Culture and Global Communication - Assignment Example

Global Communication -Examine Whether Cultural Dimensions and Cultural Differences Are Apparent/Determinable Amongst Students of Different Nationalities Table of Contents 1.0. Introduction 2 1.1. Project Background 2 1.2. Research Method 2 2.0. Methodology 4 2.1. Overview 4 2.2. Research Design 4 2.3. Data Collection Method 4 2.4. Data Analysis 5 2.5. Ethical Considerations 5 3.0. Analysis and Findings 6 3.1. Analysis 6 3.2. Findings 14 5.0. Conclusion 16 References 17 Appendix 19 1.0. Introduction The assignment intends to examine whether there is any differences are apparent amid students of different nationalities. Additionally, an analysis is conducted with the aim of obtaining adequate information in relation to the individual’s culture with the help of previous research findings of Geert Hofstede. The analysis further assisted in understanding the significant similarities and dissimilarity in their culture. The US and China student were interviewed and the data collected was then analyzed and findings were made accordingly. 1.1. Project Background Culture refers to behaviour and attitude that people gathered through knowledge, value, religion, belief, role, experience, material objects, notion of time, relationship and processes from the environment or from various people and group (Belshek, n.d.). Culture is identified on the basis of behaviour, attitudes and perception of an individual. Thus, culture is one of the vital tasks for individual to learn and act with respect to it for better sustainability in a society (Gerhart, 2008). 1.2. Research Method In order to meet the aim of the research study, the research design has been based on qualitative research methods. Moreover, the primary and secondary data has been collected in order to analyse the data for obtaining appropriate results. The primary data in the study will be collected based on the semi-structured interview on the basis of the interview method. On the other hand, secondary date was collected from online sources in relation to Hofstede’s cultural dimensions. Nevertheless, the data collected was analysed through charts and graphs. Based on the analysis, it has been identified that there are differences in the culture of the US and Chines students (Rajasekar & et. al., 2013). 2.0. Methodology 2.1. Overview The aim of this particular research study was to identify the cultural differences amid students of the US and China. In this respect, a qualitative research approach has been implemented to have a better undertraining about the factors accountable for cultural differences (Rajasekar & et. al., 2013). 2.2. Research Design In this research study, a specific research design has been followed in order to fulfil the purpose of the research within the specified timeframe. In the first phase, it was important to determine the research problem, which was the similarity and dissimilarity in the cultural differences between the US and China’s student. The second phase was the framing of the research design, which comprises the plans on the basis of which data collection and analysis will be conducted. In the third phase, the data were collected from both primary and secondary for effective analysis. In the fourth phase of the research study, data were analysed with the help of the qualitative approach. In the last phase, an in-depth analysis has been conducted (Kumar, 2010). 2.3. Data Collection Method Data collection is an essential element in a research study to accomplish the desired objective of a research study in an effective manner. In this particular research, data required have been gathered both from primary as well as secondary methods. The primary data were collected from the semi-structured interviews and through self-completion questionnaire survey comprising 10 likert scale questions. The sample size for collecting data comprised two students one from the US and another from China. In this respect, interviews were conducted amid people from different nations in order to collect adequate data, for better reliability of the findings of the study. On the other hand, the secondary data were collected from the online sources regarding the various cultural dimensions as presented in Hofstede’s cultural dimensions. 2.4. Data Analysis In this particular research study, data collected has been analysed with qualitative approach which includes both qualitative and quantitative approach. On the basis of qualitative research approach, the data were collected from the interviews and questionnaire survey. The approach has helped in acquiring significant information about the research topic. Moreover, the analysis and interpretation of the gathered data have been conducted with the help of graphs and charts (Johnson, & et. al., 2007). 2.5. Ethical Considerations The research study is required to be conducted in an ethical way in order to have appropriateness in the findings. In this context, free consent was obtained from both the two students interviewed prior to the survey. Moreover, the feedbacks and responses of the students are recognized with due reflections for future references. Likewise, the secondary data collected were ensured to be gathered from the valid sources and are relevant to Hofstede cultural dimensions (Halai, 2006). 3.0. Analysis and Findings 3.1. Analysis In this research study, primary data were collected based on the questionnaire survey, which have been analysed with the assistance of charts and diagrams. Figure 1: Question 1 (Refer to Appendix) The first question revealed that Chinese students highly prefer to have superior powers than the US students. In this respect, it has been observed in the US students belief in inequalities in a society is deemed to be minimized while Chinese students are more inclined towards valuing status and position. Figure 2: Question 2 (Refer to Appendix) It has been observed from the analysis of the second question (figure 2) that the US and China’s students have different perceptions regarding importance of the family. The chart revealed that the US students highly obey their family responsibility by obeying family rules and regulations. Furthermore, Chinese student are seemed to possess individualism and wants to be independent. Figure 3: Question 3 (Refer to Appendix) It has been observed from third question (figure 3) that the US parents take pride in the individual accomplishments of students’ achievements. The data in the chart signified that the US parents of the students are highly concerned about their children achievements as compared to the Chinese parents. Figure 4: Question 4 (Refer to Appendix) The response obtained from the fourth question revealed that with regard to individualism, the US student is relatively higher i.e. scores 9, while the Chinese student scores 2. This implies that students of the US are more concerned about themselves and the family members. On the other hand, China is categorized as a collectivist society where people place importance on group efforts Figure 5: Question 5 (Refer to Appendix) The fifth question revealed that both the nations do not encourage any gender imbalance and both the boys and girl are given equal importance in the society. Figure 6: Question 6 (Refer to Appendix) It has been observed from the analysis of the sixth question (figure 6) that Chinese students are less assertive than the US students. In addition, the Chinese students are found to be driven by confident in themselves. Figure 7: Question 7 (Refer to Appendix) The seventh question (figure 7) revealed that the Chinese student ranked 3 in terms of uncertainty avoidance, which implies that the students in China are more enthusiastic and like to conduct activities that are highly governed with minimum regulations. On the other hand, the US students ranked 5, which are comparatively higher than the rank of the Chinese student. Figure 8: Question 8 (Refer to Appendix) The eighth question depicted that the Chinese student as compared to the American student is very pragmatic and students of China are more dependent on situation, context and changing scenario rather than planning for the future. Figure 9: Question 9 (Refer to Appendix) The ninth question (figure 9) revealed that Chinese culture encourages students to strive for improving their performances than the US students. Correspondingly, it implies that the US students place importance on satisfaction of their current achievement but the Chinese students strive more in future. Figure 10: Did you: Question 10 (Refer to Appendix) The tenth question revealed that individualism in the context of the US is relatively higher than China. This implies that the US students are concerned about themselves as well as their family members. On the other hand, Chinese student likely to be in the collective society other factors play a secondary role. 3.2. Findings The findings from the survey have revealed significant information with respect to cultural differences amid the US and Chinese student. Hofstede cultural power distance reveals the fact the not all individuals within a society are equal. Accordingly, the US student rated 4 in power distance, which is relatively low as compared to Chinese student who ranked 7. This signifies that in the US, student inequalities in the society are less. In China, students are inclined towards valuing status and position. In this regard, the individualism dimension deals with the amount of interdependence that a society values among its members. The findings of the survey also revealed that the US student concerns about themselves and the family members and Chinese student is categorized as a collectivist society where they place special importance on group efforts. In a similar perspective, Masculinity cultural dimension of Hofstede cultural dimensions reveals the degree of value towards achievement and success. The findings of the research revealed that Chinese student is driven by achievement, success and competition more than the US student. According the Hofstede uncertainty avoidance dimension, the findings depicted that the students in the US are more inclined towards revealing risk avoiding behaviour than the student of China. Moreover, in terms of Hofstede pragmatism, the findings imply the US student is very pragmatic whereas, the student of China is more dependent on the situation and changing scenario (The Hofstede Centre, n.d.). 5.0. Conclusion The main objective of the research study is to determine the factors that are accountable for significant differences in the global culture. Correspondingly, the research findings revealed that the students’ culture of both the US and China differs in various respect. Moreover, the findings affirmed that the Chinese student highly emphasize importance over the need of power, pragmatism and masculinity. On the other hand, the US students do not give their importance over such dimensions, as they likely to prefer individualism, avoid uncertainty of the future and are highly indulgence. In this respect, a qualitative research approach has been adopted and both primary and secondary data have been collected for appropriate findings. Moreover, primary data were obtained through the questionnaire method in semi-structured interview form. The interview was conducted on the basis of 10 questions. The use of interview as well as the questionnaire methods of data collection for this research study has been effective to obtain appropriate outcomes. Hence, from the research findings, it is clearly justifiable that culture differences exist between the students of the two nations. References Belshek, J. A., No Date. The Influence of Culture on the Negotiation Styles of British Students. Newcastle University. [Online] Available at: http://research.ncl.ac.uk/ARECLS/volume_3/jalalali.pdf [Accessed November 04, 2014]. Gerhart, B., 2008. Cross Cultural Management Research. International Journal of Cross-cultural management, Vol. 8, No.3, pp. 259-274. The Hofstede Centre, No Date. Cultural Tools. United Sates in Comparison with China. [Online] Available at: http://geert-hofstede.com/united-states.html [Accessed November 04, 2014]. Halai, A., 2006. Ethics in Qualitative Research: Issues and Challenges. EdQual Working Paper No. 4. [Online] Available at: http://www.edqual.org/publications/workingpaper/edqualwp4.pdf [Accessed November 04, 2014]. Johnson, B. R. & et. al., 2007. Toward A Definition of Mixed Methods Research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol. 1, No.2, pp. 112-133. Kumar, R., 2010. Research methodology: A step-by-step guide for beginners. United States of America: Saga. Rajasekar S. & et. al., 2013. Research Methodology. Department of Physics. [Online] Available at: http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0601009.pdf [Accessed November 04, 2014]. Appendix Questionnaires Q1: How do you see the degree of power in your life? Very Important Not Important 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q2: Do you: Question your parents Obey what parents say without questioning 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q3: In this society, parents take pride in the individual accomplishments of their children. Strongly disagree strongly agree 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q4: The economic system in you society is designed to maximize Individual interests Collective interests 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q5: Is in you society, boys are encouraged more than girls to attain a higher education. Strongly disagree Strongly agree 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q6: The society in which you live in people are generally: Non-assertive Assertive 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q7: The society accepted the norm is to: Accept the status quo Plan for the future 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q8: Did you put more emphasis on: Solving current problems Planning for the future 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q9: Is in your society and school, students were encouraged strive towards improving their performance. Strongly disagree Strongly agree 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q10: Did you: Not at all concerned for other Very concerned for others 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Read More