In this way, employees are allowed to handle conflicts by themselves to the extent that is possible. Discipline In case a conflict is unprofessional, inapt, or unsettled, the company disciplines the employees.
Of the theoretical perspectives proposed to understand cultural variations in communication styles, the most widely cited one is the differentiation between high-context and low-context communication by Edward Hall, in Low-context communication is used predominantly in individualistic cultures and reflects an analytical thinking style, where most of the attention is given to specific, focal objects independent of the surrounding environment; high-context communication is used predominantly in collectivistic cultures and reflects a holistic thinking style, where the larger context is taken into consideration when evaluating an action or event.
In low-context communication, most of the meaning is conveyed in the explicit verbal code, whereas in high-context communication, most of the information is either in the physical context or internalized in the person, with very little information given in the coded, explicit, transmitted part of the message.
These stylistic differences can be attributed to the different language structures and compositional styles in different cultures, as many studies supporting the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis have shown. These stylistic differences can become, in turn, a major source of misunderstanding, distrust, and conflict in intercultural communication.
Understanding differences in communication styles and where these differences come from allows us to revise the interpretive frameworks we tend to use to evaluate culturally different others and is a crucial step toward gaining a greater understanding of ourselves and others.
The communication styles of an individual, which combine both verbal and nonverbal elements, are shaped and reshaped by shared cultural values, worldviews, norms, and thinking styles of the cultural group to which they belong.
Needless to say, understanding the fundamental patterns of communication styles as well as the underlying systems of thought that give rise to them will help to reduce cultural barriers that hinder intercultural relationships and collaborations. This article begins by introducing major theoretical frameworks that have been used to describe culture.
Next, fundamental patterns of communication styles will be introduced, along with a discussion of the relationship between culture and language. Finally, implications of cultural differences in communication styles will be discussed.
Cultural Frameworks Culture has been defined in many ways. Some commonly applied definitions view culture as patterned ways of thinking, feeling, and reacting, common to a particular group of people and that are acquired and transmitted through the use of symbols.
Others view culture as a function of interrelated systems that include the ecology e. It is fair to say that culture includes both objective and subjective elements.
These interrelated systems do not dictate culture; rather, we can use them as a general framework to understand culture and its relation to individual and collective actions.
A number of approaches have been used to describe and explain cultural differences. This article focuses on two approaches that are most widely accepted and relevant to our understanding of cultural variations in communication styles: Value can be defined as an enduring belief that a specific mode of conduct is socially preferable to an opposite or converse mode of conduct.
Values form the basis for judging the desirability of some means or end of action. Dimensions of Cultural Values Based on a study of 88, IBM employees in 72 countries, between andHofstede identified four dimensions of cultural values: Later, Hofstede and Bond added a fifth dimension, dynamic Confucianism, with long-term orientation refers to future-oriented values such as persistence and thrift, whereas short-term orientation refers to past- and present-oriented values, such as respect for tradition and fulfilling social obligations.
The individualism-collectivism dimension alone has inspired thousands of empirical studies examining cultural differences. More specifically, people in individualistic societies, such as the United States, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and most of the northern and western European countries, tend to emphasize individual rights, such as freedom, privacy, and autonomy.
They tend to view themselves as unique and special, and are free to express their individual thoughts, opinions, and emotions. Individualists also value equality; they do not differentiate between ingroups and outgroups, applying the same standards universally, also known as universalism.
In comparison, people in collectivistic societies, such as most of Latin American, African, and Asian countries, and the Middle East, tend to view themselves as part of an interconnected social network.
They emphasize the obligations they have toward their ingroup members, and are willing to sacrifice their individual needs and desires for the benefits of the group.
They care about their relationships with ingroups, often by treating them differently than strangers or outgroup members, which is also known as particularism. In high power distance societies, such as many Latin American countries, most of African and Asian counties, and most counties in the Mediterranean area, people generally accept power as an integral part of the society.
Hierarchy and power inequality are considered appropriate and beneficial. The superiors are expected to take care of the subordinates, and in exchange for that, the subordinates owe obedience, loyalty, and deference to them, much like the culture in the military.
It is quite common in these cultures that the seniors or the superiors take precedence in seating, eating, walking, and speaking, whereas the juniors or the subordinates must wait and follow them to show proper respect. Similarly, the juniors and subordinates refrain from freely expressing their thoughts, opinions, and emotions, particularly negative ones, such as disagreements, doubts, anger, and so on.
It is not surprising that, except for a couple of exceptions, such as France, most high power distance societies are also collectivistic societies.
In contrast, in low power distance cultures, most of which are individualistic societies, people value equality and seek to minimize or eliminate various kinds of social and class inequalities.
They value democracy, and juniors and subordinates are free to question or challenge authority. People from high uncertainty avoidance cultures, such as many Latin American cultures, Mediterranean cultures, and some European e.Rapport management: a framework for r-bridal.comally speaking: Managing rapport through talk across cultures (pp.
). London: Continuum. Spencer-Oatey, Using the theory of politeness as a springboard, Culturally Speaking develops a new framework for analyzing interactions.
The book examines both comparative and interactive aspects of cross-cultural communication through a variety of disciplines, theories, and empirical data. Anyone interested in. College essay writing serviceNo PlagiarismMust have in-text citationsAPA formatScholarly References X7Include Reference PageRead Assignment Instructions BelowIn this assignment, you will prepare a communications policy for a company that you are familiar with or a fictitious company you create.
(4) H. Spencer-Oatey, Culturally Speaking: Managing Rapport through Talk across Cultures. New York: Cassel, Finally, my real reason for pondering this and writing thoughts out were to help me answer the question: “If I were teaching agile development, and understood it to be culture, and not process, how would I go about it?”.
Sociolinguistic Competence in the Complimenting Act of Native Chinese and American English Speakers: A Mirror of Cultural Value Data collection in pragmatics research. In H. Spencer-Oatey (Ed.), Culturally speaking: Managing rapport through talk across cultures (pp.
). London and New York: Continuum. Google Scholar An essay in the. However, most of the time, cultures are set through the years, and is difficult to change overnight. In summary, short term goals are set in accordance to the culture, while long term goals are the elements that strongly affects the culture of the community or group.