Conclusion. This study very briefly discussed Korean and US American culture with respect to communication. Overall, it appears that despite widespread global influences, cultural values such as Confucianism, low-/high-context communication, Individualism-Collectivism, High Context-Low Context. Polychronism-Monochronism impact on Korean and US communication. Even though global forces appear to be strong, so are traditions. Americans were reported as being more direct and Koreans were reported as being more indirect. Koreans are more communicatively apprehensive than their US American counterparts. Thus, Korean traditions still appear to be operating despite widespread exposure to people and popular culture professing non-Confucian values. Another side of the culture clash between the Korean Confucian value of not-sticking-out and the US practice of touching and public display of emotions is the controlling of emotions that still appears to be practiced by Koreans. The consequences of intercultural interactions are more vital than ever. Given the rise of terrorism, the outsourcing of work, and the increasing markets abroad, it is important for scholars to update cultural studies to assess whether or not past conclusions still stand or whether communication has changed. This knowledge will aid people in preventing dire communication mishaps and will help provide appropriate cues for carrying out the intercultural communication of the future. Works cited Alexa Dubreuil. Understanding Cross-Cultural Differences between Foreign Societies. Web. 5 June 2011.http://www.proz.com/translation-rticles/articles/2096/1/Understanding-Cross-Cultural-Differences-between-Foreign-Societies-(2%7B47%7D2) Elizabeth Würtz . A Cross-Cultural Analysis of Websites from High-Context Cultures and Low-Context Cultures . Department of Design, Communication and Media IT University Copenhagen © 2005 Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication.   Web. 5 june 2011. http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol11/issue1/wuertz.html Edward T Hall 1973.The History of Intercultural Communications. Web. June 2011. http://www.scribd.com/doc/48958183/ET-HALL Hall's cultural factors. Web .5 June 2011. http://changingminds.org/explanations/culture/hall_culture.htm Everettby Everett M. ROGERS,William B. HART,Yoshitaka MIIKE. Edward T. Hall and The History of Intercultural Communication: The United States and Japan.Web. 5 June 2011. http://www.mediacom.keio.ac.jp/publication/pdf2002/review24/2.pdf Ting toomy .Theory Reflections: Face-Negotiation Theory.Web. 5 June 2011 http://www.nafsa.org/_/File/_/theory_connections_facework.pdf Read More