Cementing Intercultural Communication Gaps For Smoother Roads to Harmony - Research Paper Example

?Cementing Intercultural Communication Gaps For Smoother Roads to Harmony Globalization has made the world much smaller with more people from different cultures coming together for various purposes. Inevitably, interactions take place and intercultural communication is bound to ensue. During these times, the consideration and understanding of each other’s cultural differences, practices, values and communications styles need to prevail. Verbal & Non-Verbal Communication Human beings communicate their thoughts and feelings to one another in verbal and non-verbal ways. Verbal communication, or speaking out to another person is often accompanied by non-verbal language which includes facial expressions, gestures, posture, body language and tone of voice. Sometimes, such non-verbal expressions say more than the verbalizations of a person. The way one communicates and receives information matters much in the quality of relationships he or she has with others. Effective communication takes practice and hard work especially for those who are not skilled in interpersonal relations. Several factors need to be considered when communicating: age, gender, relationship to the person, nature of the communication exchange, temperament and personality and even culture. The adage “Actions speak louder than words” rings true in a variety of situations. In the workplace, people manifest explicit verbal communication and implicit, non-verbal communication (Lee, 2008). Explicit verbal communication takes the form of direct reprimands or written memos to delinquent workers. Implicit, non-verbal communication is more action-oriented. An example is a boss deliberately showing a delinquent worker that he is taking over the tasks formerly assigned to the worker. The boss may not say anything, but the message comes across very clear to the worker that his inefficiency is noted by the boss. In times of conflict, the impact of implicit, nonverbal communication and explicit, verbal communication (that is, the written norm) is never equal. The more visible and stark the image, the more effective the message is delivered and received. Verbal and nonverbal interactions play a part in the effective exchange of ideas. LeFebvre (2008) advises that when speaking, one must also be aware of body language and tone and inflection of voice. She notes that different ideas may be conveyed by simply emphasizing or speaking louder the different parts of the statement. Being an active listener helps one understand the message being relayed to him. As the listener, one should hold his response until the speaker is done, and keenly observe nonverbal cues expressed. It must always be remembered that communication is a give and take process. One must learn to wait his turn to be the speaker and the listener. The Role of Culture in Communication Hofstede (1994), a well-known scholar of culture and its effect on people, defined culture as “the collective programming of the mind which distinguished the members of one human group from another… Culture, in this sense, includes systems of values; and values are among the building blocks of culture” (Hofstede, 1994, p.54 ). This definition shows how much culture has an influence on people, often dictating how they would relate and communicate to others. Consideration of others’ cultural background entails adjustments to accommodate the needs of others and the exertion of effort to understand what they want to communicate. On the contrary, disregarding the other’s culture and instead, promoting one’s own, whether it agrees with the other or not can be a source of major conflicts. Even within a specific country, there exist sub-cultures. An example is the Asian culture. Some values are associated as “typically Asian”, such as honor and integrity. Within Asian countries, some communicative interpretations differ. To illustrate, in one country, being able to look straight into the eye of another person when speaking, means that the person is sincere while in another country it denotes defiance and disrespect especially if the gaze is directed to a person of higher authority. Another example is the known gesture of nodding one’s head is taken to mean as “yes” while shaking the head means “no”. However, with Indian people, for instance, the reverse is true. These nuances need to be carefully taken in consideration in a multicultural environment. In an intercultural environment, most conflicts that surface are caused by miscommunication and misunderstanding. For example, some ethical considerations are subject to interpretation. A situation may be understood in a variety of ways that in one culture may be considered appropriate, but in another culture, it may be unacceptable. Ethics is known as doing what is right however, reaching and ethical decision is debatable depending on which culture one may come from (Brisbane Institute, 2005). Coming up with a final business decision depends on situational factors such as organizational goals, organizational codes of ethics, the legal environment and the perception of the other party. Organizational goals may be set but people from different cultures may have different approaches in reaching them. “The organizational goals of an Asian company may be more long-term and relationship oriented compared to the goals of a Western company which may be focused on short-term profits and not care as much about the relationship with the buyer.” (Brisbane Institute, 2005). The approach that the Asian company may be to establish a positive relationship with the customer before cutting into the business aspect, whereas a Western company may focus on making profits as soon as possible even if it uses cunning and even unethical tactics that may damage the relationship with the customer. “There will also be cross-cultural differences in how code of ethics are understood depending on the familiarity with, and tradition or longevity of, codes of ethics within individual business organizations.” (Brisbane Institute, 2005, p. 12). Understanding Hofstede’s Cultural Dimension Framework Effective intercultural communication is essential especially in culturally diverse environments. Hofstede’s work has provided a seminal framework for understanding cultural value orientations and their effect on the workplace. His efforts culminated in a mass study that established typologies of over 50 countries, evaluating attitudes towards power distance, uncertainty avoidance, societal orientation, social gender and time Hofstede, together with Peterson, assert that “collectivism implies a link between the individual’s self-identity and a collective, whereas individualism implies that the two are more fully distinct” (2000, p.408). An individualist sees the distinction between self and other as the defining characteristic of social interaction, whereas a collectivist sees the distinction between in-group and out-group as paramount in social interaction. This results in the notion that collectivists do not believe that social interaction is fundamentally universal in nature; there is always a self and an other that allows an individual in any type of society to identify more closely with some (Michailova and Anisimova,1999). For example, research shows that Caucasians from Europe and America have been found to dominate conflict situations while Asians tend to either avoid conflict or to oblige the other party. A high degree of individualism has been attributed to the use of a confrontational- oriented style among Euro Americans, while greater collectivism and a desire to avoid loss of face have been attributed to the use of more passive and accommodating conflict styles among Asians and Asian Americans (Khoo, 1994). This has a lot has to do with the personality and cultural upbringing of the conflicting parties. Strong personalities usually dominate and crush the conflict into oblivion by claiming their stake. More cooperative parties integrate their ideas and compromise for a “win-win” solution to the problem. Some subservient ones just oblige in spite of their own opinion to avoid conflict. Triandis & Suh (2002) agree that people in individualist cultures have more positive self-esteem (Heine et al, 1999) and show more optimism (Lee & Seligman, 1997) than those from collectivist cultures. On the other hand, people in collectivist cultures find it easy to establish intimate and long-term relationships (Verma, 1992) as opposed to those from individualist cultures who usually establish non-intimate and short-term relationships. Another cultural dimension that Hofstede explained is Power Distance. It refers to the differing levels of power individuals possess. High power distance typically results in a greater sphere of influence of managers over subordinates. However, a high power distance does not necessarily ensure compliance or attitudinal agreement (Hofstede and Peterson, 2000). In theory, influence breeds respect between a manager and subordinate, and the subordinate will defer to the manager’s instructions. But complying with direction does not mean a subordinate agrees with nor respects a manager. It simply means that, in high power distance cultures, subordinates recognize the position of the manager as one of greater authority and power. According to Hofstede and Peterson, “superiors’ ability to use specific directions to shape compliance by employees who are reluctant to express disagreement is quite different from their ability to shape attitudes and beliefs” (2000, pp. 407-8). Thus, power distance only measures a manager’s degree of influence but does not contend that managers have any actual effect on subordinates’ value systems. A good example would be some cultures who were previously dominated by other cultures. An individual from a more subservient culture that was a colony of a more powerful country may be more submissive in his communication and would tend to agree to anything the other person is saying. On the other hand, an individual who comes from a culture that has dominated and conquered other cultures may be more dominant in his communication style. The third cultural dimension in Hofstede’s framework is Uncertainty avoidance. This describes the reaction of a group to that which is different or unfamiliar (Hofstede and Peterson, 2000) – do they avoid talking about things which are unfamiliar to them or do they deal with the information head on in order to gain more knowledge? Typically, those cultures that are allowed more freedom to define themselves as individuals experience a lower level of uncertainty avoidance, whereas cultures that stress conformity tend to experience higher levels of uncertainty avoidance. This explains why people from cultures with high uncertainty avoidance may either request to change the topic or ignore the conversation regarding topics which they do not have any knowledge of while those from cultures with low uncertainty avoidance may purposely engage in topics of conversation which are new to them. The masculinity and femininity of a culture also dictates how its people communicate with others. According to Hofstede and Peterson (2000), values typically associated with a particular gender have been part of social science research for decades. Hofstede’s work was the first to translate these gender-based values into a culture context. Cultures tending towards masculine values are associated with more ego-based principles, whereas cultures tending towards feminine values more closely associate with social goals. Lastly, time orientation goals of a particular culture can also say much about how they prioritize things in terms of time. Values such as thrift and perseverance (long-term) vs. respect for tradition, fulfillment of social obligations, and protections of one’s “face” (short-term) may be leveled depending on how the culture gives significance to it. This explains why some people may take their time in speaking, whether how they prolong sentences with pauses, and indulge in long-winded conversations. Most probably, they come from cultures that are more laid-back and give much value to communication and personal interactions. Those from cultures with a more fast-paced lifestyle may also talk faster and engage in short talks instead of long discussions. Handling Intercultural Conflict Having established that conflicts are bound to surface in international settings, how can these be mediated, if not prevented? It is vital that the source of conflict is examined. Cultural backgrounds need to be studied to be able to understand where the conflict is coming from and to predict future behavior. Explaining cultural differences in a non-threatening manner may just be the key, if conflicting parties are mature individuals. In more complicated situations, Dr. Gillian P.S. Khoo identifies five types of handling conflicts, namely Dominating, Compromising, Integrating, Avoiding, and Obliging conflict styles. The individual’s cultural influence as well as his personality will reflect the kind of conflict-handling style he uses. At the end of the day, whatever mediation people use to minimize conflicts in intercultural communication, it is important to accept that there will always be cultural differences among people. Instead of focusing on its possible liability, why not extract its strengths and its possible contribution to the common interests of people? Understanding Diversity in Education Good intercultural communication is learned. All the better if an individual is properly trained to relate well to people from other cultures from childhood. Schools around the world are likewise embracing diversity and children are getting exposed to people from various cultural backgrounds. These opportunities may offer both positive and negative learning experiences at first, but with appropriate guidance from culturally sensitive teachers, they will eventually learn to accept each other. Diversity can affect both the environment of the class and the students. The language differences may lead the students to a communication gap. Students belonging to a different culture may face different problems in accordance to their living standards. The skill level expectation of the students depends upon their origin and culture. For example a student from Greece may face difficulties while studying in the US. This is because the student is not able to cope with the standards of education in the US as he has always studied in the standards of Greece. He may face difficulties in understanding the language and writing according to the standards in the US. This has a massive effect on the way one studies. In such a situation a teacher is the person who may greatly help students by identifying their problem and finding appropriate solutions for it. If one cannot adjust to the environment of the school he might face the problems of depression and stress and may not be able to study properly. Teachers should make an effort to find out about the cultural background of their students and adjust their curriculum to accommodate them. For example the teacher should know about the standards of education in Greece and should not force the student from Greece to work on the standards of the US immediately. If the student is forced to comply to standards he is not familiar with, it is possible that he may be discouraged and even quit his efforts to progress (Opsahl 1996). In view of this, school authorities must be knowledgeable about policies and practices regarding issues dealing with the growing diversity in schools which include immigration policies, access of immigrants to social and educational services and US language policy regarding the official status of English. On a much more specific level, culturally relevant teaching must be learned by teachers. It takes into consideration the cultural background of the students at all times. It also keeps in mind cultural aspects in all interactions with students on both personal and educational levels. (Edwards & Kuhlman, 2007). Students’ cultures, languages and experiences need to be acknowledged, valued and used as important sources of their education because they deserve the best that society can give them. Global education is defined as “education that develops the knowledge, skills and attitudes that are the basis for decision making and participation in a world characterized by cultural pluralism, interconnectedness and international economic competition (Merryfield, 1995, p.1). A good teacher is blind to racial prejudices and is interested in and respectful of the varied cultural customs, traditions and values each foreign child represents. It is basic for any human being to embody the culture he comes from, whether speaking the language or manifesting the accent of that language, manner of dressing, and holding on to beliefs imbibed from that culture. Such behaviors need to be accepted, respected and even celebrated in the classroom. It also brings in a lot of learning for the other students and makes the school experience richer. Teaching children respect and acceptance of people who are different from them is one of the first steps in molding upright character. Upholding such values as they grow up is bound to lead to harmonious relationships between cultures. Strategies in Bridging Intercultural Communication Intercultural communication usually involves employment of communication strategies to reach understanding. It is a mutual attempt of communicating parties to agree on a meaning in circumstances when meaning structures are not shared by both (Tarone, 1980). For example, a Swiss woman and a Japanese woman try to communicate. Both of them compromise on meaning adjusting their Swiss and Japanese perspectives respectively to see just one meaning that both of them can understand. They may use common words they know, gestures, sounds, etc just to cement whatever gaps in communication they share. This is very similar to Vygotsky’s (1978) views. His theories place a great deal of emphasis on effective social interaction. Interactions are likely to go through a process called intersubjectivity. This is when two people are engaged in a task and begin from different understandings but with interaction, comes to an agreed, shared understanding. This is usually manifested when people initially debate opposite arguments but upon more understanding of the concept because of listening to each other’s opinions, will both end up seeing the concept in one direction. People from different cultures communicating with each other utilize “a systematic technique employed by a speaker to express his meaning when faced with some difficulty. ‘Difficulty’, in this definition, is taken to refer uniquely to the speaker’s inadequate command of the language used in the interaction” (Corder, 1983, p. 16). They come up with strategies to “compensate for breakdowns due to limiting conditions in actual communication or to insufficient competence in one or more of the other areas of communicative competence, and strategies to enhance the effectiveness of communication” (Canale, 1983, p. 11-12). Successful communication entails communicative competence, and this covers four areas namely the Linguistic, sociolinguistic, discourse and strategic competence (Canale & Swain, 1980). Linguistic competence refers to one’s adeptness in the use of language codes such as grammar rules, vocabulary words, pronunciation, spelling, among others. Sociolinguistic competence involves the mastery of language use in terms of the socio-cultural ambience. How appropriate vocabulary is applied, how one registers in speaking the language, politeness and style which are deemed socially acceptable within the culture of the community. Discourse competence is one’s ability to create language structures to apply to meaningful material such as letters, speeches, poetry, essays, etc. which flow in a coherent manner. Finally, strategic competence is the use of ““verbal and non-verbal CSs that may be called into action to compensate for breakdown in communication due to performance variables or to insufficient competence” (p. 30). This is when individuals at a loss for words to convey the meaning they want resort to the use of similar words, or associated words and actions, gestures and sounds to still put the meaning across. Strategic competence is recalled in communication breakdowns resulting from limitations in actual communications such as inability to recall something or one’s insufficiency in other areas of communication. It is also used to enhance the effectiveness of communication through various methods such as deliberately slowing down speech in order to be understood better or to create a more dramatic effect that enhances meaning conveyed. Some other strategies are paraphrasing, avoidance of difficulties, requests for repetition, simplifying language and clarifying meaning with more concrete examples (Canale & Swain, 1980). Managing Cultural Diversity in the Workplace Currently, the trend of embracing of diversity has given birth to the concept of “the inclusive workplace”. Mor Barak (2000) defines it as one that: values and uses individual and intergroup differences within its work force; cooperates with and contributes to its surrounding community; alleviates the needs of disadvantaged groups in its wider environment; and collaborates with individuals, groups, and organizations across national and cultural boundaries” (pp. 339-340). Acceptance of people from various backgrounds and allowing them active participation in workplace events and activities have been linked to job satisfaction, especially if the diverse, nontraditional members are asked of their opinions. Not only does this increase their self-esteem and sense of belonging, but it can potentially affect their retention and effectiveness on the job (Mor Barak, 2000). Being acknowledged for one’s creative contributions to the company motivates an employee to think up of more. An employer may be instrumental in awaking that creative spark by advocating for dynamic ideas from the employees, who, coming from diverse backgrounds, may be the best people to rely on. Inclusive environments allow people to have the freedom to keep their uniqueness to bring in different ideas to either enrich what is existing or challenge what is entrenched. When they become too assimilated in a homogeneous culture, they lose their uniqueness and true value to themselves and the organization (Young, 2007). What is important is that they share the same values with the organization they belong to despite the various cultural backgrounds they come from. Differing values create conflict and will impede goal achievement. According to Mishra and Morrissey (1990), the following factors propagate trust: open communication; giving workers a greater share in decision making; sharing of critical information and true sharing of perceptions and feelings. In the workplace, good communication is key in accomplishing tasks in pursuit of organizational goals. Dialogue is defined as “a sustained collective inquiry into the processes, assumptions and certainties that compose everyday experience.” (Isaacs, n.d.). In the organizational setting, dialogues are used to have a “meeting of minds”, extracting what each member believes and coming up with an agreed decision that takes into account those beliefs, Members think together, analyzing causes and effects, and end up understanding a shared meaning. Usually, they reach greater heights in idea-storming that as individuals, they could not have thought of. This is contrasted with the construct of consensus building wherein people “seek some rational means to limit options and focus on the ones that are logically acceptable to most people.” (Isaacs, n.d.). Usually, the final consensus is reached if only to end the discussion, and that is what the group can “live with for now”. There is no guarantee that whatever factor initially leading some members to disagree will just vanish after the consensus has been made. It is likely that some members walk away in resignation but not in total satisfaction. Richmond & McCroskey (2005) defines organizational communication as “the process by which individuals stimulate meaning in the minds of other individuals by means of verbal or nonverbal messages in the context of a formal organization” (p. 20). There are six functions that seem to dominate communication in the organizational context. The functions are to inform, regulate, integrate, manage, persuade, and socialize. Conflicts in intercultural communication in the workplace are inevitable due to pre-conceived notions people carry of others. Common cultural stereotypes such which propagate negative impressions of others cloud one’s judgment of a person even before one gets to know him. For example, a new Black American employee may be looked down upon and expected to speak inappropriately, as associated with black gangsters depicted in movies. This pre-conceived notion unjustly creates bias against him even if in truth, he is a decent, respectable and highly educated individual. Steele (1997) explains that stereotype threat is an external factor that greatly affects an individual’s confidence about his own abilities due to his identification with the domain and the resulting image it projects about him. The new Black American employee may likewise expect the stereotype against him since he has experienced it many times before. It is up to him to prove them wrong or treat it as a self-fulfilling prophecy by actually giving in to their low expectations. Mead (1994) summarizes some guidelines in managing cross-cultural diversity in the workplace and motivating these diverse workers in the performance of their tasks in the organization. First is to value the exchange of alternative points of view. This fosters thinking “out of the box” and brings fresh perspectives into the organizational thinking. A person from another culture may bring a fresh, new perspective to a usual concept, possibly inspired from his own cultural background. Another guideline is to tolerate uncertainty in group processes. Faced with a new idea, one may not feel at ease right away especially if he comes from a culture of high uncertainty avoidance. However, if tolerance for uncertainty is encouraged, this may even strengthen the bond of the members as they strive to pursue best options together and cooperating to come up with a group decision. Respecting each other’s experiences and sharing one’s own enriches each other’s knowledge and possibly increase understanding and tolerance of differences. Finally, use the exposure to other cultural values as opportunity for learning. Everyone stands to gain from learning about others. Conclusion Due to the current trend of globalization, it is inevitable that people will encounter peers and colleagues from other cultures that may be different from theirs. Such situations are prone to initial awkwardness due to adjustment to each other. A deeper understanding of where a person comes from – his culture, values, beliefs, traditions, worldview, etc. goes a long way in cementing gaps in intercultural communication. Not only will it show acceptance and respect, but will also provide opportunities for learning about other cultures, thus enriching one’s mind and relationships with others. References Brisbane Institute (2005), Business Ethics. Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In J. C. Richards & R. W. Schmidt (Eds.). Language and communication, Harlow, UK: Longman. Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47. Corder, S. P. (1983). Strategies of communication. In C. F?rch & G. Kasper (Eds.), Strategies in interlanguage communication (pp. 15-19). Harlow, UK: Longman. Edwards, S. & Kuhlman, W., Culturally Responsive Teaching: Do We Walk Our Talk?, Multicultural Education, Summer 2007 Hofstede, G.(1994) Cultures and Organizations: Intercultural cooperation and it’s importance for survival –software of the mind, London: McGraw- Hill/HarperCollins Hofstede, G. and Peterson, M. (2000) ‘National Values and Organizational Practices’, in N. Ashkanasy et al (Eds.), Handbook of Organizational Culture, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 401-415 Isaacs, W.,(n.d.) Taking flight: Dialogue, collective thinking and organizational learning. Organizational Dynamics Khoo, G P. (1994), "The role of assumptions in intercultural research and consulting: Examining the interplay of culture and conflict at work". Paper presented at Pacific region forum on business and management communication, David See-Lam Centre for International Communication, Canada, Lee , T.J. (2008) Actions speak loudly, Communication World , July-August 2008 Lee, Y.T. & Seligman, M.E.P. (1997) Are Americans more optimistic than the Chinese? Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 23:32–40 LeFebvre, K.B. (2008) Strengthen Your Verbal and Nonverbal Communication Oncology Nursing Society CONNECT September 2008 Merryfield, M. M, “Institutionalizing cross-cultural experiences and international expertise in teacher education: The development and potential of a global education PDS network”, Journal of Teacher Education, 46(1), 1-9., 1995. Michailova, S. & Anisimova, A. (1999) Russian Voices from a Danish Company, Business Strategy Review, 10 Issue 4: 65-78Mishra, J., & Mor Barak, M. E. (2000) The Inclusive Workplace: An Ecosystems Approach to Diversity Management, Social Work, Vol. 45, No. 4 Morrissey, M. A. (1990). Trust in employee/employer relationships: A survey of West Michigan managers. Public Personnel Management, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp.443-463. Opsahl, M. (1996) A teacher's journey: developing a multicultural classroom. [S.l.]: Opsahl Richmond, V.P. & McCroskey, J.C. (2005) Organizational communication for survival: making work,work. Retrieved July 20, 2011 from http://www.ilstu.edu/~llipper/com329/mccroskey_chapter.pdf Steele, C.M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist, 52 (6), 613-629. Tarone, E. (1980). Communication strategies, foreigner talk, and repair in interlanguage studies. Language Learning, 30, 417-431. Triandis, H.C. & Suh, E.M. (2002) Cultural influences on personality. Annual Reviews in Psychology, 53:133-60. Verma, J. (1992) Allocentrism and relational orientation. In Innovations in Cross- Cultural Psychology, ed. S. Iwawaki, Y. Kashima, K. Leung, pp. 152–63. Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Young, C. (2007) “Organization Culture Change: The Bottom Line of Diversity” The Diversity Factor, Winter 2007/ The Changing Currency of Diversity, Volume 15, Number 1 Read More