International Dimensions of Organization Behavior - Essay Example

Essay: Cross Cultural Communication and its Barriers The exchange of meaning between two persons is referred to as communication. It is perception of one’s behaviour by another person. Communication occurs through signals, the may be verbal, non- verbal, conscious or unconscious. In this manner every communication has a signal generator, and a signal receiver. Ninety nine percent of the time communication is indirect; it is a symbolic representation of ideas, feelings and pieces of information that are bound to be indirectly communicated, yet require to be externalized. Translating thoughts into words and behaviour- that is, into symbols- and back again into meanings is based on a person’s cultural background, and it is different for every person. Therefore, the difference in the communication of the meanings is directly proportional to the difference in the background culture of the two communicators- that are, sender and receiver (Adler 1). When two people from different cultural backgrounds exchange meanings, this phenomenon is defined as cross- cultural communication. As mentioned earlier, the greater the difference of culture, the greater is the risk of miscommunication (Adler 2). There are several barriers that affect cross cultural communication at work place. They include ethnocentricity, jargon and slang, personal space, stereotypes, time, prejudice, behavior difference, and emotional display. People working in a multinational company often have to deal with individuals who belong to different ethnic backgrounds, their appearance and conduct differs from each other. Every language has its own jargon and slang, people eloquent in the medium of communication of use terms which are not understood by people who are weak in the language skills, these increase difficulties while communicating with members of organization who know the proper use and context of slang words that are used commonly. Another barrier of cross cultural communication is the problem of personal space. Every individual requires personal space to think and evaluate him or herself according to his or her belief. Socio-cultural stereotypes hinder intercultural communication, they can be gender biased or based on other social taboos (Adler 4). Time is an important factor that needs to be considered intercultural exchange of meaning, because time is constant in flow, but varies with events, people belonging to one culture may mourn over death of beloved for a long period, and this affect their performance at work, while other cultures do not mourn over things for long, this difference may affect the interaction between individuals from different backgrounds. Prejudice based on religious and political views is another hurdle in cross cultural interaction. In this regard consider the reaction of Americans towards Muslims after 9/11. The only measure of a personality is behavior, and behavior is modified by the environment, and culture is one of the key nurturing elements of personality. Related with behavior is emotional display, some cultures do not mind laughing, while others restrict themselves to gentle smiles (Adler and Allison). The easy way to understand problems arising due to cross cultural exchange of meaning will be to analyze the contrasting characteristics of cultures, and their role in modifying individuals’ behavior. Communication is a social tool that is highly influenced by the socio-cultural setup of a place or a community. Consider an organization for that regard as an example; an organization is a social group, which is composed of several individuals, arranged in a particular hierarchal setup. The group is defined on the basis of their purpose of unity that is there are certain ideological or objective oriented principles that unite these individuals. Every organization has its own culture, which is the reflection of how organized a group is, and how distinct it is from others. The degree of distinction between the two groups will be a measure to determine the risk of miscommunication (Smith, Peterson and Thomas). When organizations are formed, they have certain rules or codes of conduct that differ from other organized groups. For instance compare a conversation between head of army staff with a soldier, and a conversation between a CEO of a private firm with a regular employee of that firm. There is a clear difference in the culture of both the organizations, and the way they communicate within their groups. There is a special degree of respect that is enjoyed by senior army officials, this because of their authority and power of their post. He level of respect in case of a private firm CEO might be the same in the eye of the employee; however, outside the office his control may not be as dominant as that of a high grade army official. In this manner when a soldier deals with an employee of a private firm they both interact with each other in different manner. Same words spoken by each one of them will have different meaning and affect onto the other person. This because of the meanings they have learnt in their organizations, and when they get out of their social circle, they continue to perceive the world through the lens they have obtained by being associated with a group. Another factor affecting the cross cultural communication is society’s stereotypes. Imagine a society that has outline gender specific roles, for instance Saudi Arabia, where women are bound to spend their lives within the four walls of their houses. On the other hand compare European society with Arabian. Let say there is a cross cultural interaction between a European woman and an Arabic woman. What will be dynamics of their dialogue? One woman belongs to a culture that does not restrict the growth of women professionally, while the other one is bound to face the socio-cultural restriction. Both the individuals are women in this case but they belonged to a different setup. They not only differ on the basis of their nationality, but they also have differences regarding their code of conduct, and mode of communication. To overcome cross cultural communication barriers, the first and the foremost step is to develop patience and tolerance. It takes time for people to get settled in a new environment. During this adjustment period there are several difficulties that have to come across, to deal with such issue one needs to be patient and should not be reluctant to learn new things. An individual must be mindful of the fact that every person has his own likes and dislikes; they may possess an extrovert or introvert personality. Some may appear friendly, while others prefer to stay alone. All these characteristics are of subjective nature, and the in this regard they must be dealt with tolerance. Individuals who are foreigners to a culture must try to assimilate with the environment they are in; however, this does not mean that they should leave behind their own culture (Smith, Peterson and Thomas). Further, they must not be shy of representing who they are, and they must share their problems with people who are natives. As far as language barriers are concerned, migrants must not hesitate in learning the language of their new destination, courses for beginners may be opted to ease their mode of communication. Cross cultural communication is also affected by societal stereotypes and prejudice, they can be overcome, if individual stop being biased about other cultures and their values. This problem is associated with ethnocentricity, which can be overcome if people start thinking about this world as a global village, and takes the status of an international villager. At an organizational level, the employer needs to understand the need of breaking the cross cultural barriers within the company. This job may be carried out human resource department; it should arrange training workshops for employees belonging to different cultural backgrounds, further it should arrange individual counseling for employees who are migrants. Group tasks must be arranged for employees so that they could learn to act as a unit on projects. Language training may be arranged if required. All these activities will generate a sense of compliance among migrant or foreign employees, it helps in improving their performance, and a holistic scale it will improve the efficiency of the organization as a unit . There are a number of theories that have been postulated to study the dynamic of cross cultural communications along with various factors that influence communication. A list of theories can be drawn, however, only few of them will be mentioned and discussed in this treatise. They include Face Negotiation theory by Ting- Toomey, Integrative Communication Theory by Young Yun Kim, Judee Burgoon’s 1978 Expectancy Violation Theory, and William B. Gudykunst’s 1995 Anxiety/ Uncertainty Management Theory (Prosser). Ting- Toomey’s theory of Face Negotiation came to the surface in 1980s. The theory is based on seven assumptions and thirty two propositions. The seven assumptions made by Ting-Toomey are as follows: (1) Every culture has its own facework to negotiate with the situation; (2) the difference in facial responses sometimes create issues, especially when individuals from two different cultures are involved in a intercultural conflicte situations;(3) Power distance and scale of situation determine the facework of people; (4) the facial respond may vary at an individual scale, and it differs from collective response; (5) the power distance determine the facework; while dealing with people in higher power status, the personal response follow formal code, in horizontal exchange of idea the responses are more casual; (6) facework is dependent on the scenario, people react and behave in cultural conflict situations according to their learnt reflexes; (7) the ability to adjust in a cross cultural intercourse, and being aware of the cultural sensitive matters is termed as intercultural facework competence (Ting-Toomey n.p.). The awareness of emotional management of frustrations caused by cultural or ethnic group membership is termed as Intercultural face work competence (Ting- Toomey, n.p.). It refers to the ability of an individual to evaluate the conflicted communication from both sides of the picture. The next theory comes from Young Yun Kim, known as Integrative Communication Theory. It is a theory of cross cultural adaptation. The theory defines individual as an open system that needs to adapt to its surroundings, the adaptation occurs when the information is transferred from larger system into the individual. The theory explains how foreigners enter into a culture, and then they are directed towards assimilation of host culture. This is usually the case with migrants, who leave their countries to get settled into another culture (Kim, n.p.). Expectancy Violation Theory by Judee Burgoon deals with non-verbal communication. The core assumptions of the theory signify the importance of nonverbal communication. Expectancy Violation Theory sees communication as the exchange of information which is high in relational content and can be used to violate the expectations of another which will be perceived as either positively or negatively depending on the liking between the two people. The three assumptions made by theorist are: The ontological assumptions are based on the concept of free will, and it enshrines that individuals choose when and how to violate the expectations of others, depending on the consequences they desire for. According to the epistemological assumptions of Expectancy Violation theory that all communications have some norms and the violation of these norms will turn into specific outcomes. Further the axiological assumptions of the theory are based on empirical investigation of human response to expectancy violation (Burgoon, 129). Expectancy Violations Theory is based on scientific grounds, as it deals with single reality, and it assumes norms and reactions to be universal. Anxiety/ Uncertainty Management theory was postulated by Gudykunst. He gave a model for dealing with situations that created anxiety or were associated with uncertainty. He explained it stepwise. The first step was to outline superficial causes that included self-concept, motivation to interact, and social characterization of individual, ethical interaction. The next step was to define basic causes. He believed that if person is mindful of the situations and process he could manage anxiety more comprehensively, which will consequently bring communication effectiveness (Griffin 428 ). Analysing theories of communication barriers in cross cultural context provide several clues to undermine the issues. They explain the role of culture and society that hinder effective communication. The problem lies with the individuals as well, as they are unable to get over the differences that have superficial existence. Further, the interaction between man and environment is also important to be considered. Lingual problems are recoverable, if the person is encouraged to learn the language of majority or the language used within the organization. This will make the communication much more effective and easy. As an Arab belonging to United Arab Emirates, I have had faced barriers in communicating with English speaking people. English is a global language, however, not being a native speaker of it, makes communication very hard. Moreover, sometimes it gets very difficult to cope with English language speakers, especially when the context becomes more complex. Moreover, it is hard to decipher the nonverbal communication from native English speakers. Further, while interacting if someone asks a question regarding my culture, translating it into English becomes difficult, because, language is an important element of culture, and culture can only be explained by the language of the people who follow that culture. Cross cultural communication has become regular and quiet extensive, considering the shrinking networks of global village. The barriers regarding intercultural communication have also magnified. Diversity is not bad, but if it hinders the progress of an organization it needs to be curtailed. By developing bridges on common understanding, these barriers of cross cultural communication can be surmounted. References Adler, Nancy J and Gundersen Allison. International dimensions of organizational behavior. Cengage Learning, 2008. Adler, Nancy J. Communicating across cultural barriers. Bolten, J (2003). Burgoon, Judee K. "A communication model of personal space violations: Explication and an initial test." Human Communication Research 4.2 (1978): 129-142. Griffin, Em. Communication: A first look at communication theory. (2006) Boston: McGraw-Hill. Kim, Young Yun. Communication and cross-cultural adaptation: An integrative theory. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters., 1988. lectronic. Prosser, Michael H. Cross-Cultural Communication. n.d. 29 March 2014. Smith, P.B, M.F Peterson and D.C Thomas. The handbook of cross-cultural management research . Sage publications, 2008. Ting-Toomey, Stella. "Translating Conflict Face-Negotiation Theory into Practice." Handbook of Intercultural Training. 3rd. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2004. 217-248. Read More