COM 263: Intercultural Communications Lesson 3

Briefly discuss why it is important to be familiar with the differences in value orientations. In other words, how can this knowledge help you to become a more effective communicator in a cross-cultural context? Provide a few examples from your own life experience for illustration.

Think of the proverbs of your culture (e.g., “Time is money”). Select one of them. Explain what this proverb tells you about the values of your culture.

Discuss three (3) key differences between high-context and low-context cultures. Provide a specific example of each of these differences relative to your own life experiences.

Make a list of at least three (3) of your strongly held beliefs. What are those beliefs based on? List some facts, respected authorities, or other evidence that support them.

Define and describe three (3) differences in intercultural communication between individualistic and collectivistic cultures. Provide at least one real-world, original example from your own life experience of each type of culture for illustration.

Lesson 3 Dimensions of Culture
Instruction
View Glossary
People acquire knowledge of cultural patterns and values through interaction with others in their
cultural groups.
(opens in a new tab)https://unsplash.com/photos/_xzz_gdkH1U(opens in a new tab) by Ashes
Sitoula, Unsplash
Values, Beliefs, and Norms
Let’s start our discussion by taking a moment to look at the significance of values,
beliefs, and norms, which form the underpinning of the various dimensions of culture.
The first, and perhaps most crucial, elements of culture we will discuss are its values
and beliefs. Values are a culture’s standard for discerning what is good and just in
society. Values are deeply embedded and critical for transmitting and teaching a
culture’s beliefs. Beliefs are the tenets or convictions that people hold to be true.
Individuals in a society have specific beliefs, but they also share collective values. To
illustrate the difference, Americans commonly believe in the American Dream—that
anyone who works hard enough will be successful and wealthy. Underlying this belief is
the American value that wealth is good and important.
Values help shape a society by suggesting what is good and bad, beautiful and ugly,
sought or avoided. Consider the value that the United States places upon youth.
Children represent innocence and purity, while a youthful adult appearance signifies
beauty and vitality. Shaped by these values, individuals spend millions of dollars each
year on cosmetic products and surgeries to look young and beautiful.
Examples of beliefs are equal opportunity, freedom of speech, and work hard, play
hard. Examples of values are individual self-expression, education, and investing for the
future.
Our cultural identities are influenced by the values of our in-groups. At the same time, our
personal disposition plays a significant role in our understanding of who we are as human beings.
(opens in a new tab)https://unsplash.com/photos/-8ZESyFapTk(opens in a new tab) by Ashes
Sitoula, Unsplash
Living up to a culture’s values can be difficult. It’s easy to value good health, but it’s
hard to quit smoking. Marital monogamy is valued, but many spouses engage in
infidelity. Cultural diversity and equal opportunities for all people are valued in the
United States, yet the country’s highest political offices have been dominated by white
men.
Values often suggest how people should behave, but they don’t accurately reflect how
people do behave. Values portray an ideal culture; the standards society would like to
embrace and live up to. But ideal culture differs from real culture, the way society
actually is, based on what occurs and exists. In an ideal culture, there would be no
traffic accidents, murders, poverty, or racial tension. But in real culture, police officers,
lawmakers, educators, and social workers constantly strive to prevent or repair those
accidents, crimes, and injustices.
One way societies strive to put values into action is through rewards, sanctions, and
punishments. When people observe the norms of society and uphold its values, they
are often rewarded. A boy who helps an elderly woman board a bus may receive a
smile and a “thank you.” A business manager who raises profit margins may receive a
quarterly bonus. People sanction certain behaviors by giving their support, approval,
or permission, or by instilling formal actions of disapproval and nonsupport. Sanctions
are a form of social control, a way to encourage conformity to cultural norms.
Sometimes people conform to norms in anticipation or expectation of positive
sanctions: good grades, for instance, may mean praise from parents and teachers and
even employers. From a criminal justice perspective, properly used social control is also
inexpensive crime control. Utilizing social control approaches pushes most people to
conform to societal rules, regardless of whether authority figures (such as law
enforcement) are present.
When people go against a society’s values, they are punished. A boy who shoves an
elderly woman aside to board the bus first may receive frowns or even a scolding from
other passengers. A business manager who drives away customers will likely be fired.
Breaking norms and rejecting values can lead to cultural sanctions such as earning a
negative label—lazy, no-good bum—or to legal sanctions, such as traffic tickets, fines,
or imprisonment.
Values are not static; they vary across time and between groups as people evaluate,
debate, and change collective societal beliefs. Values also vary from culture to culture.
For example, cultures differ in their values about what kinds of physical closeness are
appropriate in public. It’s rare to see two male friends or coworkers holding hands in
the United States, where that behavior often symbolizes romantic feelings. But in many
nations, masculine physical intimacy is considered natural in public. This difference in
cultural values came to light when people reacted to photos of former president George
W. Bush holding hands with the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia in 2005. A simple
gesture, such as hand-holding, carries great symbolic differences across cultures.
Sanctions are often issued when people violate a culture’s code, including written and unwritten
rules.
(opens in a new tab)https://www.rawpixel.com/image/385456/free-photo-image-law-courtlawyer(opens in a new tab) by https://www.rawpixel.com/image/385456/free-photo-image-lawcourt-lawyer
Norms
So far, the examples in this lesson have often described how people are expected to
behave in certain situations—for example, when boarding a bus. These examples
describe the visible and invisible rules of conduct through which societies are
structured, or what sociologists call norms. Norms define how to behave in accordance
with what a society has defined as good, right, and important, and most members of
the society adhere to them.
Formal norms are established, written rules. They are behaviors worked out and
agreed upon in order to suit and serve the most people. Laws are formal norms, but so
are employee manuals, college entrance exam requirements, and “no running” signs at
swimming pools. Formal norms are the most specific and clearly stated of the various
types of norms, and they are the most strictly enforced. But even formal norms are
enforced to varying degrees and are reflected in cultural values.
For example, money is highly valued in the United States, so monetary crimes are
punished. It’s against the law to rob a bank, and banks go to great lengths to prevent
such crimes. People safeguard valuable possessions and install antitheft devices to
protect homes and cars. A less strictly enforced social norm is driving while intoxicated.
While it’s against the law to drive drunk, drinking is for the most part an acceptable
social behavior. And though there are laws to punish drunk driving, there are few
systems in place to prevent the crime. These examples show a range of enforcement in
formal norms.
Examples of formal norms include punishing robbery with prison time, no running signs
at swimming pools, and college entrance exam requirements.
There are plenty of formal norms, but the list of informal norms—casual behaviors
that are generally and widely conformed to—is longer. People learn informal norms
by observation, imitation, and general socialization. Some informal norms are
taught directly—“Kiss your Aunt Edna” or “Use your napkin”—while others are learned
by observation, including observations of the consequences when someone else violates
a norm. But although informal norms define personal interactions, they extend into
other systems as well. In the United States, there are informal norms regarding
behavior at fast food restaurants. Customers line up to order their food and leave when
they are done. They don’t sit down at a table with strangers, sing loudly as they
prepare their condiments, or nap in a booth. Most people don’t commit even benign
breaches of informal norms. Informal norms dictate appropriate behaviors without
the need of written rules.
Examples of informal norms including standing in line to check in for a flight, tipping at
a restaurant, and keeping to the right when passing someone on the sidewalk.
Watch this short Kahn Academy video to review norms, as well as to learn about the
specific norms of mores (mor-ays) and folkways.
Values
Values influence people’s views, people’s values, people’s humor, people’s hopes,
people’s loyalties, and people’s worries and fears. As communicators in an intercultural
context, we must become aware of differences in values. Values are powerful because
they dictate what we feel, think, and do. When we are building relationships with
people from different cultures, it is helpful to have an understanding of their values.
Moreover, when we are knowledgeable of our own values, and how they impact our
individual perceptions of the world, we are more likely to see how values can collide
and conflict if we are not sensitive to the assumptions we make on a daily basis.
Cultural Value Dimensions
As we can see from the previous discussion, people from different cultures have varying
values, and when these groups of people come together, they think and behave in ways
that may seem unpredictable or even erratic. If we can increase our awareness of why
people do the things they do, knowing people are only doing what they were trained to
do by their culture, we can reduce uncertainty. This enables us to let down our guard,
relax, and learn to appreciate the fascinating differences that make each culture, and
each individual, unique.
In a nutshell, values guide behavior, perceptions of what is right and wrong, feelings
about things, and even the ways time and money are spent. Not surprisingly, values
affect people’s perceptions of each other, as well as what is considered appropriate
behavior in a communication context.
A major concept in intercultural communication is that culture has a direct impact on
communication. Every culture has widely held assumptions about the nature of the
world, shared judgments about what it should be, and expectations about how people
should behave. People acquire knowledge of cultural patterns through interaction with
others in their cultural groups.
The term “dimensions of culture” refers to cultural patterns like individualism and
collectivism. Dimensions of culture help us understand how a person perceives
themselves relative to others. They are instrumental to the study of intercultural
communication because they provide an opportunity for you to compare cultures.
Moreover, they provide insight into a person’s goals and motivations based on their
culture of origin.
Cultural value dimensions help us to understand culture and to be able to make sense
of culture. These dimensions provide us with a perspective of culture for ourselves as
well as a perspective of how others perceive their culture. All cultures experience these
dimensions of difference in many ways, and different cultures solve these differences in
many ways. Becoming aware of these concepts helps us figure out the experiences we
have in relation to our culture. It helps to make that experience less ambiguous and
threatening. Cultural value dimensions provide clarity and a starting place for cultural
awareness. They are often seen as intangible and under the waterline, but once you
adapt to the cultural dimensions, you become more comfortable and do not see the
cultural difference.
As we review the various dimensions of culture, remember that cultures are always
changing. Most models provide a scale, or a continuum, with contrasting values on each
side (e.g., individualism and collectivism). It is important to note that these labels are
not polar opposites. A culture cannot be completely individualistic or collectivistic. While
one characteristic is more prominent than the other in every culture, all cultures
represent a combination of both concepts.
Mexican culture has a rich heritage and colorful pride in the perseverance of tradition.
(opens in a new tab)https://unsplash.com/photos/844IhAz4Xfk(opens in a new tab) by Joseph
Grazone, Unsplash
Hofstede’s Dimensions of Culture
The work of Geert Hofstede (2010), which he completed while employed at IBM in the
late 1960s to early 1970s, still stands as one of the most comprehensive studies of
cultural values on leadership in the workplace. From his data collected from over 30
countries and 100,000 individuals, Hofstede created a model of value dimensions that
highlights the similarities and differences between national cultures.
According to Hofstede, the five main dimensions are identity, power, gender,
uncertainty, and time. You can think about cultural value dimensions on a scale or a
continuum, where one aspect of the value lies on one side of the scale and the other
extreme lies at the other end of the scale. As with the dialectics of culture we discussed
in Lesson 2, we find certain elements of all characteristics of culture in every culture.
While Hofstede identifies five dimensions with “end points” reflecting an extreme, no
culture can be defined as exclusively one or the other.
Value Dimensions
One Extreme
Identity
Group
Indiv
Power
Egalitarian
Hiera
Gender
Feminine
Masc
Uncertainty
Ambiguity
Struc
Time
Relationship
Most western nations have high levels of individualism (dark purple) whereas other nations tend
toward lower levels (light purple) indicating more collectivistic societies.
(opens in a new tab)https://geerthofstede.com/culture-geert-hofstede-gert-jan-hofstede/6dmodel-of-national-culture/(opens in a new tab) by Geert Hofstede
1. Identity
Individualism vs. Collectivism
The value dimension of identity refers to the attention of groups or individuals toward
group needs versus individual needs, as well as toward individual achievement or
interpersonal relationships. Individualism vs. collectivism anchor opposite ends of a
continuum that describes how people define themselves and their relationships with
others. Countries that score higher on the individualism measure are considered by
definition less collectivistic than countries that score lower.
The image shown above depicts a geospatial data visualization of the varying levels of
individualism and collectivism throughout the world, based on Hofstede’s analysis.
In more highly individualistic societies, the interests of individuals receive more
emphasis than those of the group (e.g., the family, the company, etc.). The “Dimension
of Identity” diagram below shows the spectrum from Individual needs (on the far left)
to Group needs (on the far right). The diagram also shows the spectrum from Personal
identity (far left) to Group identity (far right).
Task
“Dimension of Identity” Diagram
Creative Commons https://2012books.lardbucket.org/books/a-primer-oncommunication-studies/s08-03-intercultural-communication.html(opens in a new tab) by
2012books is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0(opens in a new tab).
Individualistic societies put more value on self-striving and personal accomplishment,
while more collectivistic societies put more emphasis on the importance of
relationships and loyalty. People are defined more by what they do in individualistic
societies, while in collectivistic societies, they are defined more by what they are—i.e.
their membership in particular groups. Communication is more direct in individualistic
societies but more indirect in collectivistic societies. The US ranks very high in
individualism and South Korea ranks quite low. Japan falls close to the middle.
Hofstede argued that whether a culture is individualistic or collectivistic can have a
large effect on both organizations and people. For example, in many Latino cultures,
the concept of family, la familia, is critical to their cultural history and social systems.
La familia is the most important social unit and includes extended family members.
Decision making, conflict resolution, and negotiation are based on group needs rather
than individual preferences; through paying attention to group and collective needs,
harmony and relationships are intact. Alternatively, in individualistic cultures, the need
of the individual comes first. US culture teaches this to children at a young age. The
following is an example that illustrates the differences between individualist and
collectivist cultures:
Mary takes her eight-year-old, Johnny, to the store to buy ice-cream. She asks him to
choose what ice cream flavor he would like. Over time he learns to tell his mother about
his personal likes and dislikes. Every time his mother responds to his decisions with
encouragement. Over time he learns that he can and should be able to express himself.
By encouraging her child to make decisions and choices on his own, Mary raises a child
that considers his personal needs and wants. If Johnny was in a group that operated
more collectively, he might become quite upset when told that the whole group must
agree to a specific ice cream flavor, that is, that his personal choice does not matter in
the group decision.
2. Power
High Power Distance vs. Low Power Distance
How comfortable are you with critiquing your boss’s decisions? If you are from a low
power distance culture, your answer might be “no problem.” In low power distance
cultures, according to Hofstede (2009), people relate to one another more as equals
and less as a reflection of dominant/subordinate roles, regardless of their actual formal
roles as employee and manager, for example.
The image shown below depicts a geospatial data visualization of the varying levels of
high power distance and low power distance throughout the world, based on Hofstede’s
analysis.
The Middle East, most parts of Northern and Eastern Asia, as well as many African and LatinAmerican countries have high power distance (dark green) whereas Anglo-Saxon nations tend
toward lower power distance (light green).
(opens in a new tab)https://geerthofstede.com/culture-geert-hofstede-gert-jan-hofstede/6dmodel-of-national-culture/(opens in a new tab) by Geert Hofstede
In a high-power distance culture, you would probably be much less likely to challenge
the decision, to provide an alternative, or to give input. If you are working with
someone from a high-power distance culture, you may need to take extra care to elicit
feedback and involve them in the discussion because their cultural framework may
preclude their participation. They may have learned that less powerful people must
accept decisions without comment, even if they have a concern or know there is a
significant problem. Unless you are sensitive to cultural orientation and power distance,
you may lose valuable information.
Power distance is a measure of the degree to which less powerful members of society
expect and accept an unequal distribution of power. There is a certain degree of
inequality in all societies; however, there is relatively more equality in some societies
than in others. Countries vary along a continuum from countries where power distance
is very low to countries where power distance is very high. Measured on a scale of 1100, for instance, Denmark scores very low and Mexico scores quite high. The US falls
somewhere in between.
Countries with lower PDI values tend to be more egalitarian. For instance, there is more
equality between parents and children, with parents more likely to accept it if children
argue with them, or “talk back” to use a common expression. In the work place, bosses
are more likely to ask employees for input, and, in fact, subordinates expect to be
consulted. On the other hand, in countries with high power distance, parents expect
children to obey without questioning. People of higher status may expect conspicuous
displays of respect from subordinates. In the workplace, superiors and subordinates are
not likely to see each other as equals, and it is assumed that bosses will make decisions
without consulting employees. In general, status is more important in high power
distance countries.
Hofstede found that low-power-distance cultures emphasized equality and minimized
power and status. In an organizational environment, power dimension can represent a
culture’s tendencies toward authority on one end of the spectrum, and one’s orientation
toward laissez-faire leadership on the other end. The “Power Value Dimensions”
diagram below shows this spectrum from Laissez-Faire (on the far left) to Authoritarian
leadership (on the far right). The diagram also shows the spectrum from Inequality (far
left) to an Egalitarian power distribution (far right).
“Power Value Dimensions” Diagram
Creative Commons https://2012books.lardbucket.org/books/a-primer-oncommunication-studies/s08-03-intercultural-communication.html(opens in a new tab) by
2012books is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0(opens in a new tab).
Power distance is evident not only through job or position titles, gender, or age; you
can see examples of power distance all around you through nonverbal behavior.
However, you have to be mindful of it and take notice. You might think in terms of eye
contact, the selective use of (mostly positive) facial expressions, the care you take
when handing items to people of importance, and the approach you take with people at
the top of the social or organizational hierarchy. The United States is representative of
a small power distance culture. For example, most Americans don’t like being called by
a formal title. If you address Bob Smith as Mr. Smith, he will likely respond and say you
do not need to use the formal title of mister.
Check out this short two-minute video on power distance:
3. Gender
Femininity vs. Masculinity
There was a time when many cultures and religions valued a female figurehead;
however, with the rise of Western cultures we have observed a shift toward a masculine
ideal. Each dimension carries with it a set of cultural expectations and norms for gender
behavior and gender roles across life, including in business.
The image shown below depicts a geospatial data visualization of the varying levels of
masculinity and femininity traits throughout the world, based on Hofstede’s analysis.
Eastern Asia, Central Europe, and Anglo-Saxons countries are predominately masculine (dark
red) whereas Northern Europe and many parts of Africa tend toward feminine attributes (light
red).
(opens in a new tab)https://geerthofstede.com/culture-geert-hofstede-gert-jan-hofstede/6dmodel-of-national-culture/(opens in a new tab) by Geert Hofstede
Hofstede (2009) describes the masculine/feminine dichotomy not in terms of whether
men or women hold the power in a given culture, but rather the extent to which that
culture values certain traits that may be considered masculine or feminine. In this
context, being on the assertive side of the spectrum is considered masculine, whereas
being modest falls on the opposite side of the spectrum, as modesty and caring are
considered feminine traits.
The “Gender Dimensions” diagram below shows this spectrum from modest (on the far
left) to assertive characteristics (on the far right). The diagram also shows the
spectrum from valuing Cooperation (far left) versus Competition (far right).
“Gender Dimensions” Diagram
Creative Commons https://2012books.lardbucket.org/books/a-primer-oncommunication-studies/s08-03-intercultural-communication.html(opens in a new tab) by
2012books is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0(opens in a new tab).
Societies that score higher on the masculinity scale tend to value ambition, control,
competition, assertiveness, achievement, and material success. Countries that score
lower in masculinity tend to embrace values more widely thought of as feminine values,
e.g., nurture, care, sharing, quality of life, interpersonal relationships, modesty, and
greater concern for the disadvantaged of society. Societies high in masculinity are also
more likely to have strong opinions about what constitutes men’s work vs. women’s
work while societies low in masculinity permit much greater overlapping in the social
roles of men and women.
We can observe this difference in where people gather, how they interact, and how they
dress. We can see it during business negotiations, where it may make an important
difference in the success of the organizations involved. Cultural expectations precede
the interaction, so someone who doesn’t match those expectations may experience
tension. Business in the United States has a masculine orientation—assertiveness and
competition are highly valued. In other countries, such as Sweden, business values are
more attuned to modesty (lack of self-promotion) and taking care of society’s weaker
members. This range of difference is one aspect of intercultural communication that
requires significant attention when the communicator enters a new environment.
In essence, the masculinity-femininity dimension focuses on the extent to which a
culture stresses achievement or nurturance. Masculinity is seen as a trait that values
ambition, wealth, and clear gender roles; on the other hand, femininity is seen as a
trait that emphasizes caring and nurturing behaviors, sexuality equality, environmental
consciousness, and more flexible gender roles.
In most cultures, people who deviate from the prescribed sex role expectations are
viewed negatively. Because of their emphasis on role differentiation, collectivist cultures
tend to be more traditional and less open to change. If one violates the group’s
expectations for a particular role, the individual is likely to disrupt the harmony of the
group. This must be avoided at all costs. In this regard, collectivistic cultures are more
conformist than individualistic cultures.
The following table from Hofstede’s 2001 book, “Culture’s Consequences: Comparing
Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations across Nations” summarizes the traits
of masculine and feminine cultures.
Traits of Masculine and Feminine
Norms
High Masculine
Low Masculine
(Feminine)
Ego oriented
Relationship
Politics
and
Economics
Religion
Work
Family and
School
Money and things are
important
Quality of life and people
are important
Work high priority
Work in order to live
Economic growth high
priority
Environment protection
high priority
Conflict solved through
force
Conflict solved through
negotiation
Most important in life
Less important in life
Only men can be priests
Both men and women can
be priests
Larger gender wage gap
Smaller gender wage gap
Fewer women in
management
More women in
management
Preference for higher pay
Preference for fewer
working hours
Traditional family structure
Flexible family structure
Girls cry, boys don’t; boys
fight, girls don’t
Both boys and girls cry;
neither fight
Competitive; failure is a
disaster
Failing a minor accident
The dimension of masculinity-femininity offers good insight into how culture impacts
communication and why understanding the impact of culture on communication is
instrumental to a person’s success as a communicator.
In his findings, Hofstede indicated that cultures that rate high in masculinity, such as
Japan, Austria, Venezuela, and Italy, revealed a high proportion of males in dominant
structures; in low masculine cultures, such as Denmark, Norway, Netherlands, and
Sweden, women were treated more equally in their social systems.
It is important that you recognize that these values are not associated with being male
or female. In other words, this does not mean that men cannot be part of feminine
cultures or that women do not orient themselves toward “masculine” cultural values.
Finally, like other value dimensions, gender dimensions can vary greatly within any
culture.
4. Uncertainty
High Uncertainty Avoidance vs. Low Uncertainty Avoidance
The dimension of uncertainty measures the extent to which people value predictability
and view uncertainty or the unknown as threatening. The image shown below depicts a
geospatial data visualization of the varying levels of uncertainty avoidance throughout
the world, based on Hofstede’s analysis.
Eastern Europe, the Middle East and Latin American countries have high levels of uncertainty
avoidance (dark brown) whereas Southeast Asia and Anglo-Saxon societies tend toward lower
levels (light brown) which indicate a high tolerance for ambiguity.
(opens in a new tab)https://geerthofstede.com/culture-geert-hofstede-gert-jan-hofstede/6dmodel-of-national-culture/(opens in a new tab) by Geert Hofstede
Hofstede (2001) described this dimension of uncertainty as a society’s tolerance for
ambiguity. People in societies that measure high in this dimension prefer to know
exactly what to expect in any given situation. They have a higher need for formalized
structures, procedures, or diplomacy and tend to minimize their uncertainty levels in
order to cope with the unknowns of their situations. They want firm rules and strict
codes of behavior. They dislike ambiguity. People from countries that score low on
uncertainty avoidance generally have a higher tolerance for ambiguity. They are happy
to have few rules and prefer less structured rather than more tightly structured
contexts. In educational settings, people from countries high in uncertainty avoidance
expect their teachers to be experts with all of the answers. People from countries low in
uncertainty avoidance don’t mind it when a teacher says, “I don’t know.”
The “Uncertainty Value Dimension” diagram below shows the spectrum from having a
high tolerance for Ambiguity (on the far left) to preferring Certainty (on the far right).
The diagram also shows the spectrum from valuing Flexibility (far left) versus Structure
(far right).
“Uncertainty Value Dimension” Diagram
Creative Commons https://2012books.lardbucket.org/books/a-primer-oncommunication-studies/s08-03-intercultural-communication.html(opens in a new tab) by
2012books is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0(opens in a new tab).
High-context cultures rely more on nonverbal communication than verbal communication. As
such, they “read” the environment or the context to obtain information that helps them
communicate more effectively.
(opens in a new tab)https://unsplash.com/photos/1xMFU_F-tJ4(opens in a new tab) by
Lightscape, Unsplash
In a nutshell, uncertainty avoidance refers to a culture’s disposition to uncertainty;
does it tolerate or perhaps even welcome uncertainty, or does it make every effort to
avoid it by establishing rules as well as a rigid structure? Each culture has a different
level of tolerance for ambiguity, and this tolerance (or lack of tolerance) has a direct
impact on communication. People in cultures with a high need to avoid uncertainty
experience stress and anxiety when conditions are uncertain or unpredictable. In this
case, communication is likely to be difficult because intercultural communication in and
of itself is filled with unknowns, especially when you are just getting to know a person.
Moreover, if a culture is disposed to discomfort with ambiguity, it is likely its members
will avoid interacting with people outside of their inner circle. In intercultural
communication, this means they may intentionally avoid interacting with new people
and perhaps even withdraw from social contact because it is too stressful.
Generally speaking, Eastern cultures demonstrate a preference for strong uncertainty
avoidance, and Western cultures exhibit characteristics of weak uncertainty avoidance.
Certainty-oriented individuals tend to be more group oriented; in this case, the group
offers not only security but a structured environment with clear standards for behavior.
Uncertainty-oriented cultures are more individualistic, inviting self-expression and
unique and innovative approaches to old problems.
5. High-Context and Low-Context Cultures
The dimension of uncertainty avoidance also speaks to a culture’s orientation toward
directness and honesty. Edward Hall (1981) popularized the terms “high-context”
culture and “low-context” culture to describe cultural differences between two different
types of societies. The ideas are often used to describe the ways in which cultures
communicate and to understand what cultural constructs underlie the communication.
A message can be constructed in two ways, verbal or nonverbal. As you are now aware,
communication occurs within a cultural context, and differences in beliefs, values, and
attitudes impact how a person or an object is perceived. Similarly, the extent to which
cultures depend on words (language) or nonverbal behavior to communicate
information varies from one culture to another.
High-context cultures are societies in which people often make inferences; they
leave things unsaid, knowing that the other person would understand what was implied
in the communication. People in these societies tend to rely on groups for support.
Low-context cultures are societies that are explicit and direct in their communication.
They generally are more comfortable relying on themselves, as individuals, and working
out solutions to problems. Like high-context cultures, relationships are important to
low-context societies; the difference is in the longevity of the relationships. Generally,
low-context societies have many relationships that are less intimate and close than
those of high-context cultures.
The difference between high-context and low-context communication is one of the most
important and fascinating concepts to understand as a communicator. Remember that
the dimensions of culture are not polar opposites. When discussing high-context and
low-context cultures, we refer to the type of communication style that predominantly
occurs within a particular culture. However, situations may occur in all cultures when
you see the opposite type of communication.
Low-context (individualistic) cultures have a very direct style of communication that
relies on the verbal code—or words—to convey a message. This style of communication
relies on the use of detailed, unambiguous language in large part because people do
not expect others to have a pre-existing knowledge about a topic. It is the sender’s
responsibility to be clear and concise in the delivery of a message. If misunderstanding
occurs, it is considered the sender’s fault, not the recipient’s. As a result, emphasis is
placed on the sender’s ability to “encode” a message in such a way that enables their
audience to understand his/her intended meaning.
In low-context cultures, honesty is valued; as such, one is encouraged to say what is
on their mind, and because “time is money”, “to get to the point” as quickly as possible.
In other words, one should “say what they mean and mean what they say.” If an
individual in a low-context culture is indirect or evasive, they are likely to be perceived
as untrustworthy as well as lacking in confidence.
High-context (collectivistic) cultures, on the other hand, value indirectness in the
delivery of a message. Because people in collectivistic cultures focus on the importance
of relationships and loyalty, one needs to take extreme caution in an effort to maintain
interpersonal harmony within the group. The communication style is largely influenced
by the interdependence of group members, meaning one must take into consideration
the thoughts and feelings of others. Words must be chosen carefully. For example, if
your boss asks you to complete a task by a certain date and you know, based on
previous experience, it will not be possible, you would not say “No” to your boss but
rather tell him/her, “It will be difficult.” In a homogenous culture, your boss would
understand your answer to mean it is unlikely you will meet the deadline but you are
willing to make an earnest effort.
The key point here is that language that is considered effective in one context is
considered ineffective in the other. In high-context cultures, it is important to be subtle
and to hint at a thought or an idea, but not to explicitly state it. High-context language
is relationship-oriented. The true meaning of one’s words depends on the context itself;
the meaning of words cannot be taken at face value.
Both types of cultural differentiations are illustrated in the table below.
Cultural
Context
Countries/Cultures
Descriptors
Spain
•
Mexico
Greece
High
Context
Middle East
•
•
•
China
Japan
Less verbally
explicit
communication
Implied
meanings
Long-term
relationships
Decisions and
activities focus
around
personal, faceto-face
relationships
Korean
Thailand
United States
•
Rule-oriented
How They Perceive
the Other Context
Low-context cultures
are…
•
•
•
relationshipavoidant
too
aggressive
focused too
much on
tasks and
goals
Germany
Great Britain
Low
Context
Australia
•
•
•
Knowledge is
public and
accessible
Short-term
relationships
Task-centered
High-context cultures
are…
•
•
•
are too
ambiguous
are quiet
and modest
ask a lot of
questions
You might think low-context communication is more efficient than high-context
communication, yet the opposite is actually true. How could that be? When you have to
use a lot of words to construct a detailed message, this requires a considerable amount
of effort. In spite of that effort, your audience, the recipient of your message, may not
receive the message you intended. High-context communication, however, is more
situational. As you develop relationships with other people, you get to know who they
are. You are sensitive to the environment, and you learn to read signs in the
environment to determine what to say, and how and when to say it. The language is
indirect, and the meaning is implicit.
To illustrate the differences in high- and low-context communication between the
United States and Latin America, take a look at this 5-minute video entitled “Why
Communication is Important in Teams,” which describes communication at a
construction site with a culturally diverse crew.
6. Time
Long-term Time Orientation vs. Short-Term Time Orientation
Hofstede also highlights the importance of time orientation as a critical element in
understanding cultural differences. Time speaks to how communities are oriented
toward space and time, including their tendencies toward traditions and the past, and
their orientation toward the future and the present. In many cultural systems, holding
on to traditions is important in current day-to-day operations and relationships. Some
societies will refer to traditions to preserve and maintain cultural norms, that is, to
protect what currently exists.
The image shown below depicts a geospatial data visualization based on Hofstede’s
analysis that shows the varying levels of preference throughout the world for long-term
orientation versus short-term orientation.
Southeast Asia, with its Confucianism and Buddhism roots, has high levels of long-term
orientation (dark blue) indicating a future-oriented perspective, rather than a short-term
orientation preferred in Africa and North America (orange, yellow and green).
(opens in a new tab)https://geerthofstede.com/culture-geert-hofstede-gert-jan-hofstede/6dmodel-of-national-culture/(opens in a new tab) by Geert Hofstede
Long-term orientation is associated with thrift, savings, persistence toward results,
and the willingness to subordinate oneself for a purpose. Short-term orientation is
associated with less saving, a preference for quick results, and unrestrained spending in
response to social pressure (often referred to in English as “keeping up with the
Joneses”).
Let’s look at this last dimension in more detail, speaking in layman’s terms.
Do you want your reward right now, or can you dedicate yourself to a long-term goal?
You may work in a culture that values immediate results, and grow impatient when
those results do not materialize. Hofstede discusses this relationship of time orientation
to a culture as a “time horizon,” and it underscores the perspective of the individual
within a cultural context. Many countries in Asia, influenced by the teachings of
Confucius, value a long-term orientation, whereas other countries, including the United
States, have a more short-term approach to life. Native American cultures are known
for holding a long-term orientation, as illustrated by the proverb attributed to the
Iroquois that decisions require contemplation of their impact seven generations
removed.
Long-term orientation is often marked by persistence, thrift and frugality, and an order
to relationships based on age and status. A sense of shame, both personal and for the
family and community, is also observed across generations. What an individual does
reflects on the family, and is carried by immediate and extended family members.
Time can also be a reference to a culture’s orientation toward tasks or relationships.
For example, a manager from the United States who travels to India to negotiate a
business contract needs to know that meetings will occur whenever people show up to
the meeting, which could be hours after it is scheduled. A task-oriented leader is certain
to be frustrated when he meets up with an Indian who is more time-oriented toward
relationships. In the American perspective, promptness is professionalism; yet, in the
other perspective, the concept of time is looser and more flexible.
The “Short term versus longer term time orientation” diagram below shows the
spectrum from having a high preference for Traditions/Past (on the far left) to a Current
or Future preference (on the far right). The diagram also shows the spectrum of a
culture’s orientation toward a Task (far left) versus orientation toward a Relationship
(far right).
“Short term versus longer term time orientation” Diagram
Creative Commons https://2012books.lardbucket.org/books/a-primer-oncommunication-studies/s08-03-intercultural-communication.html(opens in a new tab) by
2012books is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0(opens in a new tab).
Monochronic cultures have a short-term time orientation.
(opens in a new tab)https://images.pexels.com/photos/1011333/p(opens in a new tab) by
Pexels
Polychronic cultures have a long-term time orientation.
(opens in a new tab)https://unsplash.com/photos/Z9xSPv2TXDc(opens in a new tab) by Farrel
Nobel, Unsplash
As a reminder, none of the categories presented in this class are better or worse.
Rather, they are just different ways of looking at the world. You are not of one type of
culture or the other; instead, you simply display more characteristics of one culture
than another. Moreover, you can be both at the same time, depending on the situation
and the circumstances. For example, you may adhere to a strict schedule while on the
job (perhaps more by necessity than desire), yet on the weekend you don’t worry about
time as much.
Do you recall our discussion about low- and high-context cultures under the
“Uncertainty” section above? If not, please review it now. The difference between the
two types of cultures will need to be clear in order for this next section to make sense.
Low-context communicators are monochromic, which means “doing one thing at a
time.” Monochronic cultures consider time a commodity; it can be bought, spent, made,
and even killed. People divide each concept of time into small pieces. A calendar is
divided into months, weeks, and days. Days are divided into morning, afternoon, and
night as well as hours, minutes, and seconds. A college education is divided into years,
semesters or quarters, and weeks—with regularly scheduled assignments, quizzes, and
exams, each of which is given a certain value.
People in monochronic cultures live by the clock. People make appointments and expect
their counterparts to be “on time.” They keep tight schedules. Businesses measure their
success or failure based on items such as short- and long-term goals, key performance
indicators, risk, and employee satisfaction, which are quantified by assigning numerical
values and tracking changes from month to month, quarter to quarter, and year to
year. The beginning and the end of each item is clearly defined. As is the case of
cultures with a low tolerance for uncertainty, people like specified processes and
procedures, steps that follow a logical, linear sequence, objectivity (i.e., “the facts”),
and measurable outcomes.
In contrast, high-context communicators are “polychromic,” that is, they do “many
things at a time.” People who learn towards a polychromic time orientation see time as
subjective; for them, time is a man-made concept and while time is important, it is not
considered a primary means by which people prioritize life events.
While monochromic cultures place tasks or “getting things done” before relationships,
people with a polychromic time orientation will place people above time. People look at
the “big picture” and value teamwork. For example, within a monochromic culture, each
individual has a specific job responsibility with a detailed scope or list of tasks. If you
ask a person to do something outside of the scope of their job, you may hear, “That’s
not my job.” If you were to ask the same of a person in a polychromic culture, they
would not hesitate because they believe that “we’re all in this together—a team” and
they value the relationships they have with others.
People with a polychromic time orientation are comfortable with ambiguity. For
example, if they are planning a road trip, they may have a destination and a general
idea as to how to get there, where they will stay, and what to do at their destination.
They might even “play it by ear.” People with a monochromic time orientation,
however, will have a detailed itinerary along with a chosen route, departure and return
dates and approximate times, hotel reservations, and a “to-do” list. Moreover, it is
likely they will have done extensive research online in advance of their trip so as to
avoid any surprises. This video, by Adjunct Faculty Member Frank Berry, summarizes
the differences between these two very different views of time.
Culture and Time Transcript
Here is a table that also provides a high-level overview of the primary differences
between monochromic and polychronic cultures.
Factor
Monochronic Action
Actions
Do one thing at a time
Focus
Concentrate on the job at hand
Attention to time
Think about when things must be achieved
Priority
Put the job first
Respect for property
Seldom borrow or lend things
Timeliness
Emphasize promptness
HIGH- AND LOW-CONTEXT CULTURE EXERCISE
Based on what you have learned about low-context and high-context communication,
let’s test your knowledge. Remember that there are elements of both low- and highcontext communication within every situation, but there is usually a predominant
communication style. Select “high-context” (HCC) or “low-context” (LCC) for each of
the following types of events and state why you categorized the communication as you
did.
New employee orientation
1.
high-context” (HCC)
2.
low-context” (LCC)
3.
Both
Birthday party
1.
high-context” (HCC)
2.
low-context” (LCC)
3.
Both
Parent-teacher conference
1.
high-context” (HCC)
2.
“low-context” (LCC)
3.
Movie
Both
1.
high-context” (HCC)
2.
low-context” (LCC)
3.
Both
Funeral service
1.
“high-context” (HCC)
2.
“low-context” (LCC)
3.
both
Documentary
1.
“high-context” (HCC)
2.
“low-context” (LCC)
3.
Both
TV sitcom
1.
“high-context” (HCC)
2.
“low-context” (LCC)
3.
Both
Communication class
1.
“high-context” (HCC)
2.
“low-context” (LCC)
3.
Both
Ride-share (like Uber or Lyft)
1.
“high-context” (HCC)
2.
“low-context” (LCC)
3.
Both
Job interview
1.
“high-context” (HCC)
2.
“low-context” (LCC)
3.
Both
Submit
Note: There is a sixth dimension of culture called “Indulgence.” We are not including it
within our discussion, as it is still relatively new, but if you are interested in learning
more, you can find it here: Geert Hofstede: The 6-D model of national culture(opens in
a new tab)
Cultures are more similar than they are different given the fact that we are all human beings.
(opens in a new tab)https://unsplash.com/photos/PkXrm-KGD_4(opens in a new tab) by
mnm.all, Unsplash
Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck’s Values Orientations
The Kluckhohn-Strodtbeck Value Orientations theory represents one of the earliest
efforts to develop a cross-cultural theory of values. According to Kluckhohn and
Strodtbeck (1961), every culture faces the same basic survival needs and must answer
the same universal questions. It is out of this need for survival that cultural values
arise.
In their research, Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck suggest five (5) basic types of
problems to be solved by every society relative to the human experience.
THE NATURE OF HUMAN BEINGS
THE NATURE OF HUMANS & THE WORLD
THE BEST WAY TO THINK ABOUT TIME
THE PROPER MODE OF HUMAN ACTIVITY
THE RELATIONSHIP OF HUMANS & SOCIETY
Here is a summary by L. Robert Kohls (1981) of the work done by Kluckhohn and
Strodtbeck and its applicability to our understanding culture, highlighting the five
common human concerns and the three possible responses for each of them.
Concerns/
orientations
Human Nature:
What is the basic nature
of people?
Man-Nature
Relationship:
What is the appropriate
relationship to nature?
Possible Responses
Evil. Most people
can’t be trusted.
People are basically
bad and need to be
controlled.
Mixed. There are
both evil people
and good people
in the world, and
you have to check
people out to find
out which they
are. People can be
changed with the
right guidance.
Good. Most people
are basically pretty
good at heart; they
are born good.
Subordinate to
Nature. People
really can’t change
nature. Life is
largely determined
by external forces,
Harmony with
Nature. Man
should, in every
way, live in
harmony with
nature.
Dominant over
Nature. It the great
human challenge to
conquer and control
nature. Everything
from air
such as fate and
genetics. What
happens was meant
to happen.
Time Sense:
How should we best
think about time?
Activity:
What is the best mode of
activity?
Social Relations:
What is the best form of
social organization?
conditioning to the
“green revolution”
has resulted from
having met this
challenge.
Past. People should
learn from history,
draw the values
they live by from
history, and strive
to continue past
traditions into the
future.
Present. The
present moment
is everything.
Let’s make the
most of it. Don’t
worry about
tomorrow: enjoy
today.
Future. Planning
and goal setting
make it possible for
people to
accomplish
miracles, to change
and grow. A little
sacrifice today will
bring a better
tomorrow.
Being. It’s enough
to just “be.” It’s not
necessary to
accomplish great
things in life to feel
your life has been
worthwhile.
Becoming. The
main purpose for
being placed on
this earth is for
one’s own inner
development.
Doing. If people
work hard and apply
themselves fully,
their efforts will be
rewarded. What a
person
accomplishes is a
measure of his or
her worth.
Hierarchical. There
is a natural order to
relations, some
people are born to
lead, others are
followers. Decisions
should be made by
those in charge.
Collateral. The
best way to be
organized is as a
group, where
everyone shares
in the decision
process. It is
important not to
make important
decisions alone.
Individual. All
people should have
equal rights, and
each should have
complete control
over one’s own
destiny. When we
have to make a
decision as a group
it should be “one
person one vote.”
At this point, you might be wondering how this all fits together. Here is a comparison
between the Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck’s value orientation theory and Hofstede’s five
dimensions of culture. Can you see the connection?
Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck’s value orientations:
Hofstede’s dimensions of culture:
The nature of humanity (evil, mixed, or good)
Orientations toward uncertainty
The relationship of humans to nature (mastery,
harmony, submission)
Power distance (i.e., social
inequality)
Relationships between humans (hierarchical,
collateral, individual)
Individualism versus collectivism
Personality (being, becoming, doing)
Femininity versus masculinity
Orientation to time (past, present, future)
Orientation to life (long-term versus
short-term)
Why is understanding dimensions of culture important?
At the start of this discussion, recall we referred to each of the two models discussed
above as “theories.” Any such model of culture is indeed just that, a theory. As
students of communication, we need to keep in mind that theories are by their very
nature subjective. In reality, we cannot “force” any component of culture into a
category let alone evaluate or judge it by the standards of another culture. The ability
to think critically is an important skill in all aspects of our lives. At the same time,
however, these models can be very useful in helping us compare and contrast the very
basic yet important characteristics of different cultures. The Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck’s
value orientations and Hofstede’s five dimensions of culture models are the most
frequently cited theories in the field of communication because they are considered the
most credible and reliable tools available for the study of culture and behavior.
Understanding these five value dimensions and their impact on different cultural
systems will be helpful to your work in cultural intelligence. Like any cultural model,
you need to recognize that cultural factors in leadership and organizations, as indicated
by Taylor Cox (1994), differ “across gender, nationality, and racial/ethnic groups as it
relates to time and space orientation, leadership style orientations, individualism versus
collectivism, competitive versus cooperative behavior, locus of control, and
communication styles” (p. 108). We need to recognize that microcultures exist within
mainstream cultures; this is significant in working effectively on a cross-cultural level
(Cox, 1994, p. 106).
As you have noticed, this lesson covered a great deal of information, including several
important dimensions of culture and models of value orientation. The context of culture
is not only the largest context in the contextual model of intercultural communication,
but it is at the very core of all aspects of intercultural communication. Hopefully, you
are starting to see how this all comes together.
Americans are known to be highly patriotic. The colors of the flag are symbolic: red symbolizes
perseverance and valor, white represents purity and innocence, and blue represents vigilance,
perseverance and justice.
(opens in a new tab)https://unsplash.com/photos/diV_Xm1G6Vo(opens in a new tab) by Chris
Barbalis, Unsplash
American Cultural Values
Do Americans have a culture? If so, what is it?
Everyone has a culture. However, it is sometimes difficult to take note of your culture
when you are immersed in it, looking at the rest of the world from the outside in. When
you consider American culture, you may think in terms of cultural artifacts. For
example, you may think about Elvis Presley, McDonald’s, Coca-Cola, or the Statue of
Liberty. You might even remember, or at least have heard of, the famous 1970’s
Chevrolet commercial that promoted vehicles as symbolic of American culture via the
theme, “baseball, hot dogs, apple pie, and Chevrolet.”
What do these things say about American culture? If they could tell a story, what would
that story be?
Among the most recent popular books that address American beliefs and values is Gary
Althen’s “American Values and Assumptions.” Here is a list of the beliefs and values
that Althen (2003) identifies as typically American:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Individualism
Freedom
Competitiveness
Privacy
Equality
Informality
The Future, Change, and Progress
The Goodness of Humanity
Time
Achievement, Action, Work, and Materialism
Directness and Assertiveness
Want to learn more about American beliefs and values?
Why is having knowledge of our values important?
It is important to understand our values because they have a powerful impact on how
we view the world. Every aspect of our social lives is impacted by values: the decisions
we make, how we prioritize what will and will not get done, how we live our lives, and
how we treat other people are a few examples. Our values give us a sense of purpose—
as do the values of others. By understanding how our values impact the way in which
we communicate, as well as how the values of others impact how they communicate,
we can achieve common ground. With this knowledge, we can recognize our similarities
and make any necessary adjustments in our behavior to accommodate differences in
culture, ensuring a mutually satisfying and rewarding experience for both parties. In
fact, the next lesson is focused exclusively on the relationship between perception,
communication, and culture.
Before we close this lesson, let’s talk for a minute about generalizations.
Generalizations about people based on their culture can be risky. In fact, it would be a
mistake to think that all Americans hold exactly the same beliefs, or even that when
Americans do agree, that they do so with the same degree of conviction (Althen, 2003).
Generalizations about Americans are based on mainstream culture. As such, they
reflect the predominant views of white, middle class people who have for a long time
held a majority of the country’s positions in business, education, science and industry,
politics, journalism, and literature. Needless to say, the beliefs, values, and attitudes of
many of the nation’s various ethnic minorities might differ from the values of the
“dominant” or mainstream culture. As long as we recognize these limitations, it is
reasonable to regard the observations Althen offers as true on the average.
Did you see any values that are missing from Althen’s list? Which values would you
add?
Key Takeaways:
Here are a few key points about culture we will need to keep in mind as we move
forward in the class:
•
Culture is comprised of both tangible and intangible things you see, hear, feel,
and perceive. It consists of the shared beliefs, values, and assumptions of a
•
•
•
•
•
group of people who learn from one another and teach to others that their
behaviors, attitudes, and perspectives are the correct ways to think, act, and
feel.
Culture is a process of learning and sharing, and it is dynamic and symbolic.
Cultural issues are systemic, and understanding this helps leaders to appreciate
culture in its fullest sense.
Awareness helps to eliminate the stereotypes that are derived from cultural
misunderstandings, which limit the positive ways in which culture is viewed.
However, generalizations about cultures can help serve as a framework for
interacting with unfamiliar cultural systems.
The ‘roots’ of culture consist of the values, assumptions, and symbols of the
culture. These three ground cultural systems, often making it hard for cultural
shifts to occur.
Familiarity with Hofstede’s model of value dimensions (identity, power, gender,
uncertainty, and time) in the workplace helps leaders to realize the impact of
values and beliefs in cultural settings.