Managing cross-cultural communication

Question

1-    Explain how choosing to use a particular language in preference to another language in a cross-cultural meeting can affect the interaction and the outcomes of the meeting.

2-    ‘Cross-cultural negotiations are fundamentally different from domestic negotiations.’ What are the main differences? 

3-    What communication problems arise as a result? 

4-    How can the problems be overcome?

Answer 1

Let me turn briefly to questions three and four. Problems can arise not only from differing societal assumptions, but also from unusual turns of phrase that do not necessarily translate well from one language to another. Think about the phrase 'drop me a line,' in other words, 'write to me.' If you don't know English well enough, it sounds more like I'm asking someone to drop a rope down towards me over the cliff and help me climb up--which it can given specific circumstances.

Think about double negatives. In other languages string several negatives together and the effect is simply cumulative. In English, it's treated like math. Two negatives make a positive; one negative cancels out the other. The only remedy is to clarify, clarify, clarify as the conversation goes along. Make sure everyone understands what is being said.

Even within the same language group, perceptions can vary. The example the woman gave in the previous block about her friend's children pushing their mother to go to a memorial service. The woman said tell them it will be her memorial next. It doesn't ring to my ears like an extravagant joke. It sounds like a pointed remark, that being 'How dare they risk your health; put your foot down and tell them so.'

Going back to the first question. The language selected can end up being the language of power, for all thoughts are predicated on how it works. To avoid confusion as much as possible, keep clarifying as you go along. It can be a slow and tedious process, but there is no way around it.

Answer 2

These are very complex questions and you could write a thesis about them. I have been a language and intercultural trainer for decades and it would usually take me days, weeks, or sometimes months to train people to understand the issues you are asking about. If your questions are for an online assignment of an intercultural communication course, I suggest that you stick with the perspectives and options the course provided. My knowledge and experience is very wide-ranging and might not be the answer you are looking for to pass this course, however, if you are truly interested in the intercultural aspects of negotiating, I'll be happy to give you a brief introduction/ overview, which would of course require you to research things in more detail.

About question #1, first of all, choosing a language for a meeting means that this language will be some people's native language and a second or even third language for others. This puts the non-native speakers at a disadvantage, and they might not be able to fully understand everything, nor be able to fully express themselves properly. Moreover, different languages tend to have different features that can promote certain behaviors, e.g. French tends to be quick, logical, and cutting - a great tool for proving one's point, whereas Italian is a very eloquent and expressive language using an abundance of sophisticated vocabulary to impress and appeal. Even English has nuances: while British English tends to use understatement, vague politeness, and a rather quiet tone, American English can be very boastful, direct, and loud.

As for questions #2, 3, and 4, you may want to read up on different intercultural dimensions many famous interculturalists have come up with over time, such as:

Richard D. Lewis: linear-active, multi-active, reactive

Geert Hofstede: power distance, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, long-term orientation, indulgence

Edward T. Hall: low/ high context, mono-/ polychronic, high/ low territory

Alfons Trompenaars: universalism/ particularism, individualism/ collectivism, neutral/ affective, achievement/ ascription, specific/ diffuse, sequential/ synchronic, inner-/ outer-directed

Those differences play a major role in negotiating. Discussing this in detail would take too much time and there is not enough space to type, but I will just name a few as an overview, e.g.:

1. Time/ mono- and polychronic attitude toward time: if arriving 10 min early for an appointment is considered punctual in one culture, whereas arriving 20 min late, if there is a good reason is considered punctual and acceptable in another culture, there might not even be a negotiation, because the potential business partners will be upset or even cancel the meeting.

1. Another important point is that different cultures expect different outcomes from a meeting/ negotiation, e.g. Anglo-Saxon cultures tend to expect that the negotiator has the power to make decisions, to offer discounts, to change the terms and conditions, and to be somewhat flexible to achieve a deal or consensus. On the other hand, the Japanese and many Asian cultures would only meet to start building a relationship and to start establishing trust, if this is a potential new business partner, or in an established relationship, to announce a decision that has already been made, so there would not be any real negotiations as expected by the Anglo-Saxons. Those differing expectations can lead to frustration, unsuccessful business relations, and lost opportunities.

1. Moreover, negotiating means that you make the perfect sales pitch and that you try to convince the other party to go along with what you have suggested. However, there are two very different ways of doing this. For example, US Americans prefer a so-called "applications-first" style, which means that broad conclusions or recommendations are based on empirical observations, facts, statistics, or evidence, how a certain result can be achieved, and what the steps are to achieve them. Conversely, other cultures, such as Germans or the French prefer what is called a "principle-first style", which means that the general principles and concepts the decision is based on must be explained in much detail to prove that the conclusions are logical and coherent before any action can be taken. Therefore, a "we are the world leader in xxx and employ the brightest minds in the industry" approach will work in the US, but most likely not in Germany or France, whereas a "let me talk about the fundamental principles our research facility abides by and how they have developed our new products over the past 10 years" sales pitch will work well in Germany and France, while US Americans would be bored to death and leave the meeting thinking that their European business partners are all words and no action.

1. Finally, even though there are many other areas of contention and pitfalls in international negotiations, such as low vs. high context cultures, direct vs. indirect feedback, confrontational vs. non-confrontational, or consensual vs. top-down decision making to name just a few, I would like to focus on one more point, and that is body language. Your counterpart is smiling, but what does it mean? If you are Anglo-Saxon, this is a good sign, but if you are Chinese, you may do this because you are angry or embarrassed about something that was said. Equally, if you are negotiating with a Finn who is looking very cheerless, the negotiations may be going very well, and the Finn may be very happy with what you have suggested. However, if you are negotiating with an Arab looking cheerless, something is going seriously wrong with your negotiations and the Arab is not happy at all. Likewise, expressive body language and the use of hands and arms to explain things will be interpreted as a sign of interest and negotiations going well in many Latin cultures, whereas too much body language might be interpreted as improper, lack of control, or even unreliable in many Asian cultures. Therefore, using the wrong body language may easily derail your negotiations

Overall, these issues can be overcome be preparing properly for your intercultural negotiations and hiring an experienced intercultural trainer. This may cost a few thousand Dollars, but it will save businesses millions in the long run. It is often the difference between getting the deal or losing it.

Answer 3

This is a very interesting and complex subject. I think the biggest problem in cross-cultural interactions is the assumptions we make. There are very different rules and boundaries among different cultures, and as we communicate, we can easily overstep these boundaries and cause offenses. I am a native English speaker and am fluent in Spanish. My husband is a native Spanish speaker, and on more than one occasion, he has rebuked for things I've said to Spanish speakers.

Here's an example: a Spanish-speaking friend of mine has serious health problems, and her kids were pressuring her to attend a memorial service in another city. She said she didn't feel well enough to go, so I said, "Tell your kids that if they force you to go that the next memorial will be for you!" My husband later told me, "I couldn't believe I heard you say that!" Later, we told another friend about the exchange, and he commented, "It sounded like you were telling her to just die."

I'm starting to realize that joking or making light comments about death among people of Mexican descent is not funny at all. This is just one example of cultural/linguistic misunderstandings.How to overcome these misunderstandings? It's not easy. You need truly bilingual and bicultural individuals.