Improving Cross Cultural Communication Skills †MyAssignmenthelp.com

Question: Discuss about the Improving Cross Cultural Communication Skills. Answer: Introduction The word culture means a complicated accumulation of knowledge, folklore, language, rules, rituals, habits, lifestyles, attitudes, beliefs and customs that relates and gives a common uniqueness to a group of individuals. It takes a relatively long duration for a culture to develop. It is very common to find communications which seems to be meaningless to the receiver or the listener simply because either the communicator or the listener is unaware of what to expect out of the communication. Communication between individuals differ to a great extent between and within cultures and the various rules and regulations with reference to the accurate level of fierceness in interacting can lead to even greater misunderstandings in culture (Hilton 2003). The two words communication and culture has been repeatedly been defined and redefined by many researchers in the past simply because the two concepts are closely related to each other with what is fundamentally human. However from the anthropological view point, customs had united with all of its elements when human existence first came into being and led to the development of interpersonal relationships wherein various individuals ended up developing separate communities of their own which ultimately resulted in communication across cultures ((Kinsey 2011). One of the biggest hurdles to communication across cultures have been language, however the same has undergone drastic changes since globalisation and the advent of what we call telecommunication. The said concept is now being challenged by all by the spread of what is known as supra-English. Each culture have their own set of rules and regulations which is accepted by all its members automatically. Business entities across the globe have realised that intercultural interaction is very crucial, not only due to globalisation but also because the domestic labour has gone diverse both ethnically as well as culturally. Apart from cultural differences while communicating, it is very important to understand that the link that exist between the two communicating parties is also an important factor to be considered for successful communication(Moseley, 2009). The biggest issue is that even if the communication is being done with a positive attitude, miscommunication is probable to occur and that too when there exists cultural variations between the two ends. In the particular essay, communication across cultures is being discussed and demonstrated by providing various examples relating to ideas, attitudes and behavioural patterns. Four distinct variables are being discussed with regards the cross-cultural communication that occurs i.e. time and space, fate and personal responsibility, face and face saving and nonverbal communication. One of the most critical variable to be considered while discussing about the cross cultural communication is time as this is one thing that segregates culture and the ways the different cultures do things. Such as in the Western part of the world, time is inclined to be viewed as quantitative which is measured in units that shows the progression. In the West, time is construed to be equivalent to money and the said approach is termed as monochromic wherein focus is on a single communication at one time and not multiple. Whereas in contrast, in the Eastern side of the world, people are of the view that time is unlimited and hence do not value the same. People prefer to do multi-tasking at one point of time, thereby falling under the approach called polychromic. Thus people converse with many people at the same time and on various topics that have no linkage with each other. Thus here the cultural difference is highlighted between the east and the west (Padhi, 2016). One of the most sought after example to understand the Eastern part of world would be India. People here are of the view that time is endless via various cycles which keeps on moving, appearing and disappearing. Time here extends and elongates far beyond the human ego or lifetime. Further the dissimilarities over time can play out in excruciating and vivid ways in arbitration or clash resolution procedure. A perfect example of explaining the difference is an arbitration procedure with regards a land claim that occurred in Canada. First Nations people met the spokespersons from domestic, regional and national governments to meet each other and start the work. The former kind of people took a lot of time as they were talking about things which were away from the actual point of discussion such as the topic on which they talked about comprised of the spirit of land, what their people have done for the land and talked about generations after generations (Hooker, 2008). However, when the turn of the diplomats came, they talked to the point i.e. they showed various graphs and charts and discussed only about the purpose for which they had gathered. Thereby representing that the flow charts were linear and spare in their lack of description, starting from the overbearing customs from which these diplomats of the government came. Thus none of the two ends were happy meeting each other for the first time. They did not bother on the fact that they differed on time, rather were sure that they did not talk on the similar lines due to cultural differences, thus making communication uninteresting as well. Thus this made their interaction tough (Reynolds, Valentine, 2011). Hence it can be construed that the cultural advancements towards interaction does not necessarily always ensure good faith but also at times may cater to servicing of a number of motives. Emphasizing supremacy, dominance, benefit or direction over the path of arbitration may be a purpose enveloped up in particular cultural behaviours (Adair et.al.2001) . Culture as well as cultural beliefs can be utilised as a weapon by arbitrators, hence for the said purpose it is crucial for the interacting ends to be involved in collaborative-process design while catering to inflexible divergences (LeBaron, 2003). Since people from varying cultural backgrounds work in conjunction with each other to formulate a process to cater and deal with the problems that segregate them, they can query about various cultural preferences such as time and space and how it may have an impact on the arbitration or the conflict resolving procedure. Hence this way, they may immunize against the usage of culture as an approach or an apparatus to press forward supremacy (Ybema, Hynghae, 2009). The second crucial erratic elements which has an impact on the communication across cultures is fate and personal responsibility. It connotes to the extent one feels oneself as the master of life as against the level to which one views oneself as subject to things outside ones management. A second approach to this would be how much a person has the capability to adapt itself to the changes and contrive so as to be able to select the course of ones linkages and lives. Some have pinched a matching amid the importance on private accountability in North American surroundings and the background itself (Thomas, 1994). In North America there is a huge area which is sparsely populated. Here various kids grow up with a heroic logic of life wherein they possess huge ideas and hope filaments everlasting. Whenever they face any failures, they do not get discouraged, instead get up again and try until they achieve success. However in contradiction to the same, if places with a relatively smaller territory is considered wherein the history shows that the past has been too stressful full of struggles, at such territories the main stress is upon what luck has to play in the life of human beings. Such as in Mexico, the people view struggles and stress as an integral part of life which cannot be let go of or avoided. There way of reacting to breakdowns and disappointments is by reiterating ni modo which means that the disappointment was written in their luck and hence unavoidable (Earley, 2006). The cultural conflict in communication is important in this context. If a person is devoted in free determination crosses paths with somebody more defeatist in direction, miscommunication is surely to occur (Gudykunst, 2003). The same is because the former would demand for accountability and responsibility and unable to view the same may understand that the later is lazy or not honest with his work. However, the later would think that he would be respected and applauded for his efforts and if the same does not happen, may blame that the former was dominant and impertinent, overstated with his views with regards what can be possibly be achieved or reversed (Catana, 2014). The third variable with regards cross cultural communication is face and face-saving. Face is an integral part across varying cultural backgrounds but the dynamics of face and face-saving come out in a different way. The study with regards face and face saving with regards communication conflicts in cross cultural interaction is crucial especially in a diversified US work force and also in the wake of globalisation wherein people are generally found to be engaged into conflicts. Face is defined and is distinct in various manners in the literature of communication across varying cultures. As per Novinger, the said variable basically means the respect or viewpoint an individual has in the eyes of others and it connotes haughtiness or respect for ones own self. Whereas, some others have defined the same as the arbitrated image of the public, reciprocally approved one another by the contestants in interaction. If the said variable is defined in a more exaggerated manner then it would com prise of ideas of status, supremacy, courtesy, humbleness, within and outside linkages, humour and dignity. In various cultures and societies, maintain face is of utmost importance even if the methods and ways of doing the same may differ (Markus, Kitayama, 1991). The initiation point of egoism, eccentricity and communitarians are intimately linked to face. If one looks at oneself as an individual who is self influential by nature, then in this case face has to play an integral role with regards preservation of the image of the person in front of others as well as to self. For the same, the individual should make all efforts to imply adequate controls in such scenarios so as to attain the aims successfully. One may achieve this by adopting a aggressive attitude in arbitration or tackling somebody to whom one thinks has done an incorrect act to the self. One may be more at ease to stand in a situation of mediation wherein both the ends meet face to face and talk about the differences and resolve the same on the forefront (Oetzel et.al. 2001). Further if the main identification is understood as a member of a group, then contemplations about face takes into account the group as a whole. However, confronting somebody face to face may portray and reflect a very sad image of the person on the entire group to which he belongs and may even lead to disruption of the peace and harmony of the community as a whole. Thus face and face saving basically demands for avoidance of direct confrontation as it helps to safeguard the image and also preserve the relationships from getting damaged. Hence it simply means that their seems to be a thirst to save the face else shun from extending offense (Adler, 2003). Non verbal communication is the most crucial variable in cross cultural communication as language is a problem in cultural interaction which to an extent gets resolved due to the non-verbal part of it. Thereby whenever verbal form of interaction is not clear enough to comprehend, then the individual uses non-verbal method of interaction to exchange ideas. Nonverbal form of communication can be either via postur-es or sign language or emotional expression or touch or such other various forms. Cultures which belong to the low context such as the USA and Canada put relatively less amount of pressure on the non-verbal form. However one cannot conclude that non-verbal form of interaction is totally absent, but the same is less prevalent as people prefer to talk in words than in actions. Whereas in the high-context scenario in countries such as Japan, China or Columbia, it is easy to communicate in the non-verbal manner as their language is too difficult to comprehend thereby sign language etc helps in better communicating of the information (Okazaki, 2004). Some of the rudiments of the non-verbal communication are similar across various cultures. Such as the research confirms that emotions such as anger, happiness, surprise, sad are showed and articulated in the same manner irrespective of the culture to which a person belongs. Then the most pertinent question arises is as to where is the difference then. The issues come up with regards such emotions which are suitable to exhibit in various cultural settings and by whom. Such as it may be highly acceptable in places such as the USA to accept the loud behaviour of women expressing their emotion of terror rather than annoyance and for the male counterpart to exhibit fury but not horror. Furthermore, even the exhibition of fail expressions across various cultures is varying. Such as in China and Japan, people across the globe would think that facial expressions shown by them represent happiness but it may actually show anger or cover up sorrow. However, the disparities in the understanding may give way to disagreement or shoot up live clash. Such as if a Japanese is trying to tell the listener about the why he or she was not available at the time of negotiation since there was a mishap in the family, the same may be done with a smile, since their culture understanding is that it is inappropriate to impose in tenderness of sorrow on someone else. Hence for a westerner who is of the belief that a smile connotes happiness or joy, the said smile may look as incompatible and even rude during such a situation. Although there are some facial expressions which are same across various cultural backgrounds, even then the final understanding of these expressions linger around being culture specific. Thereby it is crucial to interpret certain things with regards cultural starting points and values so as to understand the sentiments being articulated across various cultural communications taking place (Pym, 2003). Another variable across cultures is related to proxemics or certain methods of linking to space. Across cultures one comes across varying ideas and views about well-bred space for communications and arbitrations, such as people belonging to North America are of the view that they need ample space since they are used to the same in their daily life in their houses as well. However in contrast, the Europeans prefer talking by maintaining least possible space since they are used to smaller personal space (Adetunji, Sze, 2012). The issue with regards space preferences is the the judgements attached with the space and not the fact that the space is present. Thus if a person is used to sitting close to someone while interacting and the other person tries to maintain space, then the former would interpret such a way of non-verbal communication as rudeness or unavailability of adequate interest to communicate. Whereas those who are used to communicate by maintaining a specific distance with the other person, then the latter in this case if coming close would be considered as discourteous and belligerent by nature. Hence it can be said that line-waiting activities and that which is present in a group setting such as a grocery shop are culturally prejudiced. As per the Americans, they prefer to maintain discipline by standing in line as they are of the view first come first serve whereas the people of France are used to breaking a line which connotes indiscipline behaviour at various places. Thereby these examples of disparities with regards the communication which is not verbal in nature are just the tip of the iceberg. Cautious annotations, in progress learning from a range of basis and humanizing associations across cultures will all help increase the enriching confidence to labour successfully with non-verbal communiqu differentiations (Koksal, 2011). Coclusion All the variables talked about in this essay i.e. time and space, face and face saving, personal responsibility and non-verbal communication are much more complicated than it seems so in the essay above. All these variables, individually have a stark persuade in the line of communication and may be accountable for clashes or the intensification of clashes when the conversation moves towards miscommunication or is being interpreted incorrectly. Thus in order to ensure that communications across cultures are being carried out in a silent and an amicable manner, the parties communicating should over a period of time should try to meet up in between, thereby trying to understand each others cultures and the values attached with the same. It is very important to understand that when two people interacting do not belong to the same cultural background, then they should understand what is correct as per the opposite culture and communicate in a manner which is not offensive to both the part ies. Thus the main key to cross0cultural interaction is basically trying to understand the other culture and respecting their values and beliefs as well. Bridging the gap is possible when both the ends move forward equally thereby ensuring to meet midway in order to ensure successful and meaning communication. Expressing high opinion for the traditions and the values apart from ones own is basically one of the best possible way in ensuring a successful development of cross cultural communication It this respect which helps in ultimately leading to a good and a healthy cross-cultural communication relationship. References: Adair, W.L, Okumura. T, Brett, J.M. (2001). Negotiation behaviour when cultures collide: the U.S. and Japan. Journal of Applied Psychology. 86: 37185. Adler, N.J .(2003). Communication across cultural barriers. In: Bolten J, Ehrhardt C (eds) Interkulturelle Kommunikation: Texte und bungen zum interkulturellen Handeln. Sternenfels: Wissenschaft Praxis, 247276 Adetunji,R.R. Sze, K.P. (2012). Understanding Non-Verbal Communication across cultures : A symbolic Interactionism Approach. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/255967701_Understanding_Non-Verbal_Communication_across_Cultures_A_Symbolic_Interactionism_Approach Catana,S.E. (2014). Teaching Cross-cultural Communication Issues- A way of successfully integrating into the Multicultural Knowledge Society. Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences. 128. 343-348 Earley, C. P. (2006).Leading cultural research in the future, a matter of paradigms and taste. Journal of International Business Studies, 37: 922-931. Gudykunst, W.B. (2003). Cross-Cultural and Intercultural Communication. Sage Publication: New Delhi Hilton,G. (2003). Becoming Culturally Fluent. Communication World. 24(6). 34-36 Hooker,J.N. (2008). Cultural Differences in Business Communication. Retrieved from https://repository.cmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1149context=tepper Kinsey,C. (2011). Communicating across cultures. Retrieved from https://www.asme.org/engineering-topics/articles/business-communication/communicating-across-cultures Koksal,D. (2011). Pragmatic Approach to Cross-Cultural Communication in the BUsienss World. Retrieved from https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.607.246rep=rep1type=pdf LeBaron,M. (2003). Cross-Cultural Communication. Retrieved from https://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/cross-cultural_communication Markus, H. Kitayama, S. (1991) Culture and the self: implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review. 98: 22453. Moseley,A. (2009). Improving Cross-Cultural Communication Skills: Ask-Seek-Knock. Retrieved from https://www.regent.edu/acad/global/publications/lao/issue_17/LAO_IssXVII_Moseley.pdf Okazaki, S. (2004). Does culture matter? Identifying cross-national dimensions in Japanese multinationals product-based websites. Electronic Markets. 14: 5869. Oetzel,J., Ting-Toomey,S., Masumoto,T., Wilcox,R. (2001). Face and facework in conflict: A cross-cultural comparison of China, Germany, Japan and Unites States. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/248925162_Face_and_facework_in_conflict_A_cross-cultural_comparison_of_China_Germany_Japan_and_the_United_States Padhi, P.K. (2016). The Rising Importance of Cross-Cultural Communication in Global Business Scenario. Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Science. 4(1). 20-26. Retrieved from https://www.questjournals.org/jrhss/papers/vol4-issue1/E412026.pdf Pym,A. (2003). A Theory of Cross-Cultural Communication. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242584197_A_Theory_of_Cross-Cultural_Communication Reynolds, S., Valentine, D. (2011). Guide to Cross-cultural Communication. (2nded). New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Thomas,D.R. (1994). Understanding cross-cultural communication. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257880583_Understanding_cross-cultural_communication Ybema,S. Hynghae,B. (2009). Cultivating Cultural Differences in Asymmetric Power Relations. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management. 9(3). 339-358