Journal Entry #2 – Cultural Patterns

 Journal Entry #2:  Please answer the following in this week’s journal entry.  You must have at least 350 words written in this journal entry.
Total Points Possible:  50

In Module 2, Unit 2, we learned about different and major cultural patterns (Hofstede, Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck, Edward T. Hall) that help to frame the way cultural groups view the world and act and behave.  Please identify and discuss which cultural patterns you see as being a part of your life, background, and experiences.  Do one or two stand out in terms of where and how you grew up (nationally, regionally, ethnically and culturally).  Explain.  Refer to any cultural pattern or related concept from the course readings and documents for this unit (website link in the Module 2 Section, Powerpoint slides, and Note for/Individualism/Collectivism inventory).  (This journal entry will help you do some work for our course paper, the Cultural Profile Project.) 

website:https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/

Intercultural Communication and Global Understanding

4.

Vertical

/Horizontal Individualism and Collectivism

Subsections:

Structural and social dimensions of individualism and collectivism

Interpreting the cells

Defining communicative behaviors

Communicative style

Classic cases

Structural and social dimensions of individualism and collectivism

The following chart attempts to systematize our thinking about individualism
and collectivism:

Vertical Horizontal
Collectivism Individualism Collectivism Individualism

Kind of
Self

• Inter-
dependent

• Independent • Inter-dependent • Independent

• Different from

others

• Different from

others
• Same as others • Same as

others

• Dutiful • Achievement-
oriented

• Cooperative • Unique

Social
Rel’n

• Communal
sharing

• Authority
ranking

• Market pricing
• Authority

ranking

• Communal
sharing

• Equality
matching

• Market pricing
• Equality
matching

Comm’n
Style

• Indirect
• Formal
• Differentiated
• Duty &

Obligation

• Direct
• Informal
• Individuated
• Content &

Clarity

• Indirect
• Formal
• Implied
• Context &

Concern

• Direct
• Informal
• Individuated &

Communal
• Content &
Clarity

Identity

• Tightened
• Bounded

• Loosened
• Flexible

• Tightened
• Bounded

• Loosened
• Flexible

First, we distinguish between people who are comfortable thinking about
social relations as vertical, and those who prefer horizontal relationships.
Those preferring verticality tend to accept inequality and the notion that
rank has its privileges. Those preferring the horizontal desire to be similar to
others on most attributes, especially status and desire to have social
cohesion with others.

In this array, there are four kinds of self, using two scales, independent or
interdependent and same or different. Horizontal individualism refers to an
independent/same self. This dimension highlights an independent nature and
the expectation that people should be similar on most attributes He does not
want to stand out. Cultures in this dimension prefer to work alone, privacy is
important, and equality is emphasized. This is the U.S. on a social level.
France, Germany, Australia are least likely to be prejudiced and
ethnocentric.

Interpreting the cells

Horizontal collectivism refers to an interdependent/same self. This dimension
highlights an interdependent nature and the expectation that people should
be similar on most attributes. Cultures with this dimension do not want to
stand out and value social cohesion with the ingroup. Belonging is important
and there is little individuation.

Vertical individualism refers to an independent/different self. This dimension
highlights an independent nature but wants to distinguish one’s self and is
imbued within a hierarchy. Cultures with this dimension do not want to be
average. Here groups are competitive, self-motivated, and want to be the
best or succeed. These cultures are also differentiated on a political and
economic scale (e.g., U.S. on an economic scale with taxation). Vertical
individualistic cultures are more likely to put down other groups in an effort
to be distinguished from others and to win the competition in the market
place.

Vertical collectivism refers to an interdependent/different self. This
dimension highlights an interdependent nature but accepts inequality and
rank. Cultures here are differentiated in social classes and social class
remains fixed to the one in which you were born. The identities are bounded
here (e.g., Japan; India; parts of Latin America). These cultures are deemed
more ethnocentric.

In both I and C, vertical dimension accepts inequality and rank has its
privileges (different self).

The horizontal focuses on people should be similar on most attributes,
especially status (same self which does not want to stand out)

In C, horizontal includes a sense of social cohesion and of oneness with
members of the ingroup.

Vertical includes a sense of serving the ingroup and sacrificing for the benefit
of the ingroup and doing one’s duty.

Defining communicative behaviors

The act of Communal Sharing goes on in families. Things are shared, people
feel a high degree of belonging and also fear loneliness. Gifts are given and
relationships are eternal. Disadvantages of this outlook are ingroup
favoritism, hostility towards outgroups, racism, and supernationalism

Authority Ranking measures a tendency to recognize hierarchy. In this
framework, resources are divided according to rank/attention (e.g, age,
gender). Inequalities are naturalized, so that high status people give many
gifts and have more obligations than lower classes. They are rewarded with
respect, deference, loyalty and obedience. Punishment and discipline may
ensue if these individuals do not fulfill their duties.

Equality Matching refers to social equality. These individuals prefer total
equality, in which resources are distributed equally. Decisions are made by
voting; justice has high value.

Persons given to Market Pricing (Proportionality) prefer to receive resources
equal to their contributions—the more they give, the more they get.
Achievement is important, as is quantification of everything. One is defined
by one’s occupation, and wars are fought for economic benefit. Market value
is more important than social value, which can lead to exploitation of
workers.

Communicative style

Communication Style categories. This assesses
persons according to their communication style with
an ingroup/public (but can be different in private).
They may not treat others as they would family
members. Collectivists may be communicating with
ingroup that is larger. They may communicate
slightly differently with relatives, co-workers,
neighbors, same-sex, and close friends.
Individualists have a smaller ingroup but behavior in
slightly different wasy in out- and ingroups.
Collectivists have fewer skills to interact with
strangers than individualists; silence is embarassing for individualists and
appropriate cultural behavior for collectivists.

Japanese Children
Courtesy of Adamgaston
http://flickr.com/photos/ada
mgaston/262205463/

Identity Category. This assesses persons in specific situations. It gets at the
notion of what kind of identity occurs in a culture. Is it bounded, tight, and
not permeable? Is it open and flexible? Are there strict behavioral norms
and expectations? Here rules are so internalized that they create hardened

identities. In tightened cultures, there are a limited number of appropriate
behaviors, and these are widely shared and have a clear sense of what to
do. For example, comparing Japan the United States, when asked if rules
existed in the classroom and on the street, 40% of U.S. children and 92% of
Japanese children agreed.

Acculturation and adaptation occur along these lines as well: collective
acculturation if groups are stigmatized, and individual acculturation if
accepted.

Classic cases

Most collective cultures are vertical, while most individualistic cultures are
horizontal. Within cultures this is not rigid, however, for there is considerable
room for variation. These are tendencies, not absolute realities.

In Sweden, where horizontal individualist culture, prevails, people are self-
reliant. The elderly do not live with their children. Living by oneself is highly
valued—87% said want to live on own. Swedes score high on individualism
but do not like people who stick out. Do not like to be unique or
conspicuous, which contrasts with other kinds of individualists, such as North
Americans, English, French, or Germans. High social status is only desired
by about 2% of population, as compared with 7% of Americans and 25% of
Germans.

The United States displays a vertical individualism pattern, in many
situations and including business transactions.

Australians display a more horizontal individualist form of behavior.

In Israeli kibbutz persons do not want to stand out, rather they want to
value community needs.

Prior to World War II, Japan displayed vertical collectivism style, but
afterward turned toward horizontal collectivism, especially in its dealings
with the U.S. citizens. Older Japanese tend to remain vertical, while younger
people are moving in horizontal direction and toward individualism.

China has vertical collectivist tendencies, and authorities do advocate
horizontal themes. There are individualist traits, as in Confucian traditions,
Taoism, and Buddhism. But even these have yielded to egalitarianism and
individual and team responsibility/competition. Before 1980, an iron rice
bowl guaranteed a minimum income. Now Chinese workers must hold jobs
and perform well. Some 80% of the population is rural and relatively poor,
so I-factors remain low.

Other collectivist cultures include the Philippines, Latin America, and Italy.
Southern Italians are interesting in that they are collectivistic in that only the
immediate family is the important ingroup. But when dealing with outsiders,
they act individualistic. Thus, vertical collectivism prevails when dealing with
ingroups, and vertical individualism prevails when dealing with outsiders.

Individualistic cultures include Ancient Greece (Illiad and Odyssey),
Germany, and France. The British have perhaps the most individualist
culture, where influence, affluence, and ability to move around are highly
valued. Scandinavia has both moderately individualist and many horizontal
collectivist elements.

Endnotes

Triandis, H.C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism: New directions in
social psychology. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Vertical
Kind of Self
•  Indirect
•  Formal

 Tightened
 Flexible
 Tightened

InterculturalCommunication and Global Understanding

3. The Deep Structure of Culture: Key Elements of Intercultural
Communication

Subsections:
Deep structure of culture

Cultural patterns and communication

Different cultural pattern models/taxonomies

Individualism vs. collectivism

Uncertainty avoidance

Power distance

Propensity to problem-solving

Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck’s value orientations

Hall’s High and Low Context—Communication

Deep structure of culture

The following elements constitute the “deep structure of culture,” which
refers to the foundation of every cultural system. This deep structure of
culture is crucial to understand as it forms the backbone of all intercultural
communication encounters. Cultural members speak from and experience
the world through these elements.

A. Social Perception: the way we make sense of the world; the process
of understanding reality by attributing meaning to the social objects and
events we encounter in our environments.

The way we see, select, evaluate and organize
stimuli from the external world, refers to our
social perception. We act based upon what we
perceive and we learn these perceptions through
cultural experiences. For example, you may notice
that you always highly value directness and
assertiveness; that is a social perception that is

shaped by your cultural position. Social perception
involves the unconscious processing that takes
place when we look around ourselves and
immediately start to interpret and evaluate what
has taken place. Individuals have different filters
of social perc

Assertive and driven
business culture
Courtesy of Commence
Technology Partners
http://www.commencepartners.
com/pages/projects.html

eption.

B. World View: the orientation we hold towards religion, nature, life,
death, and the universe

World view refers to the larger philosophies we hold about the world around
us. For example, when does life begin and end for you? Does life end for
you? Do you believe in an afterlife? What is your view of the role of nature in
relation to human society? What is the meaning of life? World views usually
stand as broader, larger perspectives on the world and society.

C. Beliefs: convictions in the truth/value of something

Our beliefs refer to our own held declarations that something exists or does
not. This could be with regard to a religion (what is a God) to specific
events, and or people. Beliefs are more specific than world views in that they
specify what we hold as true and real.

D. Values: principles or guidelines (normative) informing a member of
what is good, bad, right, wrong, true and false.

On an even more specific level than beliefs, values reflect the priorities of a
culture; these provides standards and norms for behavior and a set of rules
for interaction in that culture.

E. Attitude: learned tendencies to respond in a consistent manner to
people, objects and events in our environment.

If we strongly believe that taking care of our elders is important for our
culture, and this is right and good, we are likely to act in this regard. Thus,
attitudes stand as the behavioral components and represent the learned
disposition from beliefs, values, and world views. Cultural groups that have a
strong value for respecting one’s elders, will engage in behavior consistent
with this value.

Cultural patterns and communication

Cultural Patterns consist of integrations of world
views, beliefs, values, and attitudes that
contribute to the way in which a people
approach life.

Cultural patterns refer to a culture’s
assumptions about what the world is, the shared
judgments about what it should be, and the
widely held expectations about how people
should behave. These are the unseen,
unconsciously enacted, shared expectations
which become stable over time but can change
in specific historical moments (although rare).
Cultural patterns guide individuals’ thought

Islam – One cultural pattern
affecting the way in which
people approach life
Courtesy of Brazilian Government
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image
:Mosque.Qibla.01

processes and orientations to the world. Scholars argue that cultural
patterns represent shared mental programs that govern specific behavior
choices in cultural groups.

It is critical to understand differences in cultural patterns if you wish to be a
better intercultural communicator. These cultural patterns will provide you
with systems of culture knowledge and interpretive skills for symbols used in
communication. No common set of behaviors can be completely and
universally interpreted in the same way nor regarded with the same degree
of favorability. Some of these patterns are context-bound and others bear
similarities across specific national cultures.

Different cultural pattern models/taxonomies

Geert Hofstede developed another approach to cultural patterns and
communication that he labeled “value dimensions.” His research consisted
of:

• He studied cultural differences in terms of work-related value
orientations.
• Asserted that people carry mental programs that are developed during
childhood and are reinforced by their culture. These programs contain the ideas
of one’s cultures and are expressed through its dominant values.
• Conducted survey research with 88,000 employees of a large
multinational business (IBM) that has branches in 66 countries.
• He found 4 patterns along which dominant patterns of a culture can be
ordered. Can be used to understand cultural and work-related values.
• Limitations of study: most of the respondents were male, mid-level
managers, higher level of education, countries did not include Africa, Arab
countries, or any from the Soviet Bloc, was conducted over 20 years ago.
• All cultural patterns are mere indications; these are continua and not
extreme poles; most cultures have different degrees of both individualism and
collectivism.
• Think of these cultural patterns as being in terms of degrees.

He chose subjects from middle managers in 50 IBM subsidiaries spanning
forty countries. After analysis, he ranked countries 1-40 in different
categories.

Individualism vs. Collectivism

Individualism:

• the individual is the imp. unit as well as the uniqueness of the
individual

• priority of personal interests over group interests

• “I” is stressed

• competition over cooperation — achievement-based

• personal privacy is valued

Collectivism:

• the group is the important unit (in-group)

• group includes relatives, extended family, loved ones, and
organizations

• prioritizes loyalty to group

• cooperation/collaboration over competition

• “We” is emphasized; belonging, groupwork, group dec. making

Uncertainty avoidance

Uncertainty avoidance is the degree to which
a culture is adaptable to uncertainty, change,
and the unknown. Great Britain, Hong Kong,
Ireland, and Sweden, for example, have a
high tolerance for uncertainty and ambiguity—
these believe in minimizing the number of
rules and rituals that govern social conduct,
are more tolerant of dissent and socially
deviant behavior, and in taking risks.

Belgium, Greece, Japan, and Portugal prefer to
avoid uncertainty (and establish more
structure)(are advanced, adopt Buddhism and

Unitarianism)—they desire consensus about goals, do not tolerate dissent, or
allow deviation in the behaviors of cultural members, try to ensure security
and uncertainty through an extensive set of rules (are beginning to
modernize, embrace religions like Catholicism, and Islam.

Stamps of Great Britain showing
diversity being embraced
Courtesy of Norvic Philatelics
http://www.norphil.co.uk/2005/food.
htm

Predictors of uncertainty avoidance vary. High uncertainty avoidance
cultures are the ones beginning to modernize, characterized by a high rate

of change—extensive systems of laws—embrace
religions such as Catholicism and Islam; low
uncertainty avoidance cultures tend to be
advanced in modernization and more
stable/predictable—have fewer rules and laws—
prefer negotiation and resolution to conflict—
adopt Buddhism and Unitarianism which
emphasize relativity.

Consequences of high uncertainty avoidance
include worry about the future, lots of anxiety,

and rules to control behaviors. Consequences of low uncertainty avoidance
are living day-by-day, willingness to change, taking risks, accepting
deviance, accepting individual achievement, few rules to control social
behaviors, and religious rituals that require precise patterns of enactment.

Portuguese Uniform Fashion
Source: Euro 2008
http://en.euro2008.uefa.com/cou
ntries/organisation/sa/kind=3276
8/newsid=365596.html

The United States ranks moderate on uncertainty avoidance, while Japan
and France have high uncertainty avoidance.

Power distance

Contrary to what we think in the U.S. culture about equality, all people in a
culture do not have equal levels of social status or social power. Some may
be more superior in terms of education, age, wealth, gender, birth order,
family background, occupation, personal achievements.

Cultures also differ to the extent to which they view such status inequalities
as good or bad, just or unjust. All cultures have particular value orientations
about the appropriateness or importance of status differences.

Low power distance cultures, like Austria, Denmark, Israel, and New
Zealand, prefer small distances as cultural value, believe in the importance
of minimizing social or class inequalities, questioning or challenging authority
figures, reducing hierarchy. Organizational structures and using power only
for legitimate purposes.

High power distance cultures, such as India, Mexico, Philippines, and
Venezuela, believe in a social order in which each person has a rightful and
protected place, the actions of authorities should not be challenged,
hierarchy and inequality are appropriate and necessary and those with
status have a right to use their power for whatever purposes.

Latin America – mum and dad work on rich poor gap.
http://bakedpanda.blogspot.com/2008/10/rich-poor-gap-widens-in-europe-and.html

Population Density Map

ata_products/OurChangingPlanet/PDF/Page_253_new

Courtesy of NASA
http://eospso.gsfc.nasa.gov/eos_homepage/for_scientists/
d

Predictors of power distance
cultures include climate,
population size, and wealth.
Cultures found in high latitude
climates that are far from
equator and have moderate
to cold climates tend to have
low power distance culture
scores. Those in low latitude
climates that are near the
equator and have tropical
climates have high power
distance cultural scores. In
colder climates, human
survival requires more protection. Survival can occur only if the culture can
develop solutions that counter act the extreme forces.

Propensity to problem-solving

tech solutions is low, more traditional approaches are preferred, independent

The need for solutions predisposes the culture to seek less traditional and
more innovative answers to its common problems, which in turn means a
greater need for modernization, mass literacy, independent thinking,
decentralization of political power, tech, and a general questioning of
authority. Other hand, warmer climates depend far less on these. Need for

thinking is not as necessary. People learn from their elders, which means
there is less questioning of authority.

Population size is also important. The larger the group, the greater the
power distance cultures. With large numbers it must develop more rules and
formal procedures for coping with issues and will need more centralized
concentrations of political power.

Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck’s value orientations

Florence Kluckhohn and Fred Strodtbeck wanted to focus on cultural
patterns. Cultures differed from each other but within every culture there
were individuals who varied from the cultural patterns most often associated
with it.

To explain this, concluded that a) people in all cultures face common human
problems for which they must find a solution; b) the range of alternative
solutions to a culture’s problems is not limitless; c) within a given culture,
there will be preferred solutions which most people within the culture will
select but there will also be people who will choose other solutions, an
apparent contradiction, there is a preferred set of solutions which will be
chosen by most people but not all will exactly the same choices.

The common problems all culture face are the following:

What is the nature of human beings?

What is the relationship of humans to nature?

What is the orientation of humans to time?

What is the human orientation to activity?

What is the relationship of humans to each other?

Hall’s High and Low Context—Communication

Edward T. Hall, an anthropologist, closely examined the relationship between
the type of context and communication. Hall explored how in some cultures,
the amount of information was implied by the setting or the context itself,
regardless of the specific words that were spoken while in other cultures, the
meanings were directly based on the words spoken.

In a situation Hall labeled high context, information is implicit and resides in
the person. Little is coded and transmitted in verbal messages. Indirect

communication/silence is valued, as are
homogeneous information that changes little over
time (e.g., Korea, Japan, Venezuela).

In low context situations, information is made specific
and explicit in verbal messages. Information is more
heterogeneous and direct communication is valued
(e.g., United States, Australia, Great Britain).

Cultures differ from high to low context. High context
cultures prefer to use messages in which most of the
meaning is either implied by the physical setting or is
presumed to be part of the individual’s internalized
beliefs, values, and norms; very little is provided in
the coded, explicit, transmitted part of the message,
so people may rely on nonverbals. Examples of high
context cultures are: Japanese, African American,
Mexican and Latino. Low context culture messages have the majority of the
information in the explicit code. Examples are: German, Swedish,
Euroamerican, and English cultures.

Edward T. Hall
Courtesy of Kathryn
Sorrells
http://www.csiss.org/classi
cs/content/13

Hall believed that some cultures have messages that are high context,
others have messages that are mostly low context and some have mixtures.

Endnotes

Hall, E.T. (1959). The silent language. New York: Doubleday.

Hall, E.T. (1966). The hidden dimension. New York: Doubleday.

Hall, E.T. (1976). Beyond culture. New York: Doubleday.

Hall, E.T. (1983). The dance of life, the other dimension of time. New York:
Doubleday.

Hall, E.T. (1985). Hidden differences: Studies in international
communication. Hamburg: Grunder & Jahr.

Hall, E.T. (1987). Hidden differences: Doing business with the Japanese.
Garden City, NY, Anchor Press/ Doubleday.

Hall, E.T. (1990). Understanding cultural differences, Germans, French and
Americans. Yarmouth: Intercultural Press.

Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in
work-related values. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage.

Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors,
institutions, and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage
Publications.

Kluckhohn, C. K. (1951). Values and value orientations in the theory of
action. In T. Parsons and A. Shils (Eds.), Toward a general theory of action.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Kluckhohn, F.R. & Strodtbeck, F.L. (1961). Variations in value orientations.
Evanston, Ill.: Row, Peterson.

Samovar, L.A., & Porter, R.E. (1995; 2nd edition). Intercultural
communication: A reader. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.

Samovar, L.A., & Porter, R.E. (2000; 9th edition). Intercultural
communication: A reader. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.

, the greater power distance cultures.

COMM 174
Dr. Rona T. Halualani

Week 2, Unit 2

Geert Hofstede’s Cultural PaAerns/Dimensions
—  Dutch social psychologist
—  Worked for IBM
—  Collected over 100,000 questionnaires on how

employees from other countries reported on
their national cultures

—  Examined how a society’s culture affected its
values and how those values affect behavior

—  Found four cultural dimensions of 40 initial
countries:
—  individualism-collectivism
—  power distance
—  uncertainty avoidance
—  masculinity-femininity
—  In later research, he added:

—  long-term orientation
—  indulgence vs. self-restraint

—  Deemed these as “national cultural differences”

How might cultural paAerns influence how
groups communicate?
—  Individualism-Collectivism: Use of pronouns
— EX: A member of a collectivistic culture who
identifies with the group may use the pronoun “we”
when stating a personal opinion. A member of an
individualistic culture would perceive such a
statement as being about something that the group
may do or believe, but not necessarily the speaker’s
opinion. (Could be seen as more of an obligation and
not actual opinion.)

How might cultural paAerns influence how
groups communicate?
—  Individualism-Collectivism: “Face”
—  Face refers to the public self-image. (We portray different
faces for inclusion into a group or for autonomy as a
person; how we are perceived by others).

— When our bosses/parents issue a directive, and we do not
comply, we threaten their face; we question their
individual personhood and their authority. When you are
a teacher and have students from collectivistic cultures,
you provide direct feedback and can threaten their face.

—  In collectivistic cultures, the concern for face is
predominantly other-oriented.

How might cultural paAerns influence how
groups communicate?
—  EX: U.S.-Japanese business merger (“Tim,” a U.S. executive is

responsible for setting up a company in a merger with a Japanese
company. He worked well with the Japanese executives. One
executive, “Yoshi” was elected chairman of the board of this company
when his grandfather retired. Over the course of a year, Tim and
Yoshi and others worked on ways in which to develop this merger.
Then one day, Yoshi’s grandfather attended the meeting. This
grandfather talked about the history of the company and how it was
formed by traditional practices. Tim expected Yoshi to share the new
directions they had been discussing. However, Yoshi said nothing –
he nodded with his grandfather. Tim was frustrated and started to
protest and share these new strategies. The atmosphere became tense
and a week later, the Japanese company withdrew from the
negotiations. (Has to do with the face not of your self but of a group,
a culture, a family, an organization).

How might cultural paAerns influence how
groups communicate?
—  In individualistic cultures, the concern for face is self-
oriented. (There are misunderstandings when
individualists fail to give face to collectivisits when they
interact). Yoshi was giving his grandfather face

—  EX: Like Tim

—  European American teachers misunderstand African
American students – (stylin) – refusing to comply as part
of a verbal sparring game. They could be perceived as
threatening the teacher’s face.

How might cultural paAerns influence how
groups communicate?
—  Low and High Context Communication
—  Low-context cultures use more direct styles of communication.
—  High-context cultures use more indirect styles of communication.

— 

—  EX: Greek-US communication (Greeks employ an indirect style of comm and

interpret others’ behavior based on the assumption that they are also using
the same style. Americans use direct styles of communication.)

— 
—  W (direct): Bob’s having a party. Wanna go?
—  M (indirect): OK
— 
—  (later)
—  W (direct): Are you sure you wanna go?
—  M (indirect): OK, let’s not go. I am tired anyways.
—  (the male interpreted the woman’s questions as an indirect indication that she

did not want to go)

How might cultural paAerns influence how
groups communicate?
—  EX: Uncertainty reduction with low and high context cultures
— 
—  *If high context cultures believe that meaning resides in the context/

person, low context cultures believe that the meaning resides in the
verbal message. In initial interactions with strangers, we often reduce
uncertainty of each other but differently. In the U.S., which is a low
context culture, members try to find info about beliefs, values, and
attitudes to reduce uncertainty. In Japan, a high context culture must
know one other’s status and background in order to reduce
uncertainty and know which version of the language to use (for e.g.,
different ways of addressing/talking to superiors, equals, and inferiors:
“I belong to Mitsubishi Bank. What is your job? How old are you?
What is the name of your company — many misinterpret these as rude
and nosey).

— 

How might cultural paAerns influence how
groups communicate?
—  We might use these cultural patterns to reduce uncertainty
about specific cultural groups.

—  Uncertainty Reduction Theory: We try to reduce uncertainty
when we communicate with strangers for the following:

—  *prediction (to predict stranger’s behaviors)
—  *explanation (to be able to explain stranger’s behaviors – to ask
why they behave the way they do)

—  *anxiety (tenseness about what might happen; when we
communicate with others from different cultures, we have a
level of UNC and anxiety) (wanting to know info, to be in
control, fear negative evaluations by other group or awkward
communication encounters).

How might cultural paAerns influence how
groups communicate?
— EX of misunderstanding:

How might cultural paAerns influence how
groups communicate?
— Which cultural patterns from this unit do you see
operating in the previous slide (table)?

— How much can we rely on cultural patterns to guide
explanations for behaviors? Are these guaranteed
predictors?

—  If not, how should we use cultural patterns?

How might cultural paAerns influence how
groups communicate?
—  Critical Incident Examples
—  Critical Incident #1: The Job Interview
— 
—  John is an Irish American exchange student from San Jose State University who is studying at a Japanese university as a part of a one-year-

abroad program. It has been two months into the school year and John feels settled into the routine life of a college student and feels ready
to start a part-time job teaching English for extra money. For the past few weeks, he has been looking at various English-language
newspapers and responding to job advertisements. After going to several interviews, however, John has experienced a growing sense of
frustration with his prospective employers. Interview after interview, John would leave the building feeling confident that he would get the
job. The interviewers would not only seem extremely responsive but would also comment on his excellent qualifications. Each interview
would end with something to the effect of: “John we are very impressed by your qualifications we will think about it and let you know.”

—  Infallibly, however, John would never hear from them. After waiting a couple of weeks, he would try calling the companies to see if any
progress was made. Each time he would hear a rather baffled answer and would be told that they would have to think about it some more
and call him back. Again he would wait to no avail. Angry and frustrated, John mentioned this to two American friends (Mary and Frank) he
had met at the university. Their conversation went as follows:

— 
—  John: I can’t believe it’s been 3 weeks since I started interviewing and all of the places are “still thinking”! What’s taking them so long??
— 
—  Mary: You know what? If I were you I’d give up and try looking some more . . .
— 
—  John: But there’s still the possibility that I’ll get one of the jobs I interviewed for . . . right?
— 
—  Frank: Not necessarily . . . The Japanese can tell you one thing and mean another. I have been through 20 different interviews myself

and the only time they actually called me back was when I got the job. Even though all the other places told he how qualified I was during
the interviews, none of them had the decency to keep their promise of notifying me later.

— 
—  Mary: That’s the same for me! When I got my job they called me back almost immediately after the interview. The other places didn’t

even bother writing or calling me. It’s so frustrating, because if they would tell us “Yes” or “No,” at least we would know whether we should
keep looking some more or not!

— 
—  John: Yeah! Personally, I think it’s really rude that they don’t call us back after saying that they would!
— 
—  Why are these employers not calling John back? Provide an interpretation/explanation. What should John do?

How might cultural paAerns influence how
groups communicate?
—  Critical Incident #1: The Job Interview
—  Why are these employers not calling John back? Provide an interpretation/

explanation. What should John do?

—  Employers were baffled by John’s phone call and told him that they would have to think
about it some more.

—  The employers did not want to embarrass John and make him lose face. They tried to
relay this message through nonverbal cues such as delaying the answer and simply not
replying. The Japanese avoid saying “No” outright in order to save the party’s face and to
preserve interpersonal harmony. Direct rejection is humiliating for Japanese; people
employ tactics such as using silence or making tangential responses instead of a direct
“No.”

—  The collective is revered over the individual. People must constantly strive at
maintaining good interpersonal relationships. Avoiding unpleasantness is a part of
social responsibility. Thus, one must read between the lines here. The use of indirect
forms necessitates a more active role on the part of the listener.

—  Cultural Patterns at Work: Individualism-Collectivism, Low-High Context,
Power Distance, Face

How might cultural paAerns influence how
groups communicate?
—  Critical Incident #2: Get To The Point

— 
—  James, an American business executive in San Jose, CA, hosted two suppliers from Brazil. He was pleased

with the initial courtesies. The executives from Brazil brought gifts and were very kind.
—  The next day, there was a meeting between James and his staff and the executives from Brazil, Mr. Lorenzo

and Mr. Ota. The parties in attendance were introduced to each other. Coffee and pastries were served and Mr.
Lorenzo and Mr. Ota asked about the San Jose area, if any of the staff had been to Brazil, and what their hobbies
were. As time passed and Mr. Lorenzo and Mr. Ota showed no sign of talking business, James started to worry. He
gently suggested that he had many things to discuss with them. Mr. Lorenzo said there was no rush to get into the
drudgery of business talk and that they needed to understand each other and that business would take care of itself.

—  After about 40 minutes, James started looking at his wristwatch and brought up the business issues to be
discussed. Mr. Lorenzo and Mr. Ota steered him away from business talk and led him into discussing golf. One of
them proposed that they should go to a golf course after lunch because it was a pleasant, sunny day. James was quite
confused about his visitors’ lack of desire to discuss business and was not certain that he would be able to get a
contract signed in the next 24 hours.

— 
—  What is going on in this incident? What should James do?

How might cultural paAerns influence how
groups communicate?
—  Critical Incident #2: Get To The Point

—  What is going on in this incident? What should James do?

—  Negotiation involves both socializing, rapport building, information exchange, persuasion, and arriving at an
agreement. Developing trust through socializing and getting to know each other is important for collectivist cultures
in business contexts. Business cannot be done without knowing a person’s needs and preferences and establishing
trust. Collectivisits deal with only the ones they know and trust; they bring people into their primary network of
family, relations, and friends. Thus, there is a tendency to be relational (valuing a relationship even when it is
unprofitable to do so) rather than rational (choosing relts that serve one’s immediate interests). Signs of impatience
lead to apprehension

— 
—  Individualist cultures spend little time on socializing and rapport building and prefer information sharing. The main

thrust is on persuasion (convincing the other party of one’s point of view).

—  Cultural Patterns at Work: Individualism-Collectivism, Low-High Context, Uncertainty Avoidance

How might cultural paAerns influence how
groups communicate?
—  Critical Incident #2: Get To The Point

—  What is going on in this incident? What should James do?
—  Negotiation involves both socializing, rapport building, information exchange, persuasion, and arriving at an
agreement. Developing trust through socializing and getting to know each other is important for collectivist cultures
in business contexts. Business cannot be done without knowing a person’s needs and preferences and establishing
trust. Collectivisits deal with only the ones they know and trust; they bring people into their primary network of
family, relations, and friends. Thus, there is a tendency to be relational (valuing a relationship even when it is
unprofitable to do so) rather than rational (choosing relts that serve one’s immediate interests). Signs of impatience
lead to apprehension
— 
—  Individualist cultures spend little time on socializing and rapport building and prefer information sharing. The main
thrust is on persuasion (convincing the other party of one’s point of view).

—  Cultural Patterns at Work: Individualism-Collectivism, Low-High Context, Uncertainty Avoidance

How might cultural paAerns influence how
groups communicate?
—  Relationship Between World View, Culture, & Communication (Martin & Nakayama, Chapters 2, 3)
— 
—  A) Culture influences communication (WV directly impacts the way the cultural group

communicates.)
— 
—  As reflected in the Hofstede reading, Chen reading, Daniel & Smitherman reading, & Katriel reading
— 
— 
— 
—  B) Communication influences culture (The way a cultural group communicates helps to build and

sustain that cultural group and its world view.)

— 
—  As reflected in the Katriel & Philipsen reading

— 
— 
—  C) Both a cycle of points A and B
—