First Level Leadership

Cross Cultural Communication

Build your Cross Cultural Communication with this article

How would you react in the following situation?  You are seated in a car driven by a close friend, and the car is involved in a grave accident. Wait a bit,

he was drunk and driving fast. You know the accident was his fault. Yet your friend expects you to testify under oath that he was not drunk, and driving within the speed limit; then he can obviate the legal consequences.

 Would you testify?

There could be many possible explanations – whether to testify or not. We indulge in cross cultural communication based on our own cultural frame of reference to any situation, so what we see is based on our cultural values.

But what’s this got to do with you?

If you are someone who is involved in cross cultural communication with colleagues from more than four different nationalities, then this article may be of special interest to you. Identifying cultural differences that lead to confusion or conflict is a good step towards building cultural adaptability.

Rules of Engagement of cross cultural communication

Geert Hofstede, a Dutch researcher, established that there were substantial differences in the behaviors and attitudes of managers and employees of different countries. He used the following attributes to analyze the various groups:

Individualism/ Collectivism

Individualism reflects the level of personal choice in a job, its freedom and challenges. e.g. most Europeans and North Americans. Collectivism is recognized by a strong social grouping. The employer is expected to give security in return for loyalty. e.g. Thailand, Philippines and many Arab countries.

Power Distance

Employees accept that their boss has more powers and should have precise answers to questions posed by subordinates. High Power Distance – India, Philippines and many Arab countries. Lower Power Distance – Europe, North America and Australia.

Uncertainty Avoidance

This dimension means the extent to which people feel threatened by unknown situations and want stability. Japan is a high uncertainty avoidance country. Singapore, Hong Kong, India and Philippines score low on uncertainty avoidance

Fons Trompennar identified other differences between cultures:

Achieved Status

Status accorded to people on the bases of their achievement is called Achieved Status – e.g. North Americans and North European.

Ascribed status

Status accorded to people on the basis of age, class, gender, education is called Ascribed Status – e.g. South East Asian.

Universalism / Particularism

In a universal culture (e.g. USA or northern Europe) you would apply the same rules to everyone. For a particularistic culture (India, Thailand) the closeness of relations with the individuals would be most important in deciding your actions.

What does this translate to?

What are the implications for a supervisor or a leader? An individual whose culture stresses:

Individualism – is more likely to respond to requests based on his/her individual needs such as job interest, advancements etc.

Collectivism – is more likely to respond to requests for the benefits of loyalty. Expect decisions to referred back upwards.

High Power Distance – is more likely to feel uncomfortable questioning their supervisor’s decision.

Low Power Distance - is more likely to expect their supervisor to be a guide or a coach.

High Uncertainty Avoidance – is more likely to expect clearly defined rules, procedures, and precise instructions.

Low Uncertainty Avoidance – is more likely to show initiative even if the situation is vague or ambiguous.

Achieved Status – is more likely to give respect once he/she has observed the behavior and actions of the supervisor.

Ascribed Status – is more likely to give respect to supervisors automatically because of their position.

Universalism – is more likely to look for hard standards for completing tasks by applying same rules to everyone.

Particularism – is more likely to see each case on its merits.

Virgin olive oil is ideal for cooking,

and water is essential for living. Each is great by itself, but mix them together, and you will see that they don’t blend well. The same is true for people from various cultures in one team. They don’t naturally gel well, but can coexist peacefully in the same recipe. Without either one, the dish will not taste as good...

Many individuals do not consider

cultural differences to be important. In fact, culture has a major bearing on the effectiveness of supervising various teams. Developing cross cultural communication and awareness is not an end in itself, rather it is a means towards increasing personal power and freedom of choice in a multicultural world.

By Ronen Cohen    

Next Step: Sign Up for the First Level Leadership E-zine and get access to good information without any fluff!