Tag: China

Misspeaks in Small Talk: How to Talk Small Across Cultures

Posted on by Leave a comment

Picture this: you’re at a bustling international conference, surrounded by professionals from all corners of the globe. 

As you navigate the sea of faces, you strike up a conversation with a colleague from Japan. 

You’re eager to make a good impression, but as the conversation unfolds, you find yourself struggling to find common ground.

You can tell your colleague is uncomfortable.

Maybe you spoke too personally too soon.

This scenario highlights the sometimes delicate nature of small talk across cultures. 

What may be considered polite and engaging in one culture could be perceived as intrusive or off-putting in another. 

In this blog post, we’ll unravel the mysteries of small talk in cross-cultural interactions.

The West

In Western cultures, small talk often revolves around neutral topics such as the weather, sports, or current events. 

For instance, in the United States, it’s common to initiate conversations with casual remarks like, “How’s the weather treating you today?” or “Did you catch the game last night?” 

These topics serve as safe conversational starters, allowing individuals to ease into interactions without delving into more personal matters right away.

The East

On the other hand, in many Eastern cultures, small talk tends to be more reserved and indirect, focusing on topics that preserve harmony and respect. 

In Japan, for example, small talk often centers around polite greetings and expressions of gratitude. 

Initiating conversations with phrases like “How are you?” or “Thank you for your time” demonstrates respect for social norms and etiquette.

The Middle East

In some cultures, such as those in the Middle East, small talk may involve more personal inquiries about family, health, or well-being. 

For instance, in countries like Saudi Arabia or the United Arab Emirates, it’s common for individuals to inquire about each other’s families or offer blessings for good health and prosperity.

The Missteps & Misspeaks

Though small talk can serve as a tool to build rapport, it can also present cultural pitfalls if not approached with sensitivity and awareness. 

For instance, in China, discussing topics related to politics, religion, or personal finances may be considered taboo, as they can potentially lead to conflict or discomfort. 

Similarly, in some cultures like Finland or Sweden, excessive small talk may be perceived as insincere or intrusive, as these societies value directness and authenticity in communication.

Navigating these cultural boundaries requires a keen understanding of local customs and norms. 

By observing and adapting to the small talk conventions of different cultures, individuals can bridge cultural divides, foster connections, and build trust in their interpersonal interactions.

High Context vs. Low Context: Navigating Cultural Communication

Posted on by Leave a comment

Communication is not just about the words we say; it’s about the nuance. 

The concepts of high context and low context communication play a crucial role in understanding how different cultures convey meaning and messages. 

These contrasting communication styles can sometimes result in conflict across cultures, so let’s dissect their cultural implications.

High Context Communication

High context communication refers to cultures where much of the meaning is conveyed through nonverbal cues, implicit messages, and contextual factors. 

In high context cultures – like Japan, China, Korea, and many Middle Eastern and Latin American countries – relationships are paramount, and communication is often indirect and nuanced.

In these cultures, individuals rely on shared cultural knowledge, social hierarchies, and implicit understandings to interpret communication accurately. 

For instance, a simple gesture, facial expression, or silence can convey volumes of meaning that may be missed by those unfamiliar with the cultural context.

Low Context Communication

Conversely, low context communication involves conveying meaning primarily through explicit verbal messages. 

In low context cultures, such as those found in the United States, Canada, Germany, and Scandinavia, communication tends to be direct, explicit, and to the point. 

Individuals prioritize clarity, transparency, and precision in their communication style.

Rather than relying heavily on nonverbal cues or contextual factors, much of the information is contained in the words themselves. 

As a result, misunderstandings are less common, but there may be less emphasis on building relationships or preserving harmony through communication.

Cultural Implications

The differences between high context and low context communication have significant implications for intercultural interactions and relationships. 

For example, in high context cultures like Japan, a simple “yes” may not always mean agreement; it could indicate politeness or acknowledgment without necessarily committing to a course of action.

Similarly, in low context cultures like the United States, individuals may perceive indirect communication as vague or ambiguous, leading to frustration or misinterpretation. 

For instance, in negotiations, a straightforward approach may be expected, whereas in high context cultures, a more subtle negotiation style may be preferred.

Meet in the Middle

As with most cross-cultural relationships, approaching these differences with understanding is paramount.

Understanding the nuances of high context and low context communication is essential for effective cross-cultural communication and collaboration. 

By recognizing and respecting cultural differences in communication styles, individuals can navigate intercultural interactions with sensitivity and empathy, fostering mutual understanding and building stronger relationships across cultural divides. 

As the world becomes increasingly interconnected, the ability to bridge cultural gaps through effective communication becomes ever more vital for success in our globalized society.

Is It Worth the Risk?: Different Cultural Takes on Risk Perception

Posted on by Leave a comment

Are some cultures greater risk-takers than others?

This study dove in to find out.

Analyzing the data of respondents from Germany, Poland, the US, and China, the study measured respondents’ risk preference for pricing financial options.

These are their findings.

Hypothesis

Studies have shown a correlation between a culture’s position on the individualism-collectivism scale and its risk preference.

Called the Cushion Hypothesis (Weber & Hsee, 1998), the theory suggests that those from collectivist cultures are more likely to take financial risks.

Why?

Due to the perceived support from their collectivist culture and, thus, the reduced negative consequences such a risk might have on the individual.

While this study did arrive at the same conclusion – that the collectivist society of China was less risk-averse than its American counterpart – it did identify a more specific reason for it.

Risk-Averse

The majority of respondents in all four cultures were identified as risk-averse (i.e. they were willing to pay more for options they saw as “less risky”).

When you look at a risk-return conceptualization, it is natural that most people, no matter what culture, would perceive risk this way.

When risk preference was evaluated in the traditional expected-utility framework, Chinese respondents were considerably less risk-averse in pricing than Americans.

But what this study found was that the difference in risk preference may not be due to a cultural attitude toward perceived risk; instead, it appears largely due to the perception of the financial options’ risk itself.

Chinese participants simply did not find the options as risky as their counterparts.

Conclusion

The study states:

“Chinese respondents were closest to risk neutrality in their pricing of the financial options and judged the risk of these options to be the lowest, but were not significantly less perceived-risk averse.

“American and Germans offered the lowest prices and also perceived the risk of the options to be highest, but were not significantly more perceived-risk averse.”

One might practically apply this knowledge to commerce and negotiation when working across these particular cultures, affording both negotiators joint gains.

The study concludes that while cultures do vary on a collectivism-individualism continuum which undoubtedly impacts perceived risk, other cultural factors in risky decision-making – locus of control, differences in achievement motivation, etc. – may also come into play in risk preference.

Further studies into the subject might provide more insight.

The Heroes of Our Own Story: How Cultural Bias Enters into the Teaching of History

Posted on by Leave a comment

We all want to be the heroes of our own story.

And with this desire comes bias.

When entering a new culture, learning to read between the lines of what is taught about the culture’s history will help you better understand their cultural perspective. 

You may still agree with and believe in the historical interpretation of your own culture, but getting to the roots of another culture means getting to know their view of themselves, which is never more apparent than in their teaching of history.

This knowledge will give you insight into the “why” of cultural norms, values, and traditions in your host country.

To gain this knowledge, learning what is taught is important; but, sometimes, learning what is expressly not taught is even more so.

Russia and North America

“Back in the USSR…”

While it’s obvious that Russian and Western cultures view things differently, what may not be so obvious is their extraordinarily different interpretations of history.

North Americans often view their liberal values of freedom and individualism with pride, and that is reflective in their teaching of history.

They view Marxist ideals and communist values as restrictive on individual liberties and enterprise.

Russian history, however, is taught from a Marxist viewpoint.

It teaches that the American working class – and overseas labor from American corporations – is exploitative.

Like Americans, their view of their own history is also one of pride.

They present their communist system as more egalitarian, distributing wealth more fairly amongst the working class.

While American historians present Russia as oppressive, so do Russian historians present America.

And from an outsider’s perspective, if you’re being honest with yourself and viewing these arguments and their history objectively, you can see truth in both…however, you’re probably more biased toward the history that aligns with your own values and norms.

Japan and China

Japan and China are two other examples of nationalist takes on history.

The Japanese take pride in their long and glorious empire. However, the tragic recent history of WWII and the events surrounding it is often deemphasized in classrooms.

Mariko Oi, a Japanese teacher who studied abroad in Australia, puts this into perspective:

“Japanese people often fail to understand why neighboring countries harbor a grudge over events that happened in the 1930s and ‘40s. The reason, in many cases, is that they barely learned any 20th century history. I myself only got a full picture when I left Japan…” 

According to Oi, only 5 percent of her Japanese textbook (19 out of 357 pages) dealt with the recent history of WWII and the events that led up to it from 1931 to 1945.

A single line was dedicated to the Rape of Nanjing (also known as the Nanjing Massacre) which occurred during the Sino-Japanese war of 1937 when Japan invaded China. That war too was given but a single page.

On the other side of the East China Sea, Chinese students are taught in detail about Japanese war crimes and about the Rape of Nanjing in particular.

And as for other WWII enemies, the subject receives different treatment in American textbooks versus Japanese textbooks. 

The Manhattan Project is often heroically emphasized by American historians who detail the justifications for dropping the atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

In Mariko Oi’s Japanese textbook again, a single sentence is dedicated to this event.

Cultural Bias in Ourselves

The point of all this is that a nation tends to have a specific view of itself. 

And, in doing so, that nation will cast itself and its history in the best light while deemphasizing certain aspects that today bring shame. 

Cultural bias is difficult to recognize within ourselves. We’d like to think we’re “above” it.

But in the end, we all want to be “right”; we want our values to be right, our norms to be right, and our version of history to be right.

We want to be the heroes of our own story.

When Religion Meets History: Confucian & Communism in Chinese Culture

Posted on by Leave a comment

“If you can revive the ancient and use it to understand the modern, then you are worthy to be a teacher.” – Confucius

History. Religion. Language.

We’ve been talking about these cornerstones of culture the past few weeks, taking them one at a time.

But what happens when they meet?

And how can you, as Confucius says, understand the modern by reviving the ancient?

Welcome to the Beijing Olympics

It was 2008. Beijing, China. Olympic Opening Ceremony.

“Friends have come from afar, how happy we are.”

A quote by the Chinese philosopher, Confucius, was presented at the fore.

Later, the Bird’s Nest was invaded by 3,000 Confucian disciples. The performers held bamboo slips, upon which some read the ancient Chinese character, “He,” which means harmony.

The religious philosophy of Confucianism was present at the international ceremony, as the great philosopher represents the Chinese mind.

Alive from 552 to 479 BC, “The Uncrowned King” remains today, 1,500 years later, Chinese history’s most influential person.

He is so influential that his traditional ideas and teachings remain a part of modern Chinese thought.

A Culture Influenced By Religion and History

Although Confucius was once deemed “The Number One Hooligan Old Kong” by Mao’s Red Guards, the Communist Party realized that the great philosopher might be useful for their agenda.

Only, instead of true harmony in the way Confucian taught, the Communist Party Confucius emphasizes obedience and loyalty. He bucks Western ideals and pushes for authoritarian rule.

“Harmony” – a Confucian concept – is used a lot by Communists; harmony, meaning no dissent.

The true Confucian take on harmony, however, is one in which each person in a society works together toward prosperity. 

A research paper entitled, “The Relevance of Confucian Philosophy to Modern Concepts of Leadership and Followership,” explains Confucius’ views as follows:

“Confucius observed that because society is a weave of relationships between individuals, a healthy community depends upon an attitude of human caring among its members.”

By cherry-picking and restructuring Confucian values, the party is able to create a version of a modern political system that it can say is based on the traditional past.

In this way, Chinese history and religion tell us why a nationalistic central government, guided by moral individuals who have the people’s best interests at heart, is the way China chooses to be led – and to become a major world power.

History and religion tell us why a democratic Western political system does not sit well culturally in China.

This demonstrates that, in the end, to truly understand the ways and mentalities of your host country and its people, you must study its history and religion – and also the ways in which that history and religion might be politicized in the modern world.

Taking Action: Learning to Admire Other Cultures

Posted on by Leave a comment

Let’s take a trip around the world.

First up, Italy, where you enjoy long leisurely meals full of wine and laughter. Dining is viewed as an active pleasure in Italian culture. Italians spend double the time eating each day on average when compared to Americans. In experiencing this, you soak it in, socialize, and feel more relaxed.

Next, you hop south of the Mediterranean to Morocco, where you navigate through a market known as a souk. There, you haggle with shopkeepers over bits and bobs. You enjoy the “game” and the strategy involved.

A flight takes you to Rio de Janeiro, where you enroll in a samba class. It’s exhilarating to dance in this warm new style, taught to you by a pro.

You next travel to Japan, where you take part in a tea ceremony. You find the tradition fascinating and the emphasis on politeness admirable.

During this trip around the world, you were open to appreciating the customs and attributes of each culture – a trait that will greatly aid your cross-cultural integration

Admiration

We discussed the Colonial Superiority Complex and how it may be difficult for those from Western cultures to shed their ethnocentricity in order to see the value in other cultures.

But if you don’t try, you’re at a net loss.

Throughout history, the West has not always been economically superior to other cultures.

Muslim cultures, for centuries, were more scientifically advanced and economically powerful than European cultures.

In fact, Emperor Mansa Musa of Mali is considered by many historians to be the richest man in world history.

Neither Warren Buffet, nor Bill Gates could compete.

Mansa Musa lived during the 13th and 14th centuries and was so wealthy that he is said to have done his Hajj pilgrimage to Mecca flanked by a caravan of tens of thousands, some of whom hauled hundreds of pounds of gold for Musa to splash out on extravagances. He also spread his wealth across Africa in the form of educational centers and mosques.

In today’s money, his fortune is estimated to be around $400 billion. Comparatively, Jeff Bezo’s net worth is currently half that.

Asia’s Economic Growth

More recently, Japan’s economic growth in the ‘80s, with brands like Sony and Toyota booming, made America check their superiority complex at the door.

They faced competition on the global stage, prompting cross-cultural research on a scale never before seen.

Moreover, China’s rise over the last three decades shows that the West does not hold a monopoly over the global economy.

This is all to say that while you appreciate your own culture’s achievements and history, you should also recognize the achievements of other cultures.

Humanity’s heritage is woven with threads of the accomplishments, discoveries, and inventions of people from different backgrounds. All the world is an invaluable part of this tapestry.

Making an active effort to recognize this will put things in sharper relief for you – in a context more objective  – and will ultimately aid your cross-cultural integration.

The Colonial Superiority Complex: Why Adapting to Another Culture is a Struggle for The West

Posted on by Leave a comment

Do you easily adapt to another culture? Do you find value in another’s values and seek to understand norms and behaviors?

For Westerners, in particular, this step in cultural integration is difficult.

And its difficulty has its roots in history.

The Colonial Superiority Complex

Samuel P. Huntington, American political scientist and former director of Harvard’s Center for International Affairs, considers two opposing civilizations as particularly dangerous: the Muslim world and Western civilization.

Why did he consider these two civilizations to be dangerous?

1) Their “superiority complex” in relation to other cultures

2) Their willingness to enforce their values and norms on others

In this case, we’re defining “civilization” as a group of cultures that share history and values.

In his groundbreaking book, The Clash of Civilization, he writes, 

“It is my hypothesis that the fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. […] The clash of civilizations will dominate global politics. The fault lines between civilizations will be the battle lines of the future.” 

Published in the nineties, a number of Huntington’s predictions unfolded in reality. These two civilizations did indeed come to a head in many conflicts along the “fault lines” and continue to today.

Both Muslim civilization and Western civilization have a history of invading other cultures and universally imposing their rule of law and way of life through violence.

While all civilizations enter into war for access to resources, some in history have notably allowed the local culture to remain without much or any interference.

Others, however, attempt to convert cultures to their own way of life, often buoyed by religion.

Consider this: if your belonging to a civilization is based on race (for instance, Chinese or Slavic civilizations), the culture cannot expand.

However, if belonging is built on behavior, values, and norms, then yes, conquered people can adapt to the lifestyle.

European Colonialism in Africa

A vivid illustration of this lies in Africa.

20th century European colonialism exploited the continent both economically and culturally.

Schools, universities, and churches were built, so Western values and norms could be exported.

The political leaders in the West at that time viewed their culture as superior, so imposing it on others came with the territory.

However, as failed attempts at implementing working democracies in North Africa have shown, an external force imposing culture in this fashion does not work and instead results in civil war and failed states (e.g. Libya, Syria).

Although that’s not to say democracy will never work in other countries, a shift from ethnic culture to national culture is required, and such a shift in mentality takes willingness and time.

The West didn’t allow either.

China in Africa

On the other hand, there’s China.

Without anyone noticing, China has become Africa’s biggest trading partner, with more than $200 billion in annual goods exchanged.

During the first decade of the 21st century, a million Chinese expats have moved to Africa, largely as traders and laborers.

But the Chinese approach is different than Western colonialism. No attempts have been made by China to promote their culture on the continent.

There are no Chinese missionaries, think tanks, schools, or cultural centers. China is there purely for economic benefit; not to globally expand their culture and civilization.

African culture and political systems are left untouched by their largest trading partner.

This is the difference in approach. And this historical difference is why those from Western cultures find learning and adapting to another culture to be difficult.

Next week, we’ll talk about how to overcome that.

The Rice Field Analogy: Negotiation Tactics Across Cultures

Posted on by Leave a comment

Cultures have codes.

The past few weeks, we’ve discussed how to tap into these codes by using analogies constructively.

So can they be used to tap into negotiating with other cultures.

Innate Analogous Terms in Negotiation

Negotiation is a game.

In each culture, this game has different rules.

Strategy in negotiation requires understanding the game you’re playing.

Language used in negotiation is, of itself, analogous.

Negotiation is sometimes likened to going to war. Rules are minimal. Often, sports jargon is used, such as “fair play,” which is:

“in sport, the fact of playing according to the rules and not having an unfair advantage.”

Negotiations are something to be “won.”

These analogous terms used in negotiations naturally extend to cultures.

Framing a foreign culture’s negotiation tactics in the form of an analogy will help drive the correct strategy to “win.”

Cultural Analogies in Negotiation

In negotiation, Russians are “playing poker”; Germans are “playing chess.”

These are pretty straight forward analogies, easily understood by Westerners.

But what about the Chinese?

Chinese negotiations can be an enigma to foreigners.

You might feel mutual confidence, trust, and cooperation one day and, the very next, feel tricked into accepting something you hadn’t discussed.

The “pattern” is not like poker; it’s not like chess.

It’s variable and inconsistent.

To understand this seemingly random give-and-take, a friend provided me a succinct analogy: Chinese negotiations are like working in a rice field.

Rice is, without a doubt, an important part of Chinese culture.

It provides the people sustenance every single day from childhood to old age.

Cultivating this crop necessitates much more cooperation within a village than do crops in Europe or the U.S.

The rice field terraces in the countryside are flooded with a common irrigation system. The water irrigates one field to the next, and this requires that the entire village collectively working together.

Focusing on your land, alone, won’t work.

Instead, you must both hold your own and cooperate with others in equal parts.

This is what negotiating in China requires.

blog rice2

View it as working together on these rice terraces: you must hold your own while using the same irrigation system as that which feeds your business partner’s field. And your business partner is doing the same.

In order to be successful, you must support and cooperate with your business partner while playing defensively and cleverly, seeking your own advantage and ensuring that your partner doesn’t exploit his.

When negotiating with Chinese partners, you aren’t playing poker, neither are you playing chess.

You’re working in a rice field together, both supporting and competing.