Cross-Cultural Communication - Assignment Example

Cross Cultural Communication Introduction Cross cultural communications can pose to be highly challenging for managers working in multi-national companies, especially when the differences between cultures are as wide as United States and Japan or Arabian cultures. History has been a witness to the difficulties that US troops had in employing the dictates of the Balfour Act after World War II, wherein convincing the Arabian populations to vacate Israel for the Jews became an uphill task that led to clashes and conflicts with Palestinians that return from time to time even today. A Bird’s Eye View: While globalization brings in a steady flow of mixed cultures in the workplace arena, multinational companies, multinational enterprises, and transnational family owned businesses have a major task ahead of them in terms of creating the right degree of collaboration in the workplace to get optimum performance outputs. In a way, all the studies pertaining to creating communication transparency amongst cross cultural communities has been a positive journey, since most deducers have come up with metrics and strategies that more or less convince the world of management with facts true to any multinational workplace today. However, a major task is left undone as workplace nuances differ from company to company. The present article concentrates on reviewing what experts have been pointing out towards changing communication patterns over time, cultures, and geographies. It is well known that when a Japanese migrates and settles in the US, he or she develops the communication skills prone to be practiced in the workplace and the community around, and vice versa. This brings in a new dimension in the studies pertaining to cross cultural communications, namely, adaptability and flexibility of a global citizen. While this adds a set of new parameters to studies in cross cultural communications, we must not forget that other parameters like individual ego, adaptability index, flexibility skills, and presentation skills are not to be considered less important in any way, from traditional parameters like collectivism or integrative sequences. Managers of multinational companies come from different backgrounds themselves and end up in difficulty trying to create a balance between the different negotiation skills of employees operating in each team. The study will deal with the scenarios experienced by single cultural and multicultural managers separately and try and deduce strategies basing on the studies undertaken in the past. 2. Literature review : Straight From The Horse’s Mouth International business negotiations have always been on top priority for managers of multinational companies since the main business metric that propels growth within the enterprise is through effective negotiations. While business negotiations technically bog down to same factors like company profiles and business strategy and move around figures and time, culture suddenly takes a place of importance as the people involved in the negotiations come from different ethnic backgrounds. While communication strategies may be considered as mode of delivering messages, they have also been studied as a combination of strategies that focus and ensure that the two parties work towards achieving the same goal (Bateson, 248-250). Talking of cultural differences, it has been noticed when assessed in terms of behavioral sequences and preferences in cultural values, that there are two types of models seen in different countries (Cai et al, 591). Individualist cultures are those that prefer autonomy, self-determination, independence, and safety of self-interests. United States is known to conform to such a model of cultural preferences. Collectivism is the practice of staying interconnected, committed to group norms, protecting of interests of the group, and maintaining relational harmony (Schwartz, 139). China is said to be a collectivist culture which does not welcome out-of-group members. Also, within the group, collectivist behavioral patterns are governed by the status and role of authority of the person being spoken to (Adler, Brahm, & Graham, 449-551). Individualist cultures refrain from distinguishing status and authority and are closer to treating to everyone within the culture with equality. Differences in thinking demand deep understanding and observation of communication differences between employees, on part of the manager, who has to handle employees from such different backgrounds. Further on, business negotiations can be made effective only when there is a complete understanding of the differences between such cultures. Ideally, conducting a cultural audit or assessment would be great for company management operating branches all over the world, before they undertake international business negotiations (Hurn, 354). While dyads and metrics may keep flowing through in the world of culture assessments, communication strategies are determined best when a certain assessment model is understood from its grass roots (Hall, 13). According to Piva and Cerrato, managers of multinational companies and even family owned businesses are required to ensure that the enterprise grows through the use of the right negotiation strategy. Even family management hindrances that usually effect export metrics are unable to stop negotiations from going successful in international business. Therefore, once internationalization is adopted, family owned enterprises experience the same trepidation in changing over from the local to the international market set-up just as multinational companies do when they are expanding to new territories (Piva & Cerrato, 617-320). Use of syntactic and pragmatic modes in communication helps business negotiations only when applied in appropriate conditions (Ellis, 1-3). The very basic behavioral sequences differ from culture to culture (Blum-Kulka) and etiquette further demarcates this line of difference (Amett & Ameson, 83). While pragmatic communication codes are best suited for most scenarios (Ellis, 333-343), it is important to note that managers cannot afford to neglect a single etiquette when venturing into new markets (Carbaugh, 15). It has always been noticed that intercultural conflicts witnessed in history have been sorted out using definite communication patterns (Donohue & Bresnehan, 135-136). When two groups are unready to listen to each other, the mediators have always been required to use strategic communication that left the members of either group feeling equally important (Ellis, 255) In fact, the need to use conservative etiquette in cultures which gave high importance to status and role authority, directly comes in to business negotiations, something that managers would have to keep in mind. Multicultural managers have a whole set of advantages to benefit from although the joint gains stay low (Adair, 273). When they understand the dynamics of the Anxiety Uncertainty Management (AUM) theory that was applied to cross-cultural adaptation by Gudykunst in 1985, they slowly develop the right approach in creating the correct combination of integrative behavioral sequences to optimize upon joint gains during international business negotiations (Macduff, 31). Results in all these studies have shown how hard a challenge it is for managers of singe cultural background to migrate and adapt to the difficulties of a multi-cultural set-up. More the number of cultures, lower the percentage of success in joint gains. 3. Discussion How Do You Start A New Multicultural Business Strategy? Crucial structural changes are important to the success of any new business strategy, most of which is required in maximum during expansion of a business into the international market. While Americans are forthright in their presentation of proposals in the negotiation, Japanese negotiators are found to be indirect and more conserved in their outlining price and time deals with clients. So, if you are an American family-run enterprise that is venturing say into the Japanese or Chinese market (Adler et al 449-460), you will have to get the best gains through a strategy that recognizes this behavioral sequence during negotiations. Yes, starting with cultural audits is very important to ensuring a successful international venture. However, the very next step calls in for adaptation of negotiators to the integrative sequences. Training and teaching is required to ensure that this process of adaptation is easy and unhindered. The Picture Around Single Cultural Managers: How Is It Unique? The process is difficult for single-cultural managers who are used to handling employees and clients from a particular cultural background. This difficulty turns into a challenge especially when the time period of negotiation is limited. Turning the tables on the challenge itself, single cultural managers must employ a descriptive communication strategy right from the start. This actually enhances interpersonal adaptation of employees and helps them understand the appropriate route to intercultural adaptation that he and his team will be needed to use during the negotiations. Whether it is in a low or a high context negotiation, single cultural managers have to optimize their integrative behavioral sequences by staying as direct as possible during the negotiations, especially when dealing with individualist businesses. So, single cultural managers have no way but to be descriptive and direct in their proposals, such that it falls in line with the culture of people he is handling on a daily basis. How Do Multicultural Managers Set the Ball Rolling? Multicultural managers have a bigger game to play since, they are required to convert the very low joint gain structure to high joint gain outcome through development of integrative behavioral sequences. This is a multi-dimensional challenge since in multi-cultural scenarios; the managers have to deal with people from both ends of cultural preferences. The ideal way to start would be to create a thorough report of the desired cultural and behavioral practices that the managers would like to see during the negotiation. Members from both the teams and parties must be encouraged to work together in common projects with well defined business goals, something that ensures that all members feel equally treated during the process of negotiation. Strategic approach can work wonders with respect to successful cross-cultural negotiations, while lack of strategy can repeat the historical mistakes of inter-cultural conflict that we have been a witness to in the past. While those conflicts were mainly political in nature, failure as an outcome could happen even in cross culture communications going wrong in international business. While mediators do not happen to exist in the line of business negotiations, it is the sole responsibility of multi-cultural managers to use flexibility in the strategy that they plan to apply while negotiating a deal. Therefore, multicultural managers need to undertake in-depth research in the cultural backgrounds, practices, and biases of the clients and employees he has to handle at the workplace, and create a suitable balance by using appropriate testing and assessment tools, that indicate the right approach in integrative behavioral sequences that will work best for both the parties involved. In most of the times, a great more amount of flexibility is desired from a multicultural manager than from a subtle cultural manager. This is important to get rid of workplace conflicts and failed negotiations and helps in nurturing great team works and successful projects. Tools To Help In Assessment Of Cultural Distance And Development Of Strategy: The Sequential Stage Model Talking of flexibility, multi-cultural and single cultural managers have two options ahead of them. They could decide upon a sequential stage model that is either event driven or interval driven (Adair & Brett, 273-280). This definitely calls for cultural analysis of all the groups involved in the negotiation and assessment of aggregation strategies that are subjected to event-driven and interval-driven models. In the three step approach to understanding the event driven aggregates, managers have to use problem initiation, problem solving, and problem resolution stages to analyze and understand the differences and similarities between the two or more parties. Event driven approaches basically run on reaction to a certain event that occurs during the negotiation. While most negotiations are a series of consecutive events, repetitions are prone in this approach. Yes, while this approach is a great qualitative indicator of strengths and weaknesses of both the sides, it fails to help define content suitable for different phases. In most cases, this happens because event driven models have repetition of content and stages that gets triggered every time a certain point is repeated in the negotiation. On the contrary, interval-driven assessment models give managers a better understanding of the content relevant to each stage since there is no repetition of stages in these assessments as they are based more on the relational positions of the participants with respect to time, which is fixated to stages of equal time duration. Therefore, event driven assessments help single cultural managers best, while interval driven models help multi-cultural managers best. Common Behavioral Sequences That Can Be Used In Multicultural Negotiations Whether it is in the world of business negotiations or free trade, a competitive behavior is the first thing managers expect to meet every time internationalization is brought to effect by a company. In case of business negotiations in cross cultural communities, there is a simultaneous play of co-operative and competitive behavioral sequences. Thus, to be able to create high levels of joint gains, single cultural and multi-cultural managers need to ready themselves with separate set of assessment and strategic tools to understand the relational positioning of the different parties involved in the deal. While single cultural managers have a lesser load to lift, multicultural managers enjoy high dividends and returns after the initial heavy lifting. Yes, negotiations are incomplete without co-operative and competitive behaviors. For example, refocusing is a practice that happens too often in business negotiations, if the manager allows it to. Single cultural and multi-cultural managers must work upon optimizing the art of refocusing others while resisting the same from the other end. This works greatly in single cultural set-ups. However, in multi-cultural set-ups, the manager must ensure that the focus is more on relationship building (a co-operative practice) than on threatening or refocusing (both competitive practices). 4. Conclusion and recommendations Multi-cultural managers have to deal with the demon of cross cultural communications in a way that is much different more challenging than how single cultural managers have to. The difference arises from the fact that multi-cultural managers understand the long term implications of maintaining highly sustained relationships between members of both the parties involved in the negotiation. Conflicts in the workplace do arise due to communication gaps between employees from different cultural backgrounds working within the same team. The aim of the multicultural manager is to forever create a high context negotiation in order to ensure that the low joint gain indices change for the better. Similarly, single cultural managers cannot allow the negotiations to go at low context for a very long time because that will not be in favor of the deal. They may find the transition to a multicultural scenario hard to cope with, since the challenges are much varied in the new scenario. Managers therefore, should aspire to develop these assessment and analytical skills even while operating in single cultural environments. Although not required initially, single cultural managers who have kept these practices in mind, even when operating in a less challenging environment have been found to be able to extricate much better performances from his or her team members. Also, they are more transition ready when a company decides to internationalize and are able to take up the challenges of cross cultural communications in a better fashion than unprepared managers are able to. What Is The Ideal Combination? To begin with, there is no rocket science in improving the general performance of any single or multi cultural scenario. Instead, it is the prerogative of the manager to analyze and bring in the best behavioral sequences in the teams he has to handle. Ideally, using flexible communication, thorough co-operation and minimal competitiveness is the best way through which managers from both the backgrounds will be able to bring in successful negotiations to close an international business deal. The main focus has to be on developing a longstanding sustainable relationship within the two parties and this cannot be done on a trial and error basis. Rather, the approach has to be systematic use of tools and tests, to understand and manage the anxiety, uncertainty, and management requirements of the new structure that is going to be used in business expansion. References 1. Adair, Wendi L. & Brett, Jeanne M. The Negotiation Dance: Time, Culture, and Behavioral Sequences in Negotiation, Organization Science, (2005). 16.1, pp. 33-51. 2. Amett, Ronald C., & Ameson, Patt. Dialogic civility in a cynical age. Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 1999, Print. 3. Adair, Wendi L. Integrative Sequences And Negotiation Outcome In Same- And Mixed- Culture Negotiations, The International Journal of Conflict Management, (2003) 14 3/4, pp 273-296. 4. Adler, Nancy. J., Brahm, Richard, & Graham, John L. Strategy implementation: A comparison of face-to-face negotiations in the People’s Republic of China and the United States, Strategic Management Journal, (1992) 13, pp. 449-466. 5. Blum-Kulka, Shoshana. Dinner talk: Culture patterns of sociability and socialization in family discourse. NJ: Lawrence Eribaum, 1997. 6. Bateson, Gregory. Steps to an ecology of mind. New York; Ballentine Books, 1958. 7. Bernstein, Basil. Class, codes and control. Volume 1. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1971. 8. Carbaugh, Donal. Toward a perspective on cultural communication and intercultural contact. Semiotica, (1990) 1-2, 15-35. 9. Cai, et al. Culture in the Context of Intercultural Negotiation: Individualism-Collectivism and Paths to Integrative Agreements, Human Communication research, (2000) 26 .4, pp 591-617 10. Donohue, W.A. & Bresnahan, M.I. Communication issues in mediating cultural disputes. In J. Folger & T. Jones (Eds.), New directions in Mediation: Communication research and perspectives (pp. 135-158). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1994, Print. 11. Ellis, Donald G. Syntactic and pragmatic codes in communication. Communication Theory (1992) 2, 1-23. 12. Ellis, Donald G. Codes and pragmatic comprehension. In S.A. Deetz (Ed.), Communication yearbook 17 (pp. 333-343). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1994, Print. 13. Ellis, Donald G., An Approach To Ethnonational Conflict, International Journal of Conflict Management, (2003) 14.3/4, pp 255-272. 14. Hurn, Brian J. The Influence of Culture On International Business Negotiations, Industrial And Commercial Training, (2007) 39.7, pp. 354-360. 15. Hall, Edwrd T. Beyond Culture. New York: Anchor Press, 1976, Print. 16. Macduff, Ian. Your Pace Or Mine? Culture, Time, and Negotiation, Negotiation Journal, (2006) 22.1, pp. 31-45. 17. Piva, Mariacristina, & Cerrato, Danielle. The internationalization of small and medium-sized enterprises: the effect of family management, human capital and foreign ownership, Journal of Management & Governance Nov (2012) 16.4, pp. 617–644. 18. Schwartz, Shalom H. Individualism-collectivism: Critique and proposed refinements, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, (1990) 21, pp. 139-157. Read More