Reader Intercultural Communication 2013-2014

Building Block Intercultural Communication, version 1.0 2010-2011

© Stenden University – International Business and Languages, 2010-2011

Reader

Intercultural Communication

Articles selected by Mª Angeles Sánchez Carrascal

Version 1.0: July 2010

School year 2013-2014

Code: IIBLIC

Building Block Co-ordinator: Joëlle Hietbrink

E-mail: [email protected]


© Stenden University – International Business and Languages, 2010-2011 2

Contents

1 CULTURAL DIVERSITY, GLOBALIZATION AND CULTURAL CONVERGENCE . 3

2 SOURCES OF MISUNDERSTANDINGS ........................................................ 7

3 INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION .......................................................... 9

4 NON-VERBAL COMMUNICATION ............................................................. 16

5 CULTURE AND NON-VERBAL COMMUNICATION ...................................... 21

6 STEREOTYPES ......................................................................................... 23

7 CULTURAL CONCEPTS AND PATTERNS .................................................... 25

7.1 RESEARCH INTO CULTURAL PATTERNS ......................................................................................... 25

7.2 HOFSTEDE’S CULTURAL DIMENSIONS............................................................................................ 34

7.3 IMPLICATIONS OF HOFSTEDE’S DIMENSIONS ................................................................................. 42

7.4 HOFSTEDE’S CULTURE DIMENSIONS AND RONEN & SHENKAR’S COUNTRY CLUSTERS ................ 50

7.5 TROMPENAARS. THE THREE LAYERS OF CULTURE ......................................................................... 51



1 Cultural Diversity, Globalization and Cultural Convergence

By Stephan Dahl

What is Culture?

The word 'culture' stems from the Latin "colere", translatable as to build on, to

cultivate, to foster. Leibnitz, Voltaire, Hegel, von Humbold, Kant, Freud, Adorno,

Marcuse... all have reflected on the meaning of the word in different versions of its

use. In the early stages of the philosophical debate about what is 'culture', the term

often refers to the opposite of 'nature', whereas 'culture' was referring to something

constructed willingly by men, while 'nature' was given in itself.

Since the 18th century, the word 'culture' emerged more in the sense of 'products

that are worthy': somewhat reduced to Dürer, Goethe and Beethoven, the term was

used to describe Elite and high-culture concepts, particularly in continental Europe.

This definition of culture is still vivid; Rickert, in Kulturwissenschaft und

Naturwissenschaft (The science of culture and the science of nature), defines

culture, following the Elitist approach, as: "Gesamtheit der realen Objekte, an denen

allgemein anerkannte Werte oder durch sie konstruierte Sinngebilde haften und die

mit Ruecksicht auf die Werte gepflegt werden" (The totality of real objects, to which

the general values, or sense constructions of those, are related, and which are cared

for with regards to the values.) (Rickert, quoted in Maletzke,1996:16).

Equally, during the mid-nineteenth century, the concept of mass culture and popular

culture emerged, fueling the critical theory of the Frankfurt School and the

Birmingham School. In the words of Stuart Hall, of the Birmingham School, 'culture'

is "both the means and values which arise among distinctive social groups and

classes, on the basis of their given historical conditions and relationship, through

which they 'handle' and respond to the conditions of existence" (Hall, quoted in

McQuail, 1994:100).

Another view of culture, focuses of culture as a set of values and attributes of a

given group, and the relation of the individual to the culture, and the individual's

acquisition of those values and attributes: in the words of Geert Hofstede: "the

collective programming of the mind" (quoted in Victor,1992:6). Fisher, quoted in the

same work, defines culture as :"It is shared behavior, which is important because it

systematizes the way people do things, thus avoiding confusion and allowing co-

operation so that groups of people can accomplish what no single individual could do

alone. And it is behavior imposed by sanctions, rewards and punishments for those

who are part of the group" (Fisher, 1988).

In the context of this paper, we will adopt the definition of culture as the totality of

the following attributes of a given group (or subgroup): shared values, believes and

basic assumptions, as well as any behavior arising from those, of a given group.

Culture is understood, in this context, as collectively held set of attributes, which is

dynamic and changing over time.



A group can thereby be various forms of social constructions: it is not merely any

nation, but also supranational and international groups are possible, and often

clearly distinguishable.

The individual and the culture in which is live is a complex set of relationships. On

the one side, the individual determines its culture, on the other, it is determined by

its culture. By contributing to the culture around him, the individual is part of the

cultural change.

S.G. Summer introduced the concept of "Ethnocentrism" early this century: it refers

to the tendency that most people see their own culture as the 'center of the world'.

Often this phenomenon has been seen as a result of "naive" thinking, following from

the assumption of the world in itself being like it appears to the individual: a set of

'self-evident' rules, roles, categories and relationships, seen as 'natural'. The

concept of ethnocentrism is often displayed in the form of nationalism.

Returning to our initial discussion of what constitutes a 'culture', various concepts

are often displayed as the basic differentiation of cultures (Maletzke, 1996: 42):

- national character / basic personality

- perception

- time concept

- space concept

- thinking

- language

- non verbal communication

- values

- behavior: norms, rules, manners

- social groupings and relationships

Often, culture has also been described as 'ordered into' three layers, in fact like an

onion, where one peel has to be taken off in order to see the following layer.

The three layers of culture are explained as:

The outer layer, artifacts and products, is the most explicit of all layers: including

language and food, architecture and style etc.

The second inner layer, norms and values. Norms are "the mutual sense what is

right and wrong" while values represent the "definition of what is good and bad"

(Trompenaars and Hempden Turner, 1997:22).

The innermost layer, basic assumptions, represents the core assumptions of what

life is, assumptions about how to handle everyday problems that have become self-

evident.

This explanation of the visibility of the layers is based on a very practical approach

to culture, whereas Maletzke's basic differentiation provides a more profound



approach to the actual criteria that influence the different levels. These criteria are

explained in the following section:

The National Character/Basic Personality

Each nation has its own character, the French are not like the English, and the

Dutch not like the Germans. However, the attempt to define what makes each of

the characters distinct will provide massive difficulties. The idea of a 'national

character' is based on the assumption that people from one nation share basic

common behavioral patterns and personality traits, differentiable from other

nations. The concept has however been often criticized, and is often only fueled by

perceptions of the one nation towards the other, resulting in a number of attributes

that one nation apparently displays: the Germans are orderly, hard-working and

humorless... However, findings in that field have been often contradictory,

particularly from highly diversified cultures. The methodological difficulties may be

one of the reasons why the term 'national character' has widely been replaced with

'basic personality' or 'social character' in modern literature.

The two later concepts, although also often deemed as equally unreliable, stem from

the idea that the child is being subject to cultural influence during his early stages,

and hence develops a 'basic personality' similar in various cultures. Equally the

'social character' concept tries to identify the common character structures of a

culture.

Perception

Perception is not a passive, objective and neutral process. Every perception is seen

as an active process: "what is perceived is becoming part of the subjective

experience, embedded into the whole of the personality structure of that person,

including whatever the person's development process, his cultural and material

environment has given him or her as ways of thinking and viewing things"

(Maletzke, 1996:48). The human being distinguishes actively between important

and unimportant: perceives objects actively and clearly, while others are only

partially perceived or ignored.

Visual perception is one of the traits where the culture specific view objects is

clearly demonstrated: Most Europeans will have difficulties distinguishing for

example Japanese faces. Tajfel (in Maletzke 1996,49) describes an experiment

where US Americans and Mexicans were presented with a series of photos, depicting

situations which were only known to the one or other nationality. Each participant

was found to remember more accurately and vividly the photos showing situations

that were familiar to the own culture. The other photos were only relatively vague if

at all remembered.

Equally, the perception of feeling is altered in different cultural surrounding: shaking

hands, kissing, have different perceptions in various cultures.



Interpersonal distance may be perceived as essential or undesirable (English culture

or Latin culture).

Also the perception of what smells 'good' or 'bad' can be highly different in various

cultural surroundings.

Source: Communications and Culture Transformation,

http://www.stephweb.com/capstone/1.htm

Bibliography:

Hall, E.T, The Hidden Dimension, New York: Doubleday, 1966.

Maletzke, G, Interkulturelle Kommunication, Opladen: Westdeutser Verlag, 1996.

McQuail, D, Mass Communication Theory, London: sage, 1994

Rickert, H, Kulturwissenschaft und Naturwissenschaft, Tübingen, 1921.

Trompenaars F, and Hempden-Turner C, Ridding the Waves of Culture, London:

Nicolas Breadley, 1997.

Victor, D.A, International Business Communication, New York: Harper Collins, 1992.

http://www.stephweb.com/capstone/1.htm



2 Sources of misunderstandings

There are a lot of misunderstandings when it comes to intercultural communication. I

will give you a selection of those, which are interesting in the context of interpersonal

skills.

First of all there might be misunderstandings based on language

Secondly there might be misunderstandings based on non-verbal behavior.

Thirdly there might be misunderstandings based on different styles,

conventions, and practices.

Last, but not least there are misunderstandings based on cultural values.

First of all there might be misunderstandings based on language. Even if you are

able to speak fluently the language of the host country in some countries it might be

usual to use one - official - language for discussing work related matters, than switch

to another language to chat about the weekend activities, and than switch back to the

official language to continue working. So it is quite possible that some people,

particularly foreigners, may get into trouble about which language they have to use in

which context. Even so language-based misunderstandings can arise, when two native

speakers of the same language, but from different dialect groups or different sub-

cultures or social classes interact.

U.S. and British negotiators found themselves at a standstill when the

American company proposed that they "table" particular key points. In the

U.S. "Tabling a motion" means to not discuss it, while the same phrase in

Great Britain means to "bring it to the table for discussion."

Secondly there might be misunderstandings based on non-verbal behavior.

Language is accompanied by a continuous flow of non-verbal communication. The

main difference between verbal and non-verbal communication is, that verbal

communication means the description of ideas, thoughts, meanings and facts directly

by words, while non-verbal behavior is going to express personal emotions, moods,

identity and attitudes by gesture, facial expression, body language etc.

Thirdly there might be misunderstandings based on different styles, conventions,

and practices. We can think about time conception, space en etiquette. If you

work in the same profession, the expert-language is most of the time used in

international contexts. But even though there might appear problems in the

relationship, which are based on different cultural conventions or rules.

If an American manager has got a private invitation for dinner from a

German colleague, he would be invited at 7.30 p.m. The American probably

will arrive at the colleague’s home at 8.00 p.m. possibly he will recognize a

frosty atmosphere and might feel a bit uncomfortable. If he/she will look for

reasons, he/she will find out that it is very impolite in Germany to be 30



minutes late at a dinner-party, because everything has been prepared for

the time of invitation. On the other hand it is impolite in the USA to arrive

less than half an hour later as the invitation time.

Last, but not least there are misunderstandings based on cultural values. One of the

best-known examples is the importance of the individual relative to the group: In

most Western cultures, the individual comes first: People prefer to take care about

their immediate families and most of them feel independent from groups,

organizations or collectivities. In most Asian cultures the group comes first and people

do a lot for promoting the group harmony or emphasizing loyalty.

HOFSTEDE’S research has found out four basic value dimensions on which cultures

differ: individualism versus collectivism (see above), acceptability of power

differentials (»power-distance«; hierarchy structures in organizations), the importance

of being certain about outcomes, preferring predictability and stability (»uncertainty

avoidness«), and role differentiations between men and women (»masculism versus

feminism«).

Interestingly enough, we are not aware about most of our own cultural bound values.

But we often become aware of their influence and importance to us, when our own

values seem to be trampled on or broken by people from other cultures.

Here is an anecdote about this by GALLOIS AND CALLAN (1997): At

Western Universities there are a lot of Asian students. The Asians are often

marked down on written work because they have incorporated long

quotations from the public literature. The professors feel justified to do so,

because in the view of Western professors long quotations show a lack of

students originality, a lack of individual mental work, ideas etc. The Asian

students often feel very unhappy about this, as they have learned from

professors in their home culture, that it is important to show that they have

read the work of earlier students. While quoting these works, the students

show that they have understood what the others have written and

appreciate and respect it. This situation might come to a point, where

communication between Western professors and Asian students breaks

down, because neither the students nor the professors may be willing to

change their own point of view or look for another way to examine on what

is essential for an essay.

We should remember that »... our identity is bound up in many facets of our culture,

and it can be surprising how hard it is to give these things up.«



3 Intercultural communication

Hofstede's dimensions of culture form a deep underlying basis for the understanding

of culture that can be invaluable for the IBL students. However, it is theoretical and

since Hofstede wrote there has been widespread interest in culture and intercultural

communication, for example, Trompenaars (1994) and Jandt (1998) look at a range of

aspects of intercultural communication, these tend to focus around aspects of

communication such as language and non-verbal communication. For example both

books address proxemics and kinesics as well as aspects like eye contact and the use

of eyes in communication, and attitudes and meanings attributed to time.

A good starting point to examine the relationship between business communication

skills and intercultural communication is to look at what Trompenaars (1994) terms

affective and neutral cultures. Trompenaars says that "in relationships between people

reason and emotion both play a role. Which of these dominates will depend upon

whether we are affective, that is we show our emotion, in which case we probably get

an emotional response in return, or whether we are emotionally neutral in our

approach".

Trompenaars explains that members of cultures who are affectively neutral are not

likely to display their emotions and their feelings but will be more likely to keep them

controlled and invisible. In cultures where a higher degree of affectivity is acceptable

there will be a wider range of visible evidence of emotion. Trompenaars is keen to

explain that just because people do not demonstrate their emotion, does not mean

that they do not have them; it is just that the degree of signalling of emotion is more

acceptable in an affective culture than in a neutral one.

One of the key focuses in the field of intercultural communication is the role that

cultural differences play in ensuring affective communication and eliminating

miscommunication. Think about some of the ways in which different degrees of

affectivity could influence communication and miscommunication.

In one piece of research Trompenaars identified the percentage of respondents who

would not express feeling upset at work openly.

Japan 83%

Germany 75%

Idonesia 75%

Great Britain 71%

Norway 61%

Netherlands 59%

Hong Kong 55%

Singapore 42%

United States 40%

France 34%



Italy 29%

Use the above as a working guide to the range of affectivity between different

countries. Try to identify from your own experience some ways in which

communication between individuals with different levels of affectivity might be

hampered or miscommunication produced in the following areas of intercultural

communication:

Language: this includes both the words that are used in communication and

other features of verbal communication such as intonation.

Proximics: the use of interpersonal space

Kinesics: this includes facial expression, gestures and body movements.

Haptics: physical contact

Oculesics: communication using the eyes including frequency and duration of

eye contact

Responses to the above activity are innumerable and will depend on your own

experience of business culture and intercultural communication. But let us take a look

at our prime concern, language, as a way to seeing the role of intercultural

communication in effective communication and miscommunication.

Language

Language is perhaps the most deceptive of all the ways of communicating because

one feels interculturally that language is a tool that will aid communication, and of

course it, but there is also enormous scope for miscommunication. Jandt (1998)

identifies five ways in which language can actually act as a barrier to communication:

1. Vocabulary equivalence for example, in one language there maybe no real

equivalent for a word in another language. So, for example, whilst there is only one

word for 'snow' in English, in Eskimo there are a whole range of words, depending on

the type of snow, its newness or its hardness, so the one word in English simply does

not adequately translate.

Another problem with actual vocabulary is that in many languages there are in fact

false friends, words which seem to be the equivalent of words in the other language,

for example in French 'resumer' and English 'resume' have completely different

meanings, often to the consternation of people who think they have the same

meaning.

2. Syntactical equivalence can present real problems of understanding and create

miscommunication. For example in English verbs and adjectives can vary their

meaning depending on their position in a sentence. For example you can plan a table

or table a plan. You can place a book or book a place.

Even the simplest words like 'yes' and 'no' can have very different meanings in

different cultures. When Japanese speakers say 'yes' they may not necessarily mean

that they agree, they may simply mean that they are listening, or that you have their



attention, or that they respect what you are saying. Some languages do not use 'yes'

or 'no' in response to direct closed questions. So, for example, in Thai or some

Chinese languages to reply to the question 'do you understand what I have just said?'

in the affirmative one would say 'understand', rather than 'yes'. This answer in itself

would be ambiguous in English.

3. Experiential equivalence involves words which simply do not exist in one culture so

are difficult to translate. For example, in many cultures objects and experiences are

different from those in ones own culture. Words such as 'direct debit' or 'customer

care' may be very difficult to translate into some languages. Related to this is concept

ional equivalence, where one culture may simply not have the same concepts in the

same way as another. For example, the words 'human rights' in the West refer to a bill

of rights and ideas such as freedom of speech and the right to a fair trial. In other

countries they may simply refer to the rights of an individual to have adequate

housing and health care.

4. Vocalics is the area of language relating not to words themselves but to the way

they are used, for example the voice and intonation. This is particularly noticeable in

the difference between northern Europeans and Latins. For example, Latins show quite

a lot of variation in the tone of their voice in comparison to Anglo-Saxons, particularly,

say Germans who would speak in a much more even way. Trompenaars (1994) cites a

good example of a British manager posted to Nigeria where he spoke quite loudly and

with plenty of variation in the pitch in his voice. With the Nigerians this was fine, and

was perceived by his subordinates as an expression of concern and emotional

involvement. He was successful in Nigeria and posted on to Malaysia where this

language was seen as uncontrolled emotion and shouting, likely to cause loss of face

and not seen in a positive way at all.

5. The degree of overlapping between speakers is also of relevance here, although this

will be dealt with more fully under the heading of conversation analysis in unit 6.

Native speakers of English show a tendency in dialogue to have slight overlap between

speakers, so that as one speaker is finishing, the other speaker starts to speak. There

has been a fair bit of study on this and the second speaker seems to be able to pick up

that the first speaker is coming to the end of what they are saying by cues which are

largely related to intonation (Wichman 2000). Latin speakers, on the other hand, in a

dialogue are much more likely to overlap more extensively, so there could be long

periods of overlap when both speakers are speaking at the same time. In a

professional or work place environment many cultures, including Japanese, would

actually have a pause between two speakers.

Clearly, this simple variation in the amount of overlap, or the lack of overlap between

speakers from different cultures, can and does create serious miscommunication. A

British person in conversation with a Japanese person would be waiting for the

Japanese person to start speaking whilst a British person is actually finishing what

they are saying. Meanwhile, the Japanese person would wait for the British person to

finish speaking before they will reply. The result of this is that the Japanese often feel



that the British do not give them time to finish what they are saying and do not

respect them. The British, meanwhile, feel that the Japanese are reticent and slow to

interact and are not involved. Latins can find it quite difficult communicating with

Anglo-Saxons, because they expect to be interrupted and they feel that if they are

not, then the other person is not involved in what they are saying. This can make the

Latin’s speak more and appear to become even more excited or anxious whilst they

are waiting to be interrupted.

So, from the use of intonation and interactive style there is plenty of scope for

cultures to misunderstand each other and miscommunicate and construe each other in

very different terms because of the degree of affectivity which is acceptable in

different cultures and the degree to which affectivity is construed through intonation

and interactive style.

Proximics and haptics

Proximics = the use of personal space

Haptics = physical contact

Trompenaars' description of affectivity and neutrality has much in common with the

idea put forward by Jandt (1995) of immediacy. This is defined as "the degree of

perceived physical or psychological closeness between people".

Jandt sees immediacy as something which is expressed through a range of physical

phenomena including touching, physical space, smiling and gestures". Axtell (1990)

gives great detail on the behaviour of individual countries regarding personal space,

gestures and touching. In South East Asian countries, for example, touching between

members of different sexes in a work place situation is normally unacceptable,

whereas, for example in Latin countries, it is quite normal and acceptable for

colleagues to greet each other with a kiss and for men to greet each other with a hand

shake every day.

In many Arab countries physical space between men in a work place or business

context is usually fairly close and touching is viewed as normal, for example holding

someone's arm to guide them through a door. In fact, in my own experience, I know a

successful North African business man who has told me that he would never do

business with somebody who does not make any physical contact with them in this

way. Physical demonstrations of this kind of immediacy and affectivity, whilst normal

to people from these cultures, is viewed in a very different way by people in a less

immediate or affective culture.

Axtell (1990) goes into great detail on specific gestures which have different meanings

in different cultures, for example, the use of the OK sign in America is made by joining

the thumb and the forefinger. In France this means zero or 'no good' and is a negative

gesture.



On a much more universal level, smiling is a good example which is used by all

cultures, but again is construed differently between them. In Anglo-Saxon countries

smiling is normally viewed in the work place as a way of signalling friendliness and

cooperation, and of course at times happiness or good humour. Mole (1990) puts

forward the view that Russians often seem gloomy or forbidding on first meeting, and

a large part of this is the fact that smiling is not seen by Russians as appropriate for

what is viewed as a serious situation, in other words, a business or work place

situation. A smile would be used for greetings amongst personal friends, but it simply

is not appropriate on formal occasions. Smiling for 'no reason' would be seen as a sign

of foolishness rather than of geniality. In many South East Asian countries the smile is

used when apologizing, in which case it does not denote happiness. This can be very

disconcerting to Anglo-Saxon cultures in that it can seem that the apology is not

sincere.

Chronemics

Chronemics = attitudes towards time

Closely related to the above areas of intercultural communication is a value given by

different to time. This is called chronemics. One of the most immediately obvious

features of chronemics is attitudes of different cultures to punctuality. It is not only

that different cultures place different degrees of importance on the whole idea of

punctuality, but also that cultures differ as to what they consider to be punctual. A

very good practical demonstration of this presented in the video, 'Building a

Transnational Team' (by Video Arts 1990). The video is intended for corporate cross-

cultural training and centres around a meeting between managers from each country

in a multi-national organisation. There are French, German, Spanish, British and

American managers present. Various issues are dealt with quite effectively regarding

cross cultural communication in the meeting, but there is a graphic illustration of

different approaches to time keeping when at the beginning of the meeting, the

German arrives several minutes before the meeting (and sits at the meeting table

prepared with a large file of papers). The American arrives a couple of minutes after

this, still well before the time the meeting is scheduled and believes herself to be in

fact quite late. The British representative arrives very shortly before the start time of

the meeting and the French representative arrives just after this time. The Spanish

representative arrives some time later and is clearly unaware that other members of

the meeting feel that the meeting has started some time ago and any time for small

talk is well over.

A point worth making at this juncture is that the German would probably not have

considered himself to have arrived early and the Spaniard would not have considered

himself to have arrived late, it is just that each country has a different concept of what

punctuality means.

Aside from punctuality, there are other key features regarding different cultural

attitudes towards time, particularly the management of time and the orientation to

time in the past, present or future. But, of these, probably the most significant is the



idea put forward by Edward Hall and developed by Trompenaars, of time being either

sequential or synchronic. Cultures which tend towards sequential time view time in a

linear sequence and will start, carry out and complete any one activity or task before

they move onto the next one. In other words, in sequential time, one does one thing

at a time. Members of a synchronic culture are more able to and accustomed to

carrying out diverse activities all at the same time. Trompenaars gives a very graphic

illustration of this by describing a scene on a rainy day in Great Britain with a number

of people queuing at the bus shelter. The queue is quite long and well orderly and

quite a lot of people are getting wet in the rain because they could not go into the

shelter. However, there was of course, room for everybody under the shelter had they

been willing to break the sequence of the queue.

A good example of how resistant cultures are to changing their approaches to time,

particularly in a business context, was made clear to me recently in a visit I made to

explore possibilities for a venture between UCLan and a Moroccan partner. I knew

very well that the Moroccan culture is a synchronic culture. Moroccans are very able to

balance a whole host of activities at the same time, and I knew that this could make

my trip time consuming and to myself irritating as a member of a sequential culture.

Prior to the trip I therefore wrote to the Moroccans outlining clearly the objectives of

the visit and asking for a meeting early on in the visit (which was scheduled to last 2

days) to confirm these objectives, and a meeting at the end of the visit to identify

action points and various activities between these two sessions that would enable me,

for example, to look at the facilities the establishment had.

Even whilst I wrote this I was aware that the Moroccans may not be too easily

influenced in this respect and when I actually arrived in Morocco I was not too

surprised by events. I was met at the airport by the two directors of the organisation

and this was a way of showing hospitality and that they considered that I was an

important visitor. Actually I was rarely out of the company of one or the other of these

two at any time on the visit. There did not seem to be any scheduled meetings, even

though I tried to point out the advantages of this and tried to push for meetings where

the people involved could all sit around a table and work to agenda.

What actually happened was that I spent the next two days in the offices of the

Moroccan organisation in the company of one or other director and various other

people who were involved (and often not involved) as and when it suited them,

according to their schedules. Everything was discussed and things that could not be

discussed in the offices were discussed at lunch or dinner and there was plenty of

relationship building and evening entertainment.

Obviously the drawback from my own point of view was that this took an awful lot

longer and I was present at a lot of meetings that had very little to do with me, for

example as clients of this institution, students, family members and employees all

came to the office and various meetings would go on, sometimes simultaneously in

the director's office at any one time, frequently at the same time as one or more

telephone conversations. Whether this is viewed as chaos or skilful managing of



activities depends on one's attitude to sequential and synchronic time. In fact, in this

particular case, everything that could have been achieved between the two parties

was achieved and the relationship was developed in a way that the Moroccans felt was

important.



4 Non-verbal Communication

When Demosthenes was asked what was the first part of oratory he answered,

"'action"; and which was the second, he replied, "action"; and which was third he still

answered, "action." People tend to believe actions more than words!

Have you ever heard anyone say, "His actions spoke so loudly I couldn't hear what he

said?" Have you ever wondered whether anyone has said this about you? What we do

is a means of communication, subject to interpretation by others. Did you ever stop to

think that even failure to act is a way of communicating?

Today, many researchers are concerned with the information sent by communication

that is independent of and different from verbal information; namely, the non-verbal

communication. Verbal communication is organized by language; non-verbal

communication is not.

Communication is the transfer of information from one person to another. Most of us

spend about 75 percent of our waking hours communicating our knowledge, thoughts,

and ideas to others. However, most of us fail to realize that a great deal of our

communication is of a non-verbal form as opposed to the oral and written forms. Non-

verbal communication includes facial expressions, eye contact, tone of voice, body

posture and motions, and positioning within groups. It may also include the way we

wear our clothes or the silence we keep.

In person-to-person communications our messages are sent on two levels

simultaneously. If the nonverbal cues and the spoken message are incongruous, the

flow of communication is hindered. Right or wrong, the receiver of the communication

tends to base the intentions of the sender on the non- verbal cues he receives.

Categories and Features

G. W. Porter divides non-verbal communication into four broad categories:

Physical. This is the personal type of communication. It includes facial

expressions, tone of voice, sense of touch, sense of smell, and body motions.

Aesthetic. This is the type of communication that takes place through creative

expressions: playing instrumental music, dancing, painting and sculpturing.

Signs. This is the mechanical type of communication, which includes the use of

signal flags, the 21-gun salute, horns, and sirens.

Symbolic. This is the type of communication that makes use of religious,

status, or ego-building symbols.

Our concern here will be with what Porter has called the physical method of non-

verbal communication.

Knowledge of non-verbal communication is important managers who serve as leaders

of organizational "teams," for at least two reasons:



To function effectively as a team leader the manager must interact with the

other members successfully. Non-verbal cues, when interpreted correctly,

provide him with one means to do so.

The team members project attitudes and feelings through non-verbal

communication. Some personal needs such as approval, growth, achievement,

and recognition may be met in effective teams. The extent to which these

needs are met is closely related to how perceptive the team leader and team

members are to non-verbal communication in themselves and in others on the

team.

If the team members show a true awareness to non-verbal cues, the organization will

have a better chance to succeed, for it will be an open, honest, and confronting unit.

Argyle and his associates have been studying the features of nonverbal

communication that provide information to managers and their team members. The

following summarizes their findings:

Static Features

Distance. The distance one stands from another frequently conveys a non-verbal

message. In some cultures it is a sign of attraction, while in others it may reflect

status or the intensity of the exchange.

Orientation. People may present themselves in various ways: face-to-face, side-to-

side, or even back-to-back. For example, cooperating people are likely to sit side-by-

side while competitors frequently face one another.

Posture. Obviously one can be lying down, seated, or standing. These are not the

elements of posture that convey messages. Are we slouched or erect ? Are our legs

crossed or our arms folded ? Such postures convey a degree of formality and the

degree of relaxation in the communication exchange.

Physical Contact. Shaking hands, touching, holding, embracing, pushing, or patting

on the back all convey messages. They reflect an element of intimacy or a feeling of

(or lack of) attraction.

Dynamic Features

Facial Expressions. A smile, frown, raised eyebrow, yawn, and sneer all convey

information. Facial expressions continually change during interaction and are

monitored constantly by the recipient. There is evidence that the meaning of these

expressions may be similar across cultures.

Gestures. One of the most frequently observed, but least understood, cues is a hand

movement. Most people use hand movements regularly when talking. While some

gestures (e.g., a clenched fist) have universal meanings, most of the others are

individually learned and idiosyncratic.



Looking. A major feature of social communication is eye contact. It can convey

emotion, signal when to talk or finish, or aversion. The frequency of contact may

suggest either interest or boredom.

The above list shows that both static features and dynamic features transmit

important information from the sender to the receiver.

Tortoriello, Blott, and DeWine have defined non-verbal communication as:

". . . the exchange of messages primarily through non-linguistic means, including:

kinesics (body language), facial expressions and eye contact, tactile communication,

space and territory, environment, paralanguage (vocal but non-linguistic cues), and

the use of silence and time."

Let's review these non-linguistic ways of exchanging messages in more detail.

Kinesics

Lamb believes the best way to access an executive's managerial potential is not to

listen to what he has to say, but to observe what he does when he is saying it. He

calls this new behavioral science "movement analysis." Some of the movements and

gestures he has analyzed follow:

Forward and Backward Movements. If you extend a hand straight forward during

an interview or tend to lean forward, Lamb considers you to be an "operator"- good

for an organization requiring an infusion of energy or dramatic change of course.

Vertical Movements. If you tend to draw yourself up to your tallest during the

handshake, Lamb considers you to be a "presenter." You are a master at selling

yourself or the organization in which you are employed.

Side-to-Side Movements. If you take a lot of space while talking by moving your

arms about, you are a good informer and good listener. You are best suited for an

organization seeking a better sense of direction. Lamb believes there is a relationship

between positioning of the body and movements of the limbs and facial expressions.

He has observed harmony between the two. On the other hand, if certain gestures are

rehearsed, such as those made to impress others, there is a tendency to separate the

posture and the movements. The harmony disappears.

Studies by Lamb also indicate that communication comes about through our degree of

body flexibility. If you begin a movement with considerable force and then decelerate,

you are considered a "gentle-touch." By contrast, if you are a "pressurizer," you are

firm from beginning to end. The accuracy of Lamb's analyses is not fully known.

However, it is important that corporation executives are becoming so sensitive to the

importance of non-verbal messages that they are hiring consultants, such as Lamb, to

analyze non-verbal communications in their organizations.

Facial Expressions

Facial expressions usually communicate emotions. The expressions tell the attitudes of

the communicator. Researchers have discovered that certain facial areas reveal our

emotional state better than others. For example, the eyes tend to reveal happiness or



sadness, and even surprise. The lower face also can reveal happiness or surprise; the

smile, for example, can communicate friendliness and cooperation. The lower face,

brows, and forehead can also reveal anger. Mehrabian believes verbal cues provide 7

percent of the meaning of the message; vocal cues, 38 percent; and facial

expressions, 55 percent. This means that, as the receiver of a message, you can rely

heavily on the facial expressions of the sender because his expressions are a better

indicator of the meaning behind the message than his words.

Eye Contact

Eye contact is a direct and powerful form of non-verbal communication. The superior

in the organization generally maintains eye contact longer than the subordinate. The

direct stare of the sender of the message conveys candor and openness. It elicits a

feeling of trust. Downward glances are generally associated with modesty. Eyes rolled

upward are associated with fatigue.

Tactile Communication

Communication through touch is obviously non-verbal. Used properly it can create a

more direct message than dozens of words; used improperly it can build barriers and

cause mistrust. You can easily invade someone's space through this type of

communication. If it is used reciprocally, it indicates solidarity; if not used reciprocally,

it tends to indicate differences in status. Touch not only facilitates the sending of the

message, but the emotional impact of the message as well.

Personal Space

Personal space is your "bubble" - the space you place between yourself and others.

This invisible boundary becomes apparent only when someone bumps or tries to enter

your bubble.

How you identify your personal space and use the environment in which you find

yourself influences your ability to send or receive messages. How close do you stand

to the one with whom you are communicating ? Where do you sit in the room? How do

you position yourself with respect to others at a meeting? All of these things affect

your level of comfort, and the level of comfort of those receiving your message.

Goldhaber says there are three basic principles that summarize the use of personal

space in an organization: The higher your position (status) in the organization,

a. the more and better space you will have,

b. the better protected your territory will be, and

c. the easier it will be to invade the territory of lower-status personnel

The impact of use of space on the communication process is related directly to the

environment in which the space is maintained.

Environment

How do you arrange the objects in your environment - the desks, chairs, tables, and

bookcases? The design of your office, according to researchers, can greatly affect the

communications within it. Some managers divide their offices into personal and

impersonal areas. This can improve the communication process if the areas are used

for the purposes intended.



Your pecking-order in the organization is frequently determined by such things as the

size of your desk, square feet in your office, number of windows in the office, quality

of the carpet, and type of paintings (originals or copies) on the wall.

It is obvious that your personal space and environment affect the level of your comfort

and your status and facilitate or hinder the communication process.

Paralanguage

Is the content of your message contradicted by the attitude with which you are

communicating it? Researchers have found that the tone, pitch, quality of voice, and

rate of speaking convey emotions that can be accurately judged regardless of the

content of the message. The important thing to gain from this is that the voice is

important, not just as the conveyor of the message, but as a complement to the

message. As a communicator you should be sensitive to the influence of tone, pitch,

and quality of your voice on the interpretation of your message by the receiver.

Silence and Time

Silence can be a positive or negative influence in the communications process. It can

provide a link between messages or sever relationships. It can create tension and

uneasiness or create a peaceful situation. Silence can also be judgmental by indicating

favor or disfavor - agreement or disagreement.

For example, suppose a manager finds a couple of his staff members resting.

If he believes these staff members are basically lazy, the idleness conveys to him that

they are "goofing off" and should be given additional assignments.

If he believes these staff members are self-motivated and good workers, the idleness

conveys to him that they are taking a well-deserved "break."

If he is personally insecure, the idleness conveys to him that they are threatening his

authority.

Time can be an indicator of status. How long will you give the staff member who

wishes to speak to you? How long will you make him wait to see you? Do you maintain

a schedule? Is your schedule such that your subordinates must arrange their

schedules to suit yours? In a healthy organization, the manager and his subordinates

use time to communicate their mutual respect to each other.

Closing Thoughts

Regardless of your position in the organization it is important for you to develop some

sensitivity to nonverbal messages. Cooperation improves as we recognize and respond

appropriately to non-verbal cues. Of course you have been aware of non-verbal

communications all of your life, but how much thought have you given them?

Source:

http://www.zeromillion.com/business/management/non-verbal-communication.html

http://www.zeromillion.com/business/management/non-verbal-communication.html



5 Culture and Non-Verbal Communication

Culture variations can affect the way people communicate non-verbally. Actions that

are not seen as offensive in your home country may be deemed so in foreign business

ventures. Although there are many, the following five are the most important:

1. Immediacy and expressiveness---These demonstrate availability for

communication. High immediacy cultures are called contact cultures, and are mostly

located in warm-temperature areas like Arab countries. Low immediacy cultures are

low-contact cultures, and are found in cool climates (most North European countries).

2. Individualism vs. Collectivism---Individualistic cultures are more remote and

display less non-verbal communication. Collectivistic cultures stress cohesion as a

group, and spend time in close proximity to one another.

3. Masculinity---Women in low-masculinity cultures show more synchrony in their

movement than those in high-masculinity cultures.

5. Power distance---Research shows that high-power distance cultures tend to be

more “untouchable,” tend to be more tense in subordinates’ body movement, tend to

smile more for subordinates to appease superiors or to be polite, and tend to be more

aware that vocal loudness may be offensive to others.

6. High and low context---Research has found that people in high context cultures

tend to be more implicit in verbal codes, perceive highly verbal persons less attractive,

tend to be more reliant on and tuned into non-verbal communication, and expect to

have more non-verbal codes in communication.

Low-Context Culture High-Context culture

1. Overtly displays meanings through

direct communication forms.

1. Implicitly embeds meanings at

different levels of the socio-cultural

context.

2. Values individualism. 2. Values group sense.

3. Tends to develop transitory personal

relationship.

3. Tends to take time to cultivate and

establish a permanent personal

relationship.

4. Emphasizes linear logic. 4. Emphasizes spiral logic.

5. Values direct verbal interaction and is

less able to read nonverbal expressions.

5. Values indirect verbal interaction and

is more able to read nonverbal

expressions.

6. Tends to use "logic" to present ideas. 6. Tends to use more "feeling" in

expression.

7. Tends to emphasize highly structured

messages, give details, and place great

stress on words and technical signs.

7. Tends to give simple, ambiguous,

noncontexting messages.



This table shows the ideas of the logical, individual, and direct low-context culture and

the ambiguous, group-oriented high-context culture.

Cultural variations affect non-verbal communication in many ways. The five most

important variations that we recognize are: immediacy and expressiveness,

individualism vs. collectivism, the effect of masculinity, the power distance in the

culture, and the differences between high and low-context cultures. By recognizing

and adjusting for cultural differences that are present across the globe, you can

succeed in business endeavors abroad.

Source: http://www.cba.uni.edu/buscomm/nonverbal/Culture.htm

http://www.cba.uni.edu/buscomm/nonverbal/Culture.htm



6 Stereotypes

Stereotypes are a very good starting point for intercultural learning. Below, there is

an article that describes some of the uses and dangers of stereotyping, using

particular stereotypes of European nationalities as concrete examples.

Viewing the Viewer: Stereotypical Stereotypes

By Adam Dalton

Are stereotypes simply examples of prejudice or the embodiment of identifiable social

trends and cultural traditions? Are they subjective, objective or somewhere in-

between? Overly generalised, nationally specific or both?

Do you rely on stereotypes? Most people would tell you that they never stereotype

others, but that begs the question of where those stereotypes come from and how

they continue to be propagated. Perhaps people stereotype others unconsciously,

often believing that there is some historical or cultural truth to stereotypes.

I use stereotypes. I admit it. I can’t avoid it, and, despite the fact I know I do it, I

can’t seem to stop it. The class structure is inherent to British value systems and

tropes of understanding. As soon as I hear an accented phrase out of the mouth of

another Brit, I will unconsciously surmise what the geographical region of their origin

is, consider the economic strength and industry of the region, then make a guess as to

the quality of the education system of the region (and therefore the individual’s access

to a high level of education), then make a prediction as to the individual’s likely job

and then hazard what their social class is.

And that’s just from one phrase or from hearing a certain accent! Yes, it’s

prejudiced, but it’s also instinctive and, perhaps more importantly, useful. For

example, if the generalized and unconscious associations I make with the accent I

hear are anywhere near the mark, then my response to the individual will be

adapted to find some sort of superficial sympathy with them and avoid offence and

conflict. It’s just your survival instinct kicking in . . . and we all do it!

There are dangers to this unconscious stereotyping of course. You might come

across as patronizing if your attempts at sympathy are too uninformed or clumsy.

Furthermore, the stereotype you construct may only serve to mislead you and

prevent you from benefiting from the communication as much as you might

otherwise have done. But your ability to stereotype is adaptive and quickly learns

from its mistakes. This is obvious when you consider the fact that on the first

occasion that you talk to a new nationality, the odds of you saying something to

offend them are high. However, on the second occasion, the odds are significantly

lower. And on the third occasion they should be close to negligible. As long as you’re

not too slow a learner.



Let’s look at some concrete examples. Many countries make jokes about a particular

group or nationality being stupid. The Brits make jokes about the Irish. The Poles

make jokes about the police. The Canadians make jokes of Newfoundlanders. The

French make jokes about the Belgians . . . and so it goes on. Below is an example of

a German joke (and an ironic one at that!):

Q. What’s the difference between Heaven and Hell?

A. In Heaven, the Brits are the comedians, the Germans are the engineers and

the French are the lovers. In Hell, the Germans are the humorists, the French are

the engineers and the Brits are the lovers.

And other core character traits are identified in this humour of prejudice and

stereotype. The Irish make jokes about the Scots being tight-fisted. The Spanish

make jokes about the Catalans being scroungers . . . and so that goes on. I’m sure

you know other examples that I don’t need to repeat here.

That accounts for some of the more negative trends in stereotyping, but there are

some that are more ambiguous, even positive some would say. Do you think Brits

are reserved, inhibited or distant? Do you consider that a negative trait? I know

many Brits who are proud of just such a trait. However, perhaps Brazilians would

consider such a trait negative. Are the Brits funny . . . funnier than other cultures?

The Brits certainly have a strong tradition in comedy. Is it possible to be funny and

outgoing but still reserved? Are Poles romantic or literary? More so than other

cultures? Are the French the most romantic? Are men really better drivers than

women? Are women really more sensitive than men, or are women simply

sociologically programmed to display more emotion than men?

When you really look at it, stereotypes can seem more inaccurate and confusing

than useful. They are certainly more limiting than freeing. They can even be

dangerous and cause their own problems. So why do we use them? Can’t we

overcome our instincts? Are we slaves to the unconscious mind? Can’t we think with

our heads instead of our hearts? How would aliens stereotype human kind?

Why do we continue using stereotypes? There must be a reason other than primitive

instinct. Is it laziness and the convenience culture? Do stereotypes represent useful

characters that advertising agencies can exploit to sell products quickly and simply,

without having to put effort into developing fresh characters, in a way that can

appeal directly to a certain target group? Is nationality now becoming a branded

good? The case is certainly argued convincingly in Scotland the Brand (reviewed on

this website). Do governments actually support stereotypes, seeking to associate

certain positive values with their industries, companies and goods? Of course they

do. Cultural propaganda is the name of the game. There won’t be physical conflict in

the future, only the struggle of cultures. Let’s hope there will be fewer victims and

negative stereotypes in the future.

Source: http://elt.britcoun.org.pl/b_doyou.htm

http://elt.britcoun.org.pl/b_doyou.htm



7 Cultural concepts and patterns

7.1 Research into Cultural Patterns

By Stephan Dahl, An Overview of Intercultural Research, Middlesex University Business

School (extract)

Interest in other cultures is probably as old as the exposure of human tribes to

other tribes, and therefore an exposure to ‘foreignness’. However it was not until

the late 1950s that a more structured approach was adopted from which a theory

was derived as to how to classify cultural pattern. In his review of the history of

intercultural communication, Hart (1997) dates the beginning of intercultural

communication in the year 1959, the year that Hall’s “The Silent Language” was

published.

Basic cultural concepts and patterns

A number of mostly behavioural concepts has been identified that can be used to

distinguish between cultures. These include, for example, the differences in the

usage of kinesics (body movements), proxemics (space organisation), oculesics (eye

movement), haptics (touching behaviour) as well as paralinguistic concepts, such as

accents, intonation, speed of talking etc.. Not surprisingly each of these concepts

plays an important role in intercultural communication, particularly in

communication where the context plays an important role. Most people will either

consciously, or subconsciously look for affirmative action (or reaction) by their

counterparts when speaking to them face to face, for example to signal that what is

being said is understood. In those cases the affirmative action is, not surprisingly,

often directly linked to cultural context. Failure to provide the correct affirmative

action may well be interpreted as undermining the spoken word. Depending on the

context, this may lead to a complete communication breakdown. For example, eye

contact is an important part of the communication process in Western cultures. It is

often seen as an affirmative action of what is said. However, maintaining eye

contact is not usually acceptable in certain Asian cultures, where, for example, a

woman can only maintain eye contact with her husband. Clearly a woman from such

a culture will cause confusion, if not disbelief, when communicating with a Western

interlocutor.

Another frequently examined concept are “thought patterns”. These can be

summarised as being logical or pre-logic, inductive or deductive, abstract or

concrete and alphabetic or analphabetic (Maletzke, 1996). These concepts are more

complex, and they may require more attention, as they are slightly more difficult to

grasp. For example, inductive or deductive thought patterns may have a profound

impact on argumentation and communication styles, but also on the way the world

is seen and understood. Whereas Anglo-Saxon thought patterns are predominantly

http://stephan.dahl.at/

http://stephan.dahl.at/intercultural/



inductive, Latin American and Russian thought patterns are predominantly

deductive. Whereas inductive thinking aims to derive theoretical concepts from

individual cases, deductive thinking aims to interpret individual cases within

previously derived theoretical concepts. Clearly, argumentation styles will be quite

different in the two approaches. Equally, thinking within the Aristotelian logical

tradition, which is dominant in most Western cultures may not be understood by

people from a culture which emphasises a more holistic approach to thinking.

Although all of the concepts that have been proposed are interesting as a possible

way to examine differences in cultural patterns, they are difficult to apply in the

current study because of the severe lack of quantitative data. It is thus necessary to

look for classifications of cultural patterns at a deeper level than the behavioural one

(or the outer layer of the culture onion), as well as research that is backed up by

the availability of empirical data. All of the concepts referred to above are limited to

only one aspect out of the multi-aspect differences that make an effective research

agenda into cultural differences. Even when taken together, they do not allow a

broad analysis or classification of cultures to any great extent or depth. More

systematic and profound concepts, such as Hall and Hofstede were required to allow

for a more detailed analysis of culture at a different level than only behavioural.

Hall's classic patterns

Based on his experience in the Foreign Service, Edward T. Hall published two books,

“The Silent Language” (1959) and “The Hidden Dimension” (1969). In them, he

identified two classic dimensions of culture. Firstly, he identified high-context and low-

context cultures, where the high and low context concept is primarily concerned with

the way in which information is transmitted, that is to say communicated. According to

Hall, all "information transaction" can be characterised as high-, low - or middle -

context. "High context transactions feature pre-programmed information that is in the

receiver and in the setting, with only minimal information in the transmitted message.

Low context transactions are the reverse. Most of the information must be in the

transmitted message in order to make up for what is missing in the context." (Hall,

1976, p.101)

The high/low context concept remains one of the most frequently used concepts when

analysing, for example, face-to-face communication. The implications of this concept

are far ranging, and reaching from interpersonal to mass communication.

The high/low context concept is one of the easiest concepts to witness in intercultural

encounters. This concept deals primarily with language, which is located in the outer

layer of the ‘culture onion’, and is one of the most rudimentary concepts for any type

of intercultural communication, or analysis thereof. For example, many business

negotiators, particularly from the West, find it difficult to deal with Chinese business

negotiators. Often they have been found to encounter severe problems understanding

their counterparts, and interpreting correctly what their counterparts want to convey.

Although clearly it is not only the high/low context concept that makes communication

difficult, the high/low context concept may well play an important role in the



difficulties encountered when a person from a high context country, such as China,

communicates with a person from a low context country, such as Germany.

Equally, mass communication is likely to be influenced by the high/low context

concept. In particular, it can be expected that the information content of advertising,

for example, is lower in high context cultures than low context cultures (eg. Biswas,

Olsen and Carlet 1992; Lin 1993; Mueller 1987, Al-Olayan and Karande, 2000)

However, there is little, if any, statistical data available which identify where given

countries are located on the high-low context dimension, and linguistically, it is very

complex to identify degrees of directness, since explicitness – implicitness,

communicative strength, and bluntness-cushioning are all involved (see Bond et al.,

2000)

Hall's second concept, polychronic versus monochronic time orientation, deals with the

ways in which cultures structure their time. Similar to the high/low context concept,

this concept is easy to understand, but it lacks empirical data. The monochronic time

concept follows the notion of “one thing at a time”, while the polychronic concept

focuses on multiple tasks being handled at one time, and time is subordinate to

interpersonal relations. Table 2.1 gives a brief overview of the two different time

concepts, and their resultant behaviour.

Table 2.1: Monochronic and Polychronic Cultures

Monochronic Culture Polychronic Culture

Interpersonal Relations Interpersonal relations are

subordinate to present

schedule

Present schedule is

subordinate to Interpersonal

relations

Activity Co-ordination Schedule co-ordinates activity;

appointment time is rigid.

Interpersonal relations co-

ordinate activity; appointment

time is flexible

Task Handling One task at a time Many tasks are handled

simultaneously

Breaks and Personal Time Breaks and personal time are

sacrosanct regardless of

personal ties.

Breaks and personal time are

subordinate to personal ties.

Temporal Structure Time is inflexible; time is

tangible

Time is flexible; time is fluid

Work/personal time

separability

Work time is clearly separable

from personal time

Work time is not clearly

separable from personal time

Organisational Perception Activities are isolated from

organisation as a whole; tasks

are measured by output in

time (activity per hour or

minute)

Activities are integrated into

organisation as a whole; tasks

are measured as part of

overall organisational goal



Although the concept of monochronic/polychronic time concepts is very useful, and

like the high/low context concept easily observed, the lack of empirical data makes

the concept more difficult to apply in research. This is particularly true for research

comparing cultures that are seen as relatively close.

Both of Hall’s concepts are therefore extremely useful on the one side, yet very

ambiguous on the other. The ambiguity makes it difficult to apply the concepts within

the framework of a more analytical approach, especially for comparing cultures that

are seen as culturally close. The usefulness for broad based research is also limited by

the limit of the concepts to only one aspect of culturally based behaviour, rather than

a broad explanation of underlying values.

Hofstede's cultural dimensions

The lack of precision, and the lack of a universally applicable framework for classifying

cultural patterns, has been addressed by a number of researchers. The most famous

and most often cited work in this area is the research by the Dutch organisational

anthropologist Hofstede. Hofstede derived his culture dimensions from examining

work-related values in employees of IBM during the 1970s. In his original work he

divides culture into four dimensions at culture-level: power distance, individualism

/collectivism, masculinity/femininity and uncertainty avoidance.

Power distance is defined as "the extent to which the less powerful members of

institutions and organisations within a country expect and accept that power is

distributed unequally". (Hofstede, 1994, p. 28) The power distance concept is clearly

more far-reaching than the work place alone. Power distance is often reflected in the

hierarchical organisation of companies, the respect that is expected to be shown by

the student towards her or his teacher, the political forms of decentralisation and

centralisation, by the belief in society that inequalities among people should be

minimised, or that they are expected and desired.

The second dimension proposed by Hofstede is Individualism/Collectivism. The

concept is one of the most frequently discussed and researched concepts. Hofstede

defines this dimension as: "individualism pertains to societies in which the ties

between individuals are loose: everyone is expected to look after himself or herself

and his or her immediate family. Collectivism as its opposite pertains to societies 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." (Hofstede, 1994, p. 51)

This concept is the most popular among the Hofstede dimensions. It is frequently cited

in a variety of intercultural research, as Hofstede points out, sometimes confusingly

and confused with other dimensions (1999). It may not be extremely surprising that



this dimension is popular: It is the dimension that is most easily grasped and

frequently encountered when looking at other cultural behavioural patterns.

Masculinity/femininity is an equally powerful, yet often understated, dimension.

Hofstede defines this dimension as follows: "masculinity pertains to societies in which

social gender roles are clearly distinct (i.e., men are supposed to be assertive, tough,

and focused on material success whereas women are supposed to be more modest,

tender, and concerned witht the quality of life); femininity pertains to societies in

which social gender roles overlap (i.e., both men and women are supposed be modest,

tender, and concerned with the quality of life)." (Hofstede, 1994, p. 82-3)

Hofstede points out that this dimension is often neglected. Maybe the controversial

name given to this dimension has somewhat influenced the popularity of it. Equally, it

appears often to be confused with Individualism/Collectivism (Hofstede, 1999; Mooij

1994, 1998).

Uncertainty avoidance is the final dimension present in Hofstede's original work.

Hofstede defines uncertainty avoidance as "the extent to which the members of a

culture feel threatened by uncertain or unknown situations." (Hofstede, 1994, p. 113)

This dimension is fairly easily grasped, and can often be seen reflected in business

negotiations.

In his later work, Hofstede (1991) introduces a fifth dimension. The long-term

orientation dimension is the result of his co-operation with Michael Bond, who links

this dimension to the work of Confucius. Hofstede describes long-term orientation as

characterised by persistence, ordering relationships by status and observing this

order, thrift, and having a sense of shame, whereas short-term orientation is

characterised by personal steadiness and stability, protecting your "face”, respect for

tradition and reciprocation of greetings, favours, and gifts.

The work of Hofstede is probably the most popular work in the arena of culture

research. Although the work provides a relatively general framework for analysis, the

framework can be applied easily to many everyday intercultural encounters. It is

particularly useful, as it reduces the complexities of culture and its interactions into

five relatively easily understood cultural dimensions.

Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner

Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner (1997) classified cultures along a mix of

behavioural and value patterns. Their research focuses on the cultural dimensions of

business executives.

In their book "Riding The Waves of Culture" (1997), Trompenaars and Hampden-

Turner identify seven value orientations. Some of these value orientations can be

regarded as nearly identical to Hofstede's dimensions. Others offer a somewhat

different perspective.



The seven value dimensions identified were:

Universalism versus particularism

Communitarianism versus individualism

Neutral versus emotional

Defuse versus specific cultures

Achievement versus ascription

Human-Time relationship and

Human-Nature relationship

Of these seven value dimensions, two reflect closely the Hofstede dimensions of

Collectivism/Individualism and to a lesser extent power distance. Trompenaars and

Hampden-Turner's communitarianism/individualism value orientation seems to be

virtually identical to Hofstede's Collectivism/Individualism. Their

achievement/ascription value orientation, which describes how status is accorded,

appears to be linked to Hofstede's power distance index, at least if one accepts that

status is accorded by nature rather than achievement, and that this reflects a greater

willingness to accept power distances. It is, however, not a complete match, as

Hofstede's power index does not only relate to how status is accorded, but also to the

acceptable power distance within a society, an area that is not touched upon by

Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner.

Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner's other dimensions seem to focus more on some

resulting effects of underlying value dimensions. For example, their neutral/emotional

dimension describes the extent to which feelings are openly expressed, i.e. a

behavioural aspect rather than a value in itself.

Their universalism/particularism value orientation, describing a preference for rules

rather than trusting relationships, could be interpreted as part of Hofstede's

uncertainty avoidance dimension on the one side, and to some extent the

collectivist/individualist dimension. Their diffuse/specific value orientation, describing

the range of involvement, seems to have no direct link to any of Hofstede's

dimensions.

Human-Time relationship is closely related, if not identical, to Hall’s polychronic and

monochronic time perceptions. The Human-Nature relationship appears to be closely

related to the Human-Nature relationship in Strodbeck and Kluckhohn's (1969) Value

Orientations.

Hofstede and Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner compared

Hofstede, as well as Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner, derive their data from

questionnaires that were distributed among professionals – in the case of Hofstede

among employees of IBM, and in the case of Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner among

a large number of executives from different organisations.

Hofstede’s work is based on a questionnaire originally designed to evaluate work

values, and, not surprisingly, it is mostly focused towards that end. Trompenaars &



Hampden-Turner’s questionnaires on the other side asked respondents for preferred

behaviour in a number of both work and leisure situations. What both studies have in

common is that in both questionnaires the focus is on the ultimate goal state, and that

the underlying values are derived from a series of questions about more outer layers

of the ‘culture onion’.

This research focus gives both approaches a very practical flavour. Yet at the same

time, the underlying value claims are frequently the result of very little data, or are

derived from a limited number of questions. This has at least the potential to disturb

significantly the derived value predictions. It may also hide certain dimensions, or

values may be wrongly derived because of certain situational influences on the

respondents. Examples of this would include the notion that Italy is, when looking at

Hofstede’s data, an individualistic culture, or that French respondents show a

preference for universalism in one answer in Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner’s

questionnaire and for particularism in all the other answers. Such unexpected findings

clearly suggest the influence of situational variables or other potential problems in the

application of the data derived.

From behavioural questions to values: Schwartz Value Inventory (SVI)

A different approach to finding (cultural) value differences has been taken by Shalom

Schwartz (1992, 1994). Using his “SVI” (Schwartz Value Inventory), Schwartz did not

ask for preferred outcomes, but asked respondents to assess 57 values as to how

important they felt these values are as “guiding principles of one’s life”. Schwartz’s

work is separated into an individual-level analysis and a culture-level analysis, a major

difference compared to the works of Hofstede and Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner

who sometimes fail to clearly distinguish between the two levels, although generally

claim to work at the culture-level.

Schwartz distinguishes between value types and value dimensions. Although this

distinction is similar to some of Hofstede’s work, it is more pronounced in Schwartz’s

work. A value type is generally a set of values that can conceptually be combined into

one meaningful description, such as egalitarian commitment at the culture level.

Values located in that value-type have other values that are located at the opposite,

or in the opposing value type. In the case of egalitarian commitment, this would by

hierarchy at the culture-level. Together these two value types form the value

dimension of ‘egalitarian commitment versus hierarchy’. This is somewhat similar to,

for example, individualism versus collectivism in Hofstede’s work, which combined

form the individualism versus collectivism value dimension. However, as indicated

before, the difference between value type and value dimension is more clearly worked

out and pronounced in Schwartz’s work.

From data collected in 63 countries, with more than 60,000 individuals taking part,

Schwartz derived a total of 10 distinct value types (power, achievement, hedonism,

stimulation, self-direction, universalism, benevolence, tradition, conformity and

security) at an individual-level analysis.



These individual level value types each represent a number of values which can be

combined in a joint ‘idea’: Values located in the ‘power’ value type represent are likely

to indicate an individual that values social status and prestige or control and

dominance over people and resources. High scores in the ‘achievement’ value type

would indicate a high priority given to personal success and admiration. ‘Hedonism’

represents a value type where preference is given to pleasure and self-gratification.

‘Stimulation’ represents a group of values that express a preference for an exciting

life, and ‘self-direction’ a distinct group of values that value independence, creativity

and freedom. The ‘Universalism’ value type on the other side represents a preference

for social justice and tolerance, whereas the ‘benevolence’ value domain contains

values promoting the welfare of others. The ‘Conformity’ value type contains values

that represent obedience and the ‘tradition’ value type is made up out of values

representing a respect for traditions and customs. Lastly, the ‘security’ value type is a

value orientation containing values relating to the safety, harmony and welfare of

society and of one self (Schwartz, 2001).

Viewed in a circular order, these ten types of values can be ordered into four higher

order value types:‘openness to change’ combines stimulation, self-direction and a part

of hedonism, ‘self- enhancement’, combines achievement and power as well as the

remainder of hedonism. On the opposite side of the circle, ‘conservation’ combines the

value orientations of security, tradition and conformity - and self- transcendence,

which combines universalism and benevolence. These four higher order value types

form two bipolar conceptual dimensions. This type of order is derived from the location

of values depending on their (negative) correlation within the circle – hence values

situated on one side of the circle will be strongly negatively correlated with values on

the opposing side of the circle, yet positively correlated with values located nearby. In

practical terms, this means that a person who assigns high scores to values which are

located in the ‘security’ value type is also likely to regard values located in the

‘conformity’ value type as ‘guiding principles of his life’ – and s/he will be unlikely to

assign high scores to values located in the ‘stimulation’ or ‘self-direction’ value types.

Similar to the value domains types at individual level, Schwartz also derives seven

distinct value types when analysing the values at a culture-level. The seven value

types, which can be summarised in three value dimensions, derived from this analysis

are briefly discussed below. A more extensive discussion follows in chapter 4

(methodology).

Conservatism (later called embeddedness) is a value type that emphasises the

maintenance of traditional values or the traditional order. The value type is opposed to

two distinct autonomy value types, which are located at the opposite side of the ‘value

circle’ that is produced by Schwartz’s method of analysis. The two autonomy types

both promote individual benefit, rather than group benefit. Intellectual autonomy as a

value type places emphasis on the perusal of intellectual ideas and directions, whereas

the affective autonomy value type places greater emphasis on pleasurable

experiences.



Schwartz’s hierarchy value type emphasises a harmonious relationship with the

environment, whereas this value type is opposed by mastery, which emphasises an

active mastery of the (social) environment.

Another value dimension can be found with a further two opposing value types:

hierarchy versus egalitarianism. The hierarchy value type emphasises an unequal

distribution of power, whereas the egalitarian value type gives greater emphasis on

equality and the promotion of the welfare of others (Schwartz, 2002).

It is important to note, that Schwartz’ work represents a radical departure from the

previously presented studies, in as far as the measurement instrument is radically

different (values vs. preferred states or behaviour). This may have two consequences:

It does eliminate, at least potentially, the chance of situational variables having a

strong impact on the respondents. On the other hand, it does open the argument that

when asked about values (rather than specific outcomes) respondents may be inclined

to choose a more utopian answer, which in turn may not be reflected in their actual

behaviour.

Source: http://stephan.dahl.at/intercultural/

http://stephan.dahl.at/intercultural/



7.2 Hofstede’s Cultural dimensions

In this section we will look at some of the key literature and research and see

fundamental ways in which cultures differ. First of all we should take a look at what

we actually mean by cultures differing. Trompenaars (1994) has compared culture to

an onion: the outer layer is visible cultural differences, such as the clothes people

wear, the food they eat and so on. Going deeper are the actions that individuals

perform, for example in greeting, to bow or shake hands. At the centre of the onion

are the key beliefs and motivating factors that are not so visible, but have the effect of

determining behaviour on the more superficial layers of the onion. Theories of cultural

difference look at these factors at the heart of the onion and see how they affect all

the other layers - in other words the consequences of culture - and it is significant that

one of the defining works in the field is called 'Cultures Consequences' by Hofstede

(1984), who could be considered as one of the founding fathers in the study of cultural

differences.

One thing that Hofstede did was to play a key role in taking the study of cultural

differences from the realm of the anecdotal to a more objective and empirical

perspective. He went beyond observation, which is merely saying 'this is what people

in one culture do and this is what some others do', and proposed what he called

dimensions of culture, that apply to all cultures universally wherever they may be.

What we will do here is look first at the empirical nature of Hofstede's work, then look

at the four dimensions of culture that he proposes: power distance, uncertainty

avoidance, individualism and masculinity. We will focus more closely on one of the

most defining dimensions, power distance.

Empirical research

Hofstede's definition on the dimensions of culture was more than simply opinion,

hypothesis or preliminary research. Significant surveys were carried out in 1968 and

1972. Material was gathered in 40 countries from the subsidiaries of a multinational

company, and 16,000 questionnaires were completed. The dimensions derived from

the survey were then statistically analysed and in many instances correlated with data

from other related research in the field. This research was comprehensive, controlled

and highly empirical. In this unit considerable emphasis is given to outlining and

discussing Hofstede's dimensions. I make no apology for this. Hofstede's dimensions

may not be recent work, but they provide a framework for understanding cultural

difference that I believe has yet to be surpassed in terms of its depth and

comprehensiveness of analysis. Although research in cultural difference is now prolific,

Hofstede's dimensions still define effectively basic parameters at the heart of cultural

differences.



Hofstede identified what he called four dimensions of culture universally applicable to

people in any culture wherever they be, whether in the most sophisticated urban

environment or a small group with no contact with society outside itself.

Power distance is the distance between different individuals at different levels

in an organisation

Uncertainty avoidance is the need to avoid uncertainty about the future.

Individualism determines the degree to which an individual acts as part of a

group or as an individual independent of the group.

Masculinity relates to the values that are important to individuals at the

workplace.

Power distance

Given the brief definition above, would you estimate your home culture to have a low

or high or medium power distance? Bear your answer in mind as you work through

this section and then check it against the score that Hofstede (1984) gave it in your

core text.

Learn more about your own cultural profile and how it might compare to others by

doing Culture in the Workplace Questionnaire™ . Responses to the questionnaire help

to illuminate attitudes and values, and provide a springboard to understanding and

discussion of cultural differences and similarities. Knowing your own profile will help

you learn about others and build those bridges together.

Hofstede obtained scores for all the countries in his survey and ranked them according

to their degree of power distance. This score demonstrates the degree of distance that

is accepted within an organisation between people who have power and their

subordinates. It is largely related to the amount to which agreement or disagreement

is tolerated between the manager and subordinate within the organisation. Countries

with a high score denoting a high power distance would have little tolerance for

disagreement between a manager and subordinate, whereas countries with a low

score like Australia, New Zealand or Great Britain have a low power distance score and

are able to accept more disagreement in this context.

In a high power distance culture there is a well defined hierarchy that is closely

adhered to with clear distance between individuals at different levels of the hierarchy.

In low power distance cultures there is a less well-defined hierarchy and disagreement

between individuals at different levels of the hierarchy with varying levels of power will

be more easily tolerated. In a low power distance culture managers tend to manage in

a more participative and consultative style and see themselves as organisers and the

focus of work activities rather than being individuals who decide on their own making

directive decisions.

Clearly in a high power distance culture managers will be less consultative, less

participative and will expect that their subordinates will agree with them. In a high

power distance culture the managers will often see themselves as benevolent father

figures with the authority to decide, whereas in a low power distance culture the



managers are more likely to perceive themselves as the focus of a group of people

working together.

So for example, a low power distance culture like Great Britain has individuals very

often working in teams and cooperating, whereas in a high power distance culture like

Thailand or Malaysia groups may not work together so readily in the same kind of

way. They will rather seek instructions from a superior who is in charge and will not

expect to consult overly with peers or indeed with the managers themselves once

instructions have been given.

Low power distance cultures will tend to have a focus on equality and this can often be

reflected in the salary structures within organisations or in cultures as a whole. So for

example in Sweden or Norway the society is more homogenous than in high power

distance cultures - tax is high and social security well funded. However more equal

salary is not always related to power distance; for example the USA has a low power

distance but there are very wide gaps in income.

In Scandinavian countries the emphasis on equality can be such that within an

organisation it may not be immediately visible exactly who wields the power. The

trappings of power such as bigger and better offices and distinctive dress are played

down more in a low power distance culture whereas in a high power distance culture

they will tend to be accentuated so that the distance between individuals with power

and their subordinates can be reinforced. Hofstede gives an example which illustrates

this quite strikingly. When he was holiday in Portugal he once met the prime minister

of Sweden on a camp site where he was staying, and the prime minister was going

about his everyday activities like any other camper. This would be unthinkable in a

country with a high power distance like Mexico or the Philippines, where the prime

minister or the president would have security and a very visible entourage so that his

position of authority would be clear.

In the field of education power distance is often particularly visible. Students from a

low power distance culture will value independence and their teachers will not seek to

promote distance between themselves and the students. In a high power distance

culture students will often expect to be taught in a less participative and more teacher

centred way and will be accustomed to a higher degree of distance between

themselves and their teachers. This can be demonstrated by the way students address

teachers. For example in Great Britain university students will often call their teachers

by their first name whereas in countries with a higher power distance teachers will be

addressed with a title denoting respect such as professor, followed by the teacher's

family name.

Uncertainty avoidance

Hofstede believed that all cultures have a degree of anxiety about what will happen in

the future and that this anxiety will differ from culture to culture. Cultures having a

greater degree of anxiety about the future would want to make the future more

certain and would have less tolerance of uncertainty and would therefore seek to avoid



it. Cultures at the other end of the scale have more tolerance for uncertainty and less

need to avoid it. Hofstede cites Fromm (1965) in his discussion of Nazism as a clear

example of uncertainty avoidance. Fromm actually calls Nazism 'escape from

freedom'. Clearly the Nazi doctrine and way of life could be seen as a way to avoid the

uncertainties of the time by escaping into a way of behaving which was sure, safe and

predictable, and where behaviour and beliefs were prescribed in a rule based way.

Hofstede identifies key features of organisations with high uncertainty avoidance as

tending towards the use of experts and reliance on experts. He also identifies the

importance for such organisations of taking part in ritual behaviour. Let's look at the

use of experts first. Clearly if an organisation relies on experts then this can reduce

uncertainty. The expert knows and is the person with the superior knowledge that can

be relied on, and becomes an authority.

The other feature is ritual behaviour. Hofstede describes this as the kind of behaviour

seen in organisations when for example a meeting is called or report written that

doesn't give a lot of new information but acts as a way of giving a clear picture at any

one time about a situation that is in fact familiar. This kind of ritual behaviour can

reduce feelings of uncertainty in an organisation.

In arriving at his uncertainty index Hofstede relied on three key factors which were in

fact items in his questionnaires and related to stress, employment stability and rule

orientation. These three taken together were instrumental in determining the

uncertainty index. Hofstede saw consequences for organisations having high

uncertainty as being characteristics like quite a high level of structuring of activities,

adherence to rules and use of specialists within the organisation. Also managers in a

high uncertainty avoidance culture would tend to be more task oriented and less

interpersonally oriented and flexible. It is worth noting at this stage that uncertainty

avoidance does correspond quite closely with power distance in many cases. So for

example a country like Thailand has quite a high power distance score and also a high

uncertainty avoidance score. Great Britain on the other hand has quite a low power

distance score and a correspondingly low uncertainty avoidance score.

Individualism / Collectivism

Hofstede says that 'individualism pertains to societies in which the ties between

individuals are loose, everyone is expected to look after himself or herself, or his or

her immediate family. Collectivism is its opposite and pertains to societies in which

people from birth onwards are integrated into strong cohesive groups, which,

throughout people's lifetimes continue to protect them in exchange for unquestioning

loyalty'. (Hofstede 1994)

Hofstede derived his individualism scores from 14 work goals. These were derived

from questionnaire items, which under factor analysis were shown to be determining

factors in the individualism scores. The 6 goals of the 14 that were most significant

were: relating to individuals having personal time, individuals having freedom to adapt

to their own approach to the job and having challenging work to do - work which



provided a sense of personal accomplishment. On the other side of the coin, the items

on the work goals questionnaires that did not correlate with individualism were firstly

the ability to fully use skills and abilities on the job, secondly, the quality of the

physical working conditions, for example, a good physical working environment, and

thirdly the importance given to training opportunities.

From these questionnaires and the scores that they provided Hofstede was able to

determine individual scores and also the rankings of the countries. Not surprisingly the

highest individualism index score was found in the USA, which scored 91. Australia

followed very closely behind with 90 and Britain with 89. At the other end of the scale

there were countries such as Columbia with 13 and Pakistan with 14.

In terms of the consequences of individualism and collectivism for a society and for

organizations, two of the key factors for the consequences for organizations are firstly

that the high individualism countries have balanced power political systems and

greater occupational mobility. So, high individualism scoring countries, like the USA or

Great Britain are likely to have political systems where power is balanced - effectively

there is a working democracy and there is a balance of power in the system of

government. Also, such societies will have a greater degree of occupational mobility

and this is particularly noticeable in Great Britain and the United States where people

are prone to move around to get a new job, even compared to other European

Countries. For example, in the United States in senior management, if somebody has

been in a job for more than a few years, this is not necessarily seen as a good thing, it

is quite likely to be viewed as suspicious - why has this manager not moved on?

Whereas, in a lower individualism country occupational mobility is not so high, and

moving on in itself could be suspicious for different reasons.

For organizations a high individualism score is likely to be related to individuals having

a calculative relationship with the organizations that they work for. The individual does

not necessarily feel such a strong sense of obligation to the organisation which they

are working for, and does not expect the organization to look after him/her in the

same way as in low individualism scoring countries. For example, lecturers in higher

education in Great Britain are very often on short rolling contracts, or short term

contracts, and lecturers will often feel free to move from one university to another if

the conditions are right. They would not expect to get much more than the pension to

which they had contributed to when they leave. On the other hand, higher education

lecturers in a culture with a low individualism score would very often be very closely

bound up with the university that they work for, and the university would perhaps

sponsor them for higher degrees and research and they may even, in some instances,

provide accommodation for lecturers and sometimes even accommodation on

retirement.

In Japan, for example, individuals may well identify the organisation that they are

going to work for during their high school years and there will be a link between the

individual and that organisation when they are at university, and the individual will



then work for that organisation for most of their life and be provided for in retirement

by the organisation. This would be unusual to say the least in the UK or the USA.

Looking at the scores and the ranking for power distance and individualism, it is clear

that there is some correspondence between countries' scores in power distance and in

individualism. At first glance it might be expected to find quite a high degree of

correspondence between high power distance scores and low individualism scores. So,

for example, in the United States we have a low power distance score and a high

individualism score and in Pakistan or South American countries, we have a high

power distance score and a low individualism score. On closer inspection, however, it

can be seen that there are enough exceptions to this tendency for high power distance

and low individualism to go together to make individualism itself something worth

examining. Latin European countries, for example, will tend to have quite a high

power distance score, but also a high individualism score. This is particularly true in

France. There are also countries such as Austria and Israel which have quite low

power distance score, with only a medium individualism score.

France is a very interesting example of the individualism and power distance

relationship, as France has quite a high power distance and individualism score, and

this in some ways is quite contradictory, giving grist to the argument that the French

almost like to have an authoritarian organization and expect quite a bit of distance

between themselves and the people in power, but they also like to have their own

personal freedom This is a pattern which is quite different from that seen in the

Northern European countries, like Holland, Great Britain or Scandinavia.

The implications of power distance and individualism for teachers and teachers of EIB

are quite significant. Students in low individualism and high power distance cultures

are likely to be much less forthcoming in a plenary situation in the classroom. For

example, for one student to speak in front of a class as a result of a question is quite

difficult in a country like Japan or Thailand, compared to a country in Western Europe

with a lower power distance and higher individualism. Generally, students from for

example, the Asia-Pacific Rim countries would tend to see themselves more as part of

a group and they would not want to talk in front of the group as an individual as easily

as a Western European might. For a student from a high power distance country and

low individualism country to speak in such a way in front of the group, would be to

bring attention to themselves and to single themselves out in a way which would not

seem to be the way that the group operated. There is a proverb in Thailand that the

head that sticks up above the others is likely to be the head which is cut off.

Masculinity

Hofstede's definition of masculinity was less clear than his definitions of his other

dimensions, but in 1994 in 'Software of the Mind', he says that "masculinity pertains

to societies in which the social gender roles are clearly distinct (i.e. men are supposed

to be more assertive, tough, and focused on material success, whereas women are

supposed to be more modest, tender and concerned with the quality of life)." The

scores for each country were reached by looking at particular questionnaire items and



some of these items were judged to be more important for men, and others more

important for women. More important items for men were advancement - which

meant having the opportunity to advance to high levels in a job; earnings - which

meant having the opportunity to earn more; training - which meant having training

opportunities and being up to date with current trends. Goals which were more

important for women were having a friendly atmosphere at work; having position

security; good physical conditions; having a good working relationship with their

manager and working with people who cooperate well with one another.

In terms of consequences for society and for organizations a high masculinity score for

a country or culture meant that in that country rewards come in the form of wealth or

status for successful individuals, whereas in lower masculinity countries there would

be less emphasis on this. In organisations high masculinity countries would expect

young men to make a career and would view those who did not make careers

successfully as being failures. Whereas in a low masculinity culture it would be

accepted that some individuals want careers and some do not.

Job stress is something that is associated more with higher masculinity scores, so that

in a high masculinity country there would be generally more job stress than in a low

masculinity culture. Examples of low masculinity countries are the Scandinavian

countries and in particular Sweden, which has a particularly low masculinity score, and

interestingly has very good social services and a very inclusive society. For example

paternity leave in Sweden is extended and very well established. At the other end of

the scale Great Britain has quite a high masculinity score and the social services in

this country are quite lacking compared to Sweden. Paternity leave is not compulsory

and is usually only a few days. In terms of consequences of masculinity for education,

these are perhaps less visible than for the other three of Hofstede's dimensions.

Goodman (1994) puts forward the view that in a masculine society competition would

tend to be encouraged by teachers and achievement oriented students will tend to

make themselves more visible and students who fail will tend to identify their failure

with their own self esteem, and high achieving students will identify clear career paths

for themselves. It is worth noting in this context that there are quite a lot more

foreign language students in higher education who are women than who are men.

Perhaps one reason for this is that generally in the UK at least, foreign languages are

not viewed as the most obvious degree subject for a successful and high achieving

career.

Evaluating Hofstede's Dimensions

The four dimensions above are really at the heart of Hofstede's work. They present a

very useful blueprint of cultural difference. Like any theory, it is not complete and has

certain holes in it and inconsistencies, and plenty of objections that can be raised

against it from a number of angles. However, it is arguably the most empirically based

and complete theory of cultural difference to date, and that is why it has been given

so much weight within this unit.



Hofstede was gathering his data for the formulation of his four dimensions in the late

1960's, and obviously, things have moved on from then. Hofstede himself devised a

fifth dimension as a result of work on a Chinese Value Survey questionnaire, which

explored the reasons behind the emergence of the Tiger economies in the Asia-Pacific

rim countries. This new dimension was termed Confucian Dynamism and looked at

features of those cultures such as what was termed their persistence and

perseverance, their observation of status relationships involving meeting obligations,

their thrift and their sense of shame.

Source: http://www.uclan.ac.uk/facs/class/languages/teib/unit5a.htm

Cultural dimensions

PDI Power Distance Index

IDV Individualism

MAS Masculinity

UAI Uncertainty Avoidance Index

LTO Long-Term Orientation

Country overview

Country

PDI IDV MAS UAI LTO

Germany 35 67 66 65 31

Netherlands 38 80 14 53 44

Source: http://www.geert-hofstede.com/hofstede_dimensions.php

To check scores other countries’ scores, go to this website!

http://www.uclan.ac.uk/facs/class/languages/teib/unit5a.htm

http://www.geert-hofstede.com/hofstede_germany.shtml

http://www.geert-hofstede.com/hofstede_netherlands.shtml

http://www.geert-hofstede.com/hofstede_dimensions.php



7.3 Implications of Hofstede’s Dimensions

Power Distance

Key differences between small and large power distance societies.

I: general norm, family, school, and workplace

Small power distance

Inequalities among people should be

minimized

There should be, and there is to some

extent, interdependence between less

and more powerful people

Parents treat children as equals

Children treat parents as equals

Teachers expect initiatives from

students in class

Teachers are experts who transfer

impersonal truths

Student treat teachers as equal

More educated persons hold less

authoritarian values than less

educated persons

Hierarchy in organizations means an

inequality of roles, established for

convenience

Decentralization is popular

Narrow salary range between top and

bottom of organization

Subordinates expect to be consulted

The ideal boss is a resourceful

democrat

Privileges and status symbols are

frowned upon

Large power distance

Inequalities among people are both

expected and desired

Less powerful people should be

dependent on the more powerful; in

practice, les powerful people are

polarized between dependence and

counterdependence

Parents teach children obedience

Children treat parents with respect

Teachers are expected to take all

initiatives in class

Teachers are gurus who transfer

personal wisdom

Students treat teachers with respect

Both more and less educated persons

show almost equally authoritarian

values

Hierarchy in organizations reflects the

existential inequality between higher-

ups and lower-downs

Centralization is popular

Wide salary range between top and

bottom organization

Subordinates expect to be told what

to do

The ideal boss is a benevolent

autocrat or good father

Privileges and status symbols for

managers are both expected and

popular



Key differences between small and large power distance societies

II: politics and ideas

Small power distance

The use of power should be legitimate

and is subject to criteria of good and

evil

Skills, wealth, power, and status need

not go together

The middle class is large

All should have equal rights

Powerful people try to look less

powerful than they are

Power is based on formal position,

expertise, and ability to give rewards

The way to change a political system is

by changing the rules (evolution)

The use of violence in domestic politics

is rare

Pluralist governments based on

outcome of majority votes

Political spectrum shows strong center

and weak right and left wings

Small income differentials in society,

further reduced by the tax system

Prevailing religions and philosophical

systems stress equality

Prevailing political ideologies stress

and practice power sharing

Native management theories focus on

role of employees

Large power distance

Might prevails over right: whoever

holds the power is right and good

Skills, wealth, power, and status

should go together

The middle class is small

The powerful have privileges

Powerful people try to look as

impressive as possible

Power is based on family or friends,

charisma, and ability to use force

The way to change a political system

is by changing the people at the top

(revolution)

Domestic political conflicts frequently

lead to violence

Autocratic or oligarchic governments

based on cooptation

Political spectrum, if allowed to be

manifested, shows weak center and

strong wings

Large income differentials in society,

further increased by the tax system

Prevailing religions and philosophical

systems stress hierarchy and

stratification

Prevailing political ideologies stress

and practice power struggle

Native management theories focus on

role of managers



Individualism

Key differences between collectivist and individualist societies.

I: general norm, family, school and workplace

Collectivist

People are born into extended families

or other ingroups which continue to

protect them in exchange for loyalty

Identity is based in the social network

to which one belongs

Children learn to think in terms of ‘we’

Harmony should always be maintained

and direct confrontations avoided

High-context communication

Trespassing leads to shame and loss of

face for self and group

Purpose of education is learning how

to do

Diplomas provide entry to higher

status groups

Relationship employer-employee is

perceived in moral terms, like a family

link

Hiring and promotion decisions take

employees’ingroup into account

Management is management of groups

Relationship prevails over task

Individualist

Everyone grows up to look after

him/herself and his/her immediate

(nuclear) family only

Identity is based in the individual

Children learn to think in terms of ‘I’

Speaking one’s mind is a

characteristic of an honest person

Low-context communication

Trespassing leads to guilt and loss of

self-respect

Purpose of education is learning how

to learn

Diplomas increase economic worth

and/or self-respect

Relationship employer-employee is a

contract supposed to be based on

mutual advantage

Hiring and promotion decisions are

supposed to be based on skills and

rules only

Management is management of

individuals

Task prevails over relationship



Key differences between collectivist and individualist societies.


Collectivist

Collective interests prevail over

individual interests

Private life is invaded by group(s)

Opinions are predetermined by group

membership

Laws and rights differ by group

Low per capita GNP

Dominant role of state in the economic

system

Economy based on collective interests

Political power exercised by interest

groups

Press controlled by state

Imported economic theories largely

irrelevant because unable to deal with

collective and particularist interests

Ideologies of equality prevail over

ideologies of individual freedom

Harmony and consensus in society are

ultimate goals

Individualist

Individual interests prevail over

collective interests

Everyone has a right to privacy

Everyone is expected to have a

private opinion

Laws and rights are supposed to be

the same for all

High per capita GNP

Restrained role of the state in the

economic system

Economy based on individual interests

Political power exercised by voters

Press freedom

Native economic theories based on

pursuit of individual self-interests

Ideologies of individual freedom

prevail over ideologies of equality

Self-actualization by every individual

is an ultimate goal



Masculinity

Key differences between feminine and masculine societies.


Feminine

Dominant values in society are caring

for others and preservation

People and warm relationships are

important

Everybody is supposed to be modest

Both men and women are allowed to

be tender and to be concerned with

relationships

In the family, both fathers and

mothers deal with facts and feelings

Both bys and girls are allowed to cry

but neither should fight

Sympathy for the weak

Average student is the norm

Failing in school is a minor accident

Friendliness in teachers appreciated

Boys and girls study same subjects

Work in order to live

Managers use intuition and strive for

consensus

Stress on equality, solidarity, and

quality of work life

Resolution of conflicts by compromise

and negotiation

Masculine

Dominant values in society are

material success and progress

Money and things are important

Men are supposed to be assertive,

ambitious, and tough

Women are supposed to be tender

and to take care of relationships

In the family, fathers deal with facts

and mothers with feelings

Girls cry, boys don’t; boys should

fight back when attacked, girls

shouldn’t fight

Sympathy for the strong

Best student is the norm

Failing in school is a disaster

Brilliance in teachers appreciated

Boys and girls study different subjects

Live in order to work

Managers expected to be decisive and

assertive

Stress on equity, competition among

colleagues, and performance

Resolution of conflicts by fighting

them out



Key differences between feminine and masculine societies.


Feminine

Welfare society ideal

The needy should be helped

Permissive society

Small and slow are beautiful

Preservation of the environment should

have highest priority

Government spends relatively large

proportion of budget on development

assistance to poor countries

Government spends relatively small

proportion of budget on armaments

International conflicts should be

resolved by negotiation and

compromise

A relatively large number of women in

elected political positions

Dominant religions stress the

complementarity of the sexes

Women’s liberation means that men

and women should take equal shares

both at home and at work

Masculine

Performance society ideal

The strong should be supported

Corrective society

Big and fast are beautiful

Maintenance of economic growth

should have highest priority

Government spends relatively small

proportion of budget on development

assistance to poor countries

Government spends relatively large

proportion of budget on armaments

International conflicts should be

resolved by a show of strength or by

fighting

A relatively small number of women in

elected political positions

Dominant religions stress the male

prerogative

Women’s liberation means that women

will be admitted to positions hitherto

only occupied by men



Uncertainty avoidance

Key differences between weak and strong uncertainty avoidance societies


Strong uncertainty avoidance

The uncertainty inherent in life is felt

as a continuous threat which must be

fought

High stress; subjective feeling of

anxiety

Aggression and emotions may at

proper times and places be ventilated

Acceptance of familiar risks; fear of

ambiguous situations and of unfamiliar

risks

Tight rules for children on what is dirty

and taboo

What is different, is dangerous

Students comfortable in structured

learning situations and concerned with

the right answers

Teachers supposed to have all the

answers

Emotional need for rules, even if these

will never work

Time is money

Emotional need to be busy, inner urge

to work hard

Precision and punctuality come

naturally

Suppression of deviant ideas and

behavior, resistance to innovation

Motivation by security and esteem or

belongingness

Weak uncertainty avoidance

Uncertainty is a normal feature of life

and each day is accepted as it comes

Low stress; subjective feeling of well-

being

Aggression and emotions should not

be shown

Comfortable in ambiguous situations

and with unfamiliar risks

Lenient rules for children on what is

dirty and taboo

What is different, is curious

Students comfortable with open-

ended learning situations and

concerned with good discussions

Teachers may say ‘I don’t know’

There should not be more rules than

is strictly necessary

Time is a framework for orientation

Comfortable feeling when lazy; hard-

working only when needed

Precision and punctuality have to be

learned

Tolerance of deviant and innovative

ideas and behavior

Motivation by achievement and

esteem or belongingness



Key differences between weak and strong uncertainty avoidance societies.


Weak uncertainty avoidance

Few and general laws and rules

If rules cannot be respected, they

should be changed

Citizen competence versus authorities

Citizen protest acceptable

Citizens positive towards institutions

Citizens positive towards political

process

Tolerance, moderation

Positive attitudes towards young

people

Regionalism, internationalism,

attempts at integration of minorities

Belief in generalist and common sense

Many nurses, few doctors

One group’s truth should not be

imposed on others

Human rights: nobody should be

persecuted for their beliefs

In philosophy and science, tendency

towards relativism and empiricism

Scientific opponents can be personal

friends

Strong uncertainty avoidance

Many and precise laws and rules

If rules cannot be respected, we are

sinners and should repent

Citizen incompetence versus

authorities

Citizen protest should be repressed

Citizen negative towards institutions

Civil servants negative towards

political process

Conservatism, extremist, law and

order

Negative attitudes towards young

people

Nationalism, xenophobia, repression

of minorities

Belief in experts and specialization

Many doctors, few nurses

There is only one Truth and we have

it

Religious, political, and ideological

fundamentalism and intolerance

In philosophy and science, tendency

towards grand theories

Scientific opponents cannot be

personal friends

Source: http://westwood.wikispaces.com/file/view/Hofstede.pdf

http://westwood.wikispaces.com/file/view/Hofstede.pdf



7.4 Hofstede’s Culture Dimensions and Ronen & Shenkar’s

Country Clusters

Simcha Ronen and Oded Shenkar developed a set of country clusters from a variety of

culture research projects conducted through the early 1980s. Hofstede’s project was

important among these. While most scholars and residents of the nations in these

country clusters recognize that there is considerably variability within each one, they

provide a preliminary rough sense of what to expect in a given part of the world.

Ronen and Shenkar’s Country Clusters and Hofstede’s Culture Dimensions

Power Individualism/ Uncertainty Masculine/

Distance Collectivism Avoidance Feminine

Nordic 6 2 6 6

Germanic 5 4 3 1

Anglo 4 1 5 2

Latin Eur. 3 3 1 5

Latin Am. 2 6 2 3

Far East 1 5 4 4

Countries in each cluster:

Nordic (Finland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden), Germanic (Austria, Germany,

Switzerland), Anglo (United States, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, United Kingdom,

Irelnad, South Africa), Latin European (Portugal, Spain, Italy, Belgium, France), Latin

American (Colombia, Peru, Mexico, Chile, Venezuela, Argentina), Far Eastern

(Thailand, South Vietnam, Indonesia, Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, Philippines,

Malaysia), Arab (Abu-Dhabi, Oman, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Saudi

Arabia), and Near Eastern (Turkey, Iran, Greece)

Nation clusters taken from Ronen, S. (1986). Comparative and multinational

management. New York: John Wiley & Sons and from Ronen, S. & Shenkar, O.

(1985). Clustering countries on attitudinal dimensions: A review and synthesis.

Academy of Management Review, 10, 435-454. Hofstede dimension data taken from:

Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors,

institutions and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Source:

http://www.collegeofbusiness.fau.edu/mgt/intbusns/peterson/Culture%20Dimension

%20Toolbook%20R2.htm

http://www.collegeofbusiness.fau.edu/mgt/intbusns/peterson/Culture%20Dimension%20Toolbook%20R2.htm

http://www.collegeofbusiness.fau.edu/mgt/intbusns/peterson/Culture%20Dimension%20Toolbook%20R2.htm



7.5 Trompenaars. The three layers of culture

Another key figure in cultural differences is the Dutch writer, Trompenaars.

Trompenaars (1993) puts forward a range of cultural characteristics such as

universalist and particularist and other key distinctions. Trompenaars writes in some

depth about these and he has researched them, but not to the same empirical degree

that Hofstede researched his four dimensions. Jandt (1995) puts forward the idea of

immediacy (expressiveness) and also develops Edward Hall's idea of high and low

context communication. All these are now established areas of cultural investigation.

Let consider Trompenaars.

The three layers of culture

There are many interpretations of culture. We look at culture from a special

perspective. We like to compare culture with an onion. Culture, like an onion, consists

of layers which can be peeled off. In culture, we can distinguish three layers:

The outer layer is what people primarily associate with culture: the visual reality of

behavior, clothes, food, language, housing, etc. This is the level of explicit culture.

The middle layer refers to the norms and values which a community holds: what is

considered right and wrong (norms) or good and bad (values). Norms are often

external and reinforced by social control. Values tend to be more internal than norms.

Society doesn't have many means of controlling their enforcement. Values and norms

structure the way people in a particular culture behave. But they are not visible,

despite their influence on what happens at the observable surface.

The inner layer is the deepest: the level of implicit culture. Understanding the core of

the culture onion is the key to successfully working with other cultures. The core

consists of basic assumptions, series of rules and methods to deal with the regular

problems that it faces. These methods of problem-solving have become so basic that,

like breathing, we no longer think about how we do it. For an outsider these basic

assumptions are very difficult to recognize.

Every culture has developed its own set of basic assumptions. These basic

assumptions can be measured by dimensions. Each dimension is like a continuum.

Cultures differ in how they deal with these dimensions, but they do not differ in

needing to make some kind of response.

Universalism vs Particularism

People in universalistic cultures share the belief that general rules, codes, values and

standards take precedence over particular needs and claims of friends and relations.

In a universalistic society, the rules apply equally to the whole "universe" of members.

Any exception weakens the rule.

For example: the rule that you should bear truthful witness in a court of law, or give

your honest judgment to the insurance company concerning a payment it is about to

make to you, is more important here than particular ties of friendship or family. It isn't



that in universalistic cultures, particular ties are completely unimportant. But the

universal truth, the law, is considered logically more significant than these

relationships.

Particularistic cultures see the ideal culture in terms of human friendship,

extraordinary achievement and situations; and in intimate relationships. The "spirit of

the law" is deemed more important than the "letter of the law".

Obviously there are rules and laws in particularistic cultures; but these merely codify

here how people relate to each other. Rules are needed - if only to be able to make

exceptions to them for particular cases - but we need to be able to count on our

friends.

Individualism vs Communitarianism

Each one of us is born alone. In a predominantly individualistic culture people place

the individual before the community. Individual happiness, fulfillment, and welfare set

the pace. People are expected to decide matters largely on their own and to take care

primarily of themselves and their immediate family. In a particularistic culture, the

quality of life for all members of society is seen as directly dependent on opportunities

for individual freedom and development. The community is judged by the extent to

which it serves the interest of individual members.

Each one of us is born into a family, a neighborhood, a community, which existed

before we did, and will continue after we die. In a predominantly communitarian

culture people place the community before the individual. It is the responsibility of the

individual to act in ways which serve society. By doing so, individual needs will be

taken care of naturally.

The quality of life for the individual is seen as directly dependent on the degree to

which he takes care of his fellow man, even at the cost of individual freedom. The

individual is judged by the extent to which he serves the interest of the community.

Specific vs Diffuse

People from specific cultures start with the elements, the specifics. First they analyze

them separately, and then they put them back together again. In specific cultures, the

whole is the sum of its parts. Each person's life is divided into many components: you

can only enter one at a time. Interactions between people are highly purposeful and

well-defined.

The public sphere of specific individuals is much larger than their private sphere.

People are easily accepted into the public sphere, but it is very difficult to get into the

private sphere, since each area in which two people encounter each other is

considered separate from the other, a specific case. Specific individuals concentrate on

hard facts, standards, contracts.

People from diffusely oriented cultures start with the whole and see each element in

perspective of the total. All elements are related to each other. These relationships are



more important than each separate element; so the whole is more than just the sum

of its elements.

Diffuse individuals have a large private sphere and a small public one. Newcomers are

not easily accepted into either. But once they have been accepted, they are admitted

into all layers of the individual's life. A friend is a friend in all respects: tennis,

cooking, work, etc. The various roles someone might play in your life are not

separated.

Qualities cherished by diffuse cultures include style, demeanor, ambiance, trust,

understanding, etc.

Affective vs Neutral

In an affective culture people do not object to a display of emotions. It isn't

considered necessary to hide feelings and to keep them inside. Affective cultures may

interpret the less explicit signals of a neutral culture as less important. They may be

ignored or even go unnoticed.

In neutral culture people are taught that it is incorrect to show one's feelings overtly.

This doesn't mean they do not have feelings, it just means that the degree to which

feeling may become manifest is limited. They accept and are aware of feelings, but

are in control of them. Neutral cultures may think the louder signals of an affective

culture too excited, and over-emotional. In neutral cultures, showing too much

emotion may erode your power to interest people.

Achievement vs Ascription

Achieved status refers to what an individual does and has accomplished. In

achievement-oriented cultures, individuals derive their status from what they have

accomplished. A person with achieved status has to prove what he is worth over and

over again: status is accorded on the basis of his actions.

Ascribed status refers to what a person is and how others relate to his or her position

in the community, in society or in an organization. In an ascriptive society, individuals

derive their status from birth, age, gender or wealth. A person with ascribed status

does not have to achieve to retain his status: it is accorded to him on the basis of his

being.

Time: Sequential vs Synchronic cultures

Every culture has developed its own response to time. The time orientation dimension

has two aspects: the relative importance cultures give to the past, present, and

future, and their approach to structuring time. Time can be structured in two ways. In

one approach time moves forward, second by second, minute by minute, hour by hour

in a straight line. This is called sequentialism. In another approach time moves

round in cycles: of minutes, hours, days, years. We call this synchronism.



People structuring time sequentially tend to do one thing at a time. They view time as

a narrow line of distinct, consecutive segments. Sequential people view time as

tangible and divisible. They strongly prefer planning and keeping to plans once they

have been made. Time commitments are taken seriously. Staying on schedule is a

must.

People structuring time synchronically usually do several things at a time. To them,

time is a wide ribbon, allowing many things to take place simultaneously. Time is

flexible and intangible. Time commitments are desirable rather than absolute. Plans

are easily changed. Synchronic people especially value the satisfactory completion of

interactions with others. Promptness depends on the type of relationship

Past-oriented cultures

If a culture is predominantly oriented towards the past, the future is seen as a

repetition of past experiences. Respect for ancestors and collective historical

experiences are characteristic of a past-oriented culture.

Present-oriented cultures

A predominantly present-oriented culture will not attach much value to common past

experiences nor to future prospects. Day-by-day experiences tend to direct people's

life.

Future-oriented cultures

In a future-oriented culture most human activities are directed toward future

prospects. Generally, the past is not considered to be vitally significant to a future

state of affairs. Planning constitutes a major activity in future-oriented cultures.

Internal vs External

Relations with Nature

Every culture has developed an attitude towards the natural environment. Survival

has meant acting with or against nature. The way we relate to our environment is

linked to the way we seek to have control over our own lives and over our destiny or

fate.

Internalistic people have a mechanistic view of nature. They see nature as a complex

machine and machines can be controlled if you have the right expertise. Internalistic

people do not believe in luck or predestination. They are 'inner-directed' - one's

personal resolution is the starting point for every action. You can live the life you want

to live if you take advantage of the opportunities. Man can dominate nature - if he

makes the effort.

Externalistic people have a more organic view of nature. Mankind is one of nature's

forces, so should operate in harmony with the environment. Man should subjugate to

nature and go along with its forces. Externalistic people do not believe that they can

shape their own destiny. 'Nature moves in mysterious ways', and therefore you never

know what will happen to you. The actions of externalistic people are 'outer-directed' -

adapted to external circumstances.



Reconciliation Method

So how do we or should we better accommodate the differences between our cultures

and others with whom we are trying to work, do business or manage?

Foreign cultures have an integrity, which only some of its members will abandon.

People who abandon their culture become weakened and corrupt. We need others to

be themselves if partnership is to work. This is why we need to reconcile differences,

that is, to be ourselves, but yet see and understand how the others' perspectives can

help our own.

Once you are aware of your own mental models and cultural predisposition's, and once

you can respect and understand that those of another culture are legitimately

different, then it becomes possible to reconcile differences. Why do this? Because we

are in the business of creating wealth and value, not just for ourselves, but for those

who live in different cultural worlds. We need to share the value of buying, selling, of

joint venturing, of working in partnership.

What is reconciliation ?

In dealing with different cultures, you have several options:

Ignoring other cultures

One type of response is to ignore the other orientation. You are sticking to your own

cultural standpoint. Your style of decision making is to either impose your own way of

doing things because it is your belief that your way of doing things and your values

are best, or because you have rejected other ways of thinking or doing things because

you have either not recognised them or have no respect for them.

Abandon your standpoint

Another response is to abandon your orientation and 'go native'. Here you adopt a

'when in Rome, do as Roman's do' approach. Acting or keeping up such pretences

won't go unseen - you will be very much an amateur. Other cultures will mistrust you

- and you won't be able offer your own strengths to the marriage.

Compromise

Sometimes do it your way. Sometimes give in to the others. But this is a win-lose

solution or even lose-lose solution. Compromise can not lead to a solution in which

both parties are satisfied - some thing has to give.

Reconciliation

What is needed is an approach where the two opposing views can come to fuse or

blend - where the strength of one extreme is extended by considering and

accommodating the other. This is reconciliation.

The limited space here prevents a full explanation of the methodology and steps to

achieve full reconciliation. Our workshops, consultancy, publications are all different

ways in which you can access our methodologies to help you and your organisation

develop your propensity to reconcile cultural differences and thereby become more

effective in doing business and managing across cultures.



In summary you should learn to:

Recognise cultural differences

Respect cultural differences

Reconcile cultural differences.

In practice, the major origin of cultural differences between you and others may lie in

two or three dimensions. By reconciling the differences on the dimensions you have

identified, you can begin to reconcile your cultural orientation with the other party.

Thus the 7 dimensions of culture model gives you a strategy to focus your attention

on what you need to consider first.

Source: http://www.7d-culture.nl/index1.html

http://www.7d-culture.nl/index1.html

Documents

Reader Intercultural Communication 2013-2014