Chapter 2: Intercultural Dimensions
| Site: | elearning.feaa.uaic.ro |
| Course: | Confident Open Modules |
| Book: | Chapter 2: Intercultural Dimensions |
| Printed by: | Guest user |
| Date: | Thursday, 21 November 2024, 5:20 PM |
1. Introduction to Intercultural Dimension
Experience of an international Student in Bremen, Germany
Natalia from Brazil had an important exam at the university in the morning. However, because there had been an accident with the bus on the way to the university, she was 40 minutes late. The exam was scheduled for 90 minutes, and after that time, the lecturer wanted her to hand in the exam. However, since Natalia could not use the full time, she was not yet finished with the exam. She explained the situation to the lecturer and asked him to let her write longer so that she could use the 90 minutes allotted because she was not to blame for her lateness. She assumed that it was not a problem because, after all, her tardiness was neither intentional nor controllable. She expected the lecturer to put himself in her situation and show understanding, which would be natural in Brazil. Natalia said that in such a case, the lecturer in Brazil would show understanding in every way. Even if he did not have the time, he would ask another lecturer to supervise so that the student's grade would not suffer and she could take advantage of the time she was entitled to. However, the lecturer's response was very harsh. He insisted that she had to turn in, just like everyone else, and he could not make an exception. She should have just taken a bus earlier to make sure she arrived on time, now she had to follow the rules and hand in the exam in the given time. Natalia took this incident very personally and was offended that the lecturer showed so little understanding and goodwill.
This example is about a culture-specific rule orientation. Some cultures, like Germany, tend to orient themselves rather strongly to universally valid and culturally generally accepted rules or to submit to them when evaluating and deciding situations. Other cultures, on the other hand, tend to make decisions based on situations and rather, emphasis on the relational level between people and the situation at hand. Since there is a rather relaxed and friendly atmosphere between students and lecturers in Brazil and a great deal of value is placed on interpersonal relationships in particular, Natalia's disappointment was understandable. After all, in her culture, personal relationships and a subjective view of the respective situation take precedence over general norms.
Source of Information (Berninghausen 2012)
2. What are Cultural Dimensions?
Cultural dimensions...
...are helpful tools to understand your own behavior and that of others around you,
...enable you to look at issues from other perspectives and to try new ways of thinking.
Knowledge of these different values and role expectations can help to prevent the formation of unreflected "prejudices" in encounters with foreign people. Only if we know how and especially why people react and communicate in this or any other specific way, it will be possible to understand the situation in a holistic way and react to it in an appropriate way.
In fact, cultural values change over time. In view of the mixing of cultures in the urban centers of the Western world, cultural imprints are becoming increasingly blurred. Also, each person is always a mesh of very different cultural affiliations. It is therefore important to keep in mind that these are only constructs which, even if they have a kernel of truth, can only ever express a tendency and never represent reality.
As the studies of Hofstede, Trompenaars and the Globe Study had been carried out already several years ago and
cultures have changed rapidly in recent years, it is not important to force predetermined opinions on specific cultures. The country-specific results have been widely disputed and will not be debated here any further.
But to a certain extent, the dimensions can be useful to explain your own behavior or interpret the behavior of others. Cultural dimensions are a tool to create awareness of possible differences in the value scales, being aware of one's own values and biases. There never is one right answer to a problem. There are always multiple ways to perceive facts, which are all intrinsically logical and correct.
(Major source of information: Berninghausen and Hecht-EL Minshawi, 2009)
3. Examples of Cultural Dimensions
Which cultural dimensions have a particularly strong influence on intercultural encounters?
Based on years of experience with international and German students as well as with people from companies and non-profit organizations in intercultural trainings, we present the following cultural dimensions:
Hofstede's cultural dimensions form the basis of the dimensions selected here:
- Power Distance, based on Hofstede's "Power Distance."
- Individualism, based on Hofstede's "Individualism vs. Collectivism".
- Uncertainty avoidance, based on Hofstede's "Uncertainty avoidance."
- Achievement orientation, a form of Hofstede's "masculinity" developed further by the GLOBE study.
- Rule orientation, based on Trompenaars' "universalism vs. particularism."
- Emotionality, based on Trompenaar's "Affective vs. Neutral".
- Time Structuring, based on Hall's "Monochronic vs. Polychronic Understanding of Time."
- Context Orientation, based on Hall's "Low Context vs. High Context" and Trompenaar's "Specific vs. Diffuse."
The cultural dimension uncertainty avoidance moves between the two extreme poles: risk-taking vs. safety-loving.
Risk-takers jump into uncharted waters even without precise prior information. Trying things out leads to exploring new things, according to the motto "No risk, no fun!".
"Trust is good, control is better". In this sense, safety-loving individuals first inform themselves about the new environment and require many details in advance before jumping into unfamiliar waters. (See also: Hofstede, 2001)
Power Distance
The cultural dimension of power distance moves between the two extremes: hierarchical vs. egalitarian.
Individuals with a strong hierarchical understanding expect higher-ups to act for the good of the workforce, a group, or a project team, to give clear instructions, and to take responsibility. They rarely question the decisions of more senior or senior people and usually carry out tasks without contradiction. Leaders with a strong sense of hierarchy hardly give their employees any freedom to make decisions or have a say, but they also tend to take full responsibility themselves, clearly assign tasks, and precisely define the scope of action as well as the role of employees or students.
People with a strong egalitarian understanding prefer a balanced distribution of power as well as mutual openness and exchange among themselves. Decisions are discussed within the team, different views and opinions are expressed and included. A top-down and bottom-up flow of information is desired. People who are used to egalitarian conditions tend to act independently and are willing to take responsibility. Leaders who advocate flat hierarchies involve employees in decision-making processes, but also expect a high degree of autonomy and a sense of responsibility. (See also: Hofstede, 2001)
Individualism
The cultural dimension individualism moves between the two extreme poles: individualistic vs. collectivistic.
Individualistic individuals focus on self-actualization and the assertion of their own needs and desires, in line with the motto "Everyone is the architect of his own happiness. Even when pressure is exerted by a group, individualistic individuals tend to assert their own views.
Individuals who are strongly collectivistic tend to follow the motto "One for all and all for one." The burden is shared among many shoulders, success is achieved and savored together; failures tend to be borne by everyone involved. However, community orientation, i.e. collectivism, and a strong hierarchical power distance are not mutually exclusive. In this case, obedience and loyalty with the group or responsible leadership of the community are paramount. The needs of the group to which one feels connected in a particular situation, e.g., teammates, family members, etc., take precedence over individual desires. (See also: Hofstede, 2001).
Achievement Orientation
The cultural dimension of achievement orientation moves between the two extremes: achievement-oriented vs. socially-oriented.
Achievement-oriented individuals are characterized by ambition, a need for a career, and great ambition. Individual performance is in the foreground, in line with the motto "No pain, no gain" or "Live to work." Very good grades, the amount of salary, professional advancement, their position and career opportunities are very important to performance-oriented individuals.
People who are socially oriented attach particular importance to maintaining good relationships with employees, colleagues or fellow students and to feeling comfortable in their workplace or study environment. The focus is on social responsibility and a sense of community. This attitude can be summed up in the following mottos: "If everyone takes care of each other, everyone is taken care of" or "Work to live." (See also: House, 2004)
Time Structuring
The cultural dimension of time structuring moves between the two extremes: monochronic vs. polychronic.
Individuals with a linear, monochronic understanding of time conceive of time as a sequence of distinct events. Since modern times, a primarily linear understanding of time has existed in Western and Northern Europe, i.e., time intervals that lie on a timeline should be filled; time should be used and appropriated in the form of work. According to the linear, monochronic structuring of time, good planning and organization are required to use time wisely, true to the motto "time is money." Therefore, an attempt is made to keep deadlines and obligations exactly. The structured processing of tasks in a certain order is in the foreground, not the relationship with fellow human beings, fellow students or colleagues. Punctuality is an important requirement. Information is preferably exchanged via data and facts. Adherence to rules and regulations is important to individuals with a linear, monochronic understanding of time. They appreciate it when a project runs according to the previously worked out plan.
Individuals with a polychronic understanding of time perceive time as a fuzzily delineated space. By nature, several things can happen simultaneously in the same time spectrum. Persons with a polychronic time structuring tend to complete several tasks at the same time; plans are seen by them as postponable, missed opportunities can be made up for later. Interruptions are the rule, structured work tends to be the exception. The achievement of goals and the quality of work depend more on the positive shaping of relationships than on adherence to fixed schedules. Individuals with polychronic understandings of time show strong interest in current relationships in the here and now.(See also: Hall, 1981)
Emotionality
The cultural dimension emotionality moves between the two extremes: emotional vs. neutral.
Individuals with an emotional expression tend to openly display their feelings according to a particular occasion in public, in university life and in a professional context, to give free rein to their emotions. This may be reflected in extroverted behavior (loudness, pronounced body language, facial expressions, gestures). The expression of spontaneous feelings in public is also appreciated by others rather than openness.
In contrast, neutral people try to control or hide emerging feelings in public and at work. With others, they value self-control and restraint. During a discussion, they prefer to argue on the factual level. (See also: Trompenaars, 1993)
Rule Orientation
The cultural dimension rule orientation moves between the two extreme poles: rule-oriented vs. situation-dependent.
Individuals with a rule-oriented characteristic trust that laws, legal rules, and regulations will make coexistence as fair as possible for everyone. Laws and standards should apply to everyone, regardless of status and relationship. Exceptions are undesirable because they could weaken generally applicable rules or even the legal system.
Individuals with a situation-dependent characteristic reject the insistence on rules or strict adherence to laws or regulations. They tend to trust their own judgment. Loyalty to one another (family, friends, colleagues) enjoys a higher priority than sets of rules or legal regulations. The accompanying circumstances, the context, should be taken into account when assessing a situation, regardless of rules, regulations or laws. People who are situationally oriented do not separate as strongly between the factual and the personal. (See also: Trompenaars, 1993)
Context Orientation
The cultural dimension context orientation moves between the two extremes: fact-oriented and direct vs. relationship-oriented and indirect.
For individuals who are fact-oriented and direct, the focus is on a direct communication style and the matter at hand. Instructions, problems, and proposed solutions are expressed explicitly and clearly. Communication is primarily for the exchange of information. The motto here is: "Get to the point!". Conflict is seen as useful if it moves the people involved forward. A fact-oriented relationship is primarily there to settle the factual and business content. A personal relationship may or may not develop.
Individuals with a relationship-oriented and indirect communication style emphasize the inclusion of the environment of a particular situation. Unpleasant messages tend to be addressed in an implicit and coded manner. Direct statements are usually avoided. Some messages can only be decoded if the "code" is known.
In a relationship-oriented relationship, the whole person is involved in a business relationship and personal contact is established. In many countries, such a broad-based relationship is not only preferred, but is a condition for the success of a business deal. One starts from the personal.
(See also: Hall, 1981)
4. Reconciling Cultural Differences
All of the mentioned cultural dimensions lie between two poles of which each represents an extreme attitude.
To reconcile cultural differences, one can use the Square of values developed by Helwig and used for interpersonal communication by Friedemann Schulz von Thun.
The Square of values is based on the philosophical knowledge of Aristotle that "every virtue is to be appointed as the middle ground between two flawed extremes".
This insight can also be applied to the model of cultural dimensions:
Here, Schulz von Thun suggests a reflection of the differences as each party advocates a valuable principle and therefore represents part of the truth. Willingness and the ability to understand each other in an appreciative way are an indispensable prerequisite for reconciliation and intercultural competence.
Trompenaars too proposes a similar approach to solve intercultural conflicts. He proposes three steps: recognising cultural differences, respecting cultural differences and reconciling cultural differences.
In these video, Value Matrices are explained with the help of examples
5. Insights into Intercultural Dimensions
In this video, students in Bremen, Germany talk about their intercultural experiences and insights.
6. Online Activity
7. Self Assessment
For this activity, please follow the link: Intercultural Personality Profile Scale
8. Individual Reflections
Homework - Individual Reflections
1. Position yourself in four cultural dimensions presented in the E-Learning module. Explain why.
Output: comment to this post or post a podcast or a short video
Answer here
Output: comment to this post or post a podcast or a short video
Answer here
3. Have you ever had difficulties to cope with different positions in behavior or values of other persons?Output: comment to this post or post a podcast or a short video
Answer here
4. Enter the Hofstede dimensions presentation site (available here)and select your home country. Follow the detailed descriptions and notice the specific aspects of your own culture. Be aware that you may not fully identify with the features of national culture (described based on average values). How do you position yourself in relation to this? What are the areas where you notice differences? How integrated in your own culture do you feel?
Output: comment to this post or post a podcast or a short video
Answer here
9. Additional Information & Literature
Literature
Berninghausen, J., „Management im interkulturellen Kontext“, in: Berninghausen, J., Kuenzer, V., Wirtschaft als Interkulturelle Herausforderung, IKO, Frankfurt 2006
Berninghausen, J., & Hecht-El Minshawi, B. (2009). Intercultural Competence - Managing cultural Diversity, Training Handbook, Intercultural Studies (Volume 7). Kellner.
Berninghausen, J., Ausseneinsichten, Interkulturelle Fallbeispiele von deutschen und internationalen Studierenden über das Auslandsjahr, Kellner Verlag, Bremen, 2012
Chhokar, J.S., Brodbeck, F., House, R. J., Culture and Leadership across the World, The GLOBE Book of In-Depth Studies of 25 Societies, Taylor & Francis Group, California, London, New Delhi 2008
Hall, E. T., Beyond Culture, New York 1981
Hofstede, G., Bond, M. H., The Confucius connection: From cultural roots to economic growth, Organisation Dynamics 16, 1988
Helwig, P. (1936). Charakterologie, Stuttgart, Klett Verlag
Hofstede, G., Culture’s consequences: International differences in work related values, Sage, London 1980
Hofstede, G., Lokales Denken, globales Handeln, Kulturen, Zusammenarbeit und Management, Verlag C. H. Beck, München 1997
Kulckhohn, F. R., Strodtbeck, F. L., Variations in value orientation, Harper Collins, New York 1961
Parson T., Shils, E.A., Towards a General Theory of Action, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass. 1951,
Schulz von Thun Schulz von Thun, F., „Psychologische Vorgänge in der zwischenmenschlichen Kommunikation“, in: Fittkau, B., u. a., Kommunizieren, lernen und umlernen, Trainingskonzeptionen und Erfahrungen, Aachen 1989
Schulz von Thun, F., Miteinander reden: 1, Stile, Werte und Persönlichkeitsentwicklung, Reinbek bei Hamburg 1981
Schulz von Thun, F., Miteinander reden: 2, Stile, Werte und Persönlichkeitsentwicklung, Reinbek bei Hamburg 2006
Schulz von Thun, F. (1989). Psychologische Vorgänge in der zwischenmenschlichen Kommunikation. Fittkau, B., u. a., Kommunizieren, lernen und umlernen, Trainingskonzeptionen und Erfahrungen
Trompenaars, F., Handbuch Globales Management, Wie man kulturelle Unterschiede im Geschäftsleben versteht, ECON- Verlag, Wien, Düsseldorf 1993
Trompenaars, F., Wooliams, P., Business , Der Weg zum Interkulturellen Management Weltweit, Hamburg 2004