Communication Between Cultures

TABLE 6.15 The Influence of Cultural Patterns

CULTURAL PATTERNS

IndividualismVersus Collectivism

Individualism(e.g., U.S., Australia, Canada)

• Focuses on the individual and self-
  promotion


• Independency


• Task dominates relationship


• Social obedience through sense of guilt

Collectivism(e.g., ROK, China, Mexico)

• Focuses on the group/affiliations and self-
  criticism


• Interdependency


• Relationship dominates task


• Social obedience through sense of shame
  Egalitarian Versus Hierarchal (Power Distance)
  Egalitarian(e.g., Australia, Canada, U.S.)


• Horizontal relationships


• Equality expected

Hierarchal(e.g., Mexico, India, ROK)

• Vertical relationships


• Inequality accepted
  Low Versus High Uncertainty Avoidance
  Low Uncertainty Avoidance(e.g., Ireland, U.S.)


• Change is normal and good


• Few behavioral protocols


• Greater cultural diversity

High Uncertainty Avoidance(e.g., Japan, Spain)

• Change is disruptive and disliked


• Many behavioral protocols


• Less cultural diversity
  Monochronic Versus Polychronic (Use of Time)
  Monochronic(e.g., Germany, U.S.)


• Time is linear and segmented


• Focus on a single task


• Adherence to schedules

Polychronic(e.g., Arabs, Africans, France)

• Time is flexible


• Focus on multiple tasks


• Weak ties to schedules
  Low Versus High Context Communication
  Low Context (Direct)(e.g., Germany, U.S.)


• Meaning inherent in verbal message


• Nonverbal communication low importance


• Silence is avoided

High Context (Indirect)(e.g., ROK, Japan)

• Meaning dependent on context


• Nonverbal communication high importance


• Silence is normal
  Low Versus High Face Concerns
  Low Face Concerns(e.g., Canada, U.S.)


• Conflict/disagreement is constructive


• Concern for self-face

High Face Concerns(e.g., China, Korea, Taiwan)

• Conflict/disagreement is threatening


• Concern for mutual and other-face
  Universalism Versus Particularism
  Universalism(e.g.,U.S., UK, Australia)


• Rules and regulations apply equally to all
  in every situation


• Relationship is subordinate to principle


• There is only one truth; reality is objective

Particularism(e.g., China, Russia, Japan)

• Adherencetorulesandregulationsissituational


• Relationship obligations may take prece-
  dence over principle


• Truth is perception based; reality is subjective

Source: Adapted from Edwin R. McDaniel,“Bridging Cultural Differences in International Trade

in Services: Communication in the Globalized Market,”Taiwanese Journal of WTO StudiesXXXIV

(2013): 1–39.

Tight and Loose Cultures 239

Copyright 2017 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).