Values – Success Across Cultures

Speed, Volume, Pauses, Expressions: How Culture Shapes Communication

5. December 2024by J. WittwerLeave a comment

Communication goes beyond language; it brings together tone, body language, and pauses that reflect cultural values.

To navigate cross-cultural interactions with sensitivity and respect, we must recognize how these elements differ across cultures.

Tone, Volume, and Speed

The way we speak – how loudly, expressively, or quickly – is often dictated by cultural norms.

In African American, Caribbean, Latino, and Arab communities, vibrant, expressive speech is common.

This energetic style conveys enthusiasm and emotion but might be misinterpreted in cultures that prefer softer, more deliberate tones.

For instance, many Native American and East Asian cultures emphasize calmness in communication, viewing quieter speech as a sign of respect or thoughtfulness.

In these contexts, overly loud or rapid speech might seem overbearing or impolite to some.

Pauses and Silence

While some people find silence in conversations jarring or uncomfortable, others see it as meaningful.

In U.S. mainstream culture, silence is often interpreted as awkward or as a sign of disengagement.

By contrast, many Indigenous cultures in the Americas view pauses as opportunities for reflection.

Silence allows for careful thought and measured responses, emphasizing the value of contemplation over immediacy in conversation.

Facial Expressions

Cultural norms also influence how people use their faces to express emotion.

Many Latin American and Caribbean cultures use vivid facial expressions to complement their expressive verbal style, amplifying the emotion conveyed.

In contrast, neutral expressions are more typical in many East Asian and Native American cultures.

A lack of overt expression in these groups often signifies respect, self-control, or neutrality, not necessarily a lack of interest or understanding.

And so, with speed, volume, pauses, and expressions in mind, let’s…

Slow down, get quiet, take a moment, and smile, because learning about other cultures and the way they communicate will help bridge the gap between our differing norms, preventing misunderstandings and conflict.

Ethical Crossroads & Negotiation Challenges: The Line Between Cultural Relativism and Universal Ethical Standards

22. June 202422. June 2024by J. WittwerLeave a comment

Wherever there’s a cultural difference spawned from deeply embedded cultural values, ethical dilemmas often emerge.

Negotiators must navigate the balancing act between respecting cultural relativism and adhering to universal ethical standards.

Here, we explore some real-world examples of these challenges and strategies for overcoming them.

Cultural Relativism vs. Universal Ethical Standards

Cultural Relativism – Cultural relativism posits that moral principles are not universal and should be understood within the context of a particular culture.

For example, in some Middle Eastern countries, business negotiations often involve building personal relationships before discussing terms.

This approach, rooted in cultural norms, might seem inefficient to Western counterparts focused on transactional negotiations.

However, dismissing these customs can lead to misunderstandings and ethical missteps.

Universal Ethical Standards – On the other hand, universal ethical standards advocate for consistent moral principles regardless of cultural context.

Issues arise when practices accepted in one culture clash with these standards.

For instance, gift-giving in many Asian cultures is a common practice to foster goodwill.

Yet, this can be perceived as bribery in cultures with strict anti-corruption laws, posing an ethical dilemma for negotiators striving to maintain integrity.

Real-World Examples

Bribery and Corruption – Consider the case of a Western company negotiating a deal in a developing country where bribes are a normalized part of business transactions.

The company faces an ethical dilemma: adhere to universal anti-bribery laws or risk offending local customs and losing the deal.

A notable example is the Siemens bribery scandal, where the company paid millions in bribes to secure contracts globally.

The fallout highlighted the need for companies to navigate these ethical waters carefully, balancing respect for local practices with compliance to international laws.

Labor Practices – Another ethical dilemma can be observed in labor practices.

Western companies often outsource production to countries with lower labor costs.

However, these countries might have different standards for workers’ rights.

For example, Nike faced significant backlash in the 1990s for poor working conditions in its overseas factories.

The challenge lies in respecting the host country’s norms while ensuring that the company upholds universal ethical standards for labor practices.

Strategies for Navigating Ethical Dilemmas

Cultural Sensitivity Training – One effective strategy is to invest in cultural sensitivity training for employees involved in cross-cultural negotiations.

Understanding the nuances of different cultures can help negotiators walk this line of respecting local customs while maintaining ethical integrity.

Clear Ethical Guidelines – Companies should establish clear ethical guidelines that outline acceptable practices in cross-cultural settings.

These guidelines should be flexible enough to accommodate cultural differences but firm in upholding core ethical standards.

Engaging Local Advisors – Hiring local advisors who understand both the cultural context and the company’s ethical standards can bridge gaps.

These advisors can provide insights into how to navigate complex situations without compromising ethical principles.

Open Communication – Finally, fostering open communication between parties can help address ethical concerns upfront.

Discussing potential ethical dilemmas and agreeing on a mutually acceptable approach can prevent misunderstandings and build trust.

By employing strategies such as cultural sensitivity training, clear ethical guidelines, engaging local advisors, and fostering open communication, negotiators can bridge the gap between cultural relativism and universal ethical standards.

The Double-Edged Sword: Small Talk Across Cultures, A Case Study

5. April 2024by J. WittwerLeave a comment

“How was your weekend?”

“It’s sure hot out today, isn’t it?”

Small talk, the seemingly mundane chatter that fills the gaps in conversations, holds far more significance than meets the eye…or ear.

But even more so across cultures.

In essence, small talk serves as a gateway to deeper connections, offering a glimpse into the values, norms, and social dynamics that shape a culture.

From exchanging pleasantries to navigating delicate topics, small talk can be a subtle yet powerful tool for building rapport and fostering connections.

But it can also be a minefield across cultures.

Let’s take a look at a case study on small talk in a cross-cultural workplace and then explore how different cultures approach small talk.

A Study on Small Talk in a Cross-Cultural Workplace

A compelling case study analyzed how small talk can influence the socialization process of newcomers, exemplified by Anna, an expatriate from the Philippines, transitioning into a Hong Kong firm.

As individuals integrate into new workplace communities, small talk emerges as a pivotal domain fraught with cultural nuances and workplace norms.

Research examining Anna’s interactions with her Hong Kong colleagues sheds light on how ethnicity, social customs, and organizational culture weave into small talk discourse.

From a linguistic perspective, Anna’s small talk with her colleagues subtly reflects Filipino core values intertwined with Hong Kong social customs and local organizational culture.

While small talk can be a conduit for building relationships, it also presents challenges and opportunities for Anna’s socialization journey.

On one hand, it offers a platform for facilitating her assimilation into the workplace community.

On the other hand, discrepancies between Filipino and Hong Kong cultural norms pose challenges, requiring Anna to navigate cultural boundaries with sensitivity.

The Double-Edged Sword

Small talk emerges as a double-edged sword, wielding the power to signal appropriate and inappropriate behavior and the success or failure of socialization efforts.

Not only must a newcomers finesse their small-talking skills, but integral members of the workplace leverage small talk to mold newbies into the organizational culture.

The case study highlights the inherent complexity of small talk as a sociocultural phenomenon.

While it can facilitate socialization and rapport-building, attempts to navigate small talk without cultural sensitivity may backfire, leading to misunderstandings or misinterpretations.

By recognizing the role of small talk as a cultural artifact and facing its complexities with cultural intelligence, newcomers like Anna can find the balance between assimilation and authenticity in their journey toward workplace integration.

Building Bonds Across Cultures: Strategies to Build Trust in Negotiations

29. March 2024by J. WittwerLeave a comment

Unlocking successful outcomes in cross-cultural negotiations often hinges on a fundamental element: trust.

We talked last week about how important trust is to negotiations and that different cultures approach trust differently.

As borders blur and global interactions become commonplace, understanding how to cultivate trust across cultural divides is essential for effective communication, collaboration, and deal-making.

The power of trust is crucial in navigating the complexities of global business negotiations, and here are some ways to build it.

Cultural Sensitivity and Respect

Demonstrating respect for cultural norms, values, and customs is essential for building trust in cross-cultural negotiations.

By showing an appreciation for cultural differences and adapting communication styles and behaviors accordingly, negotiators can convey sincerity and foster trust.

For example, in a negotiation with a Japanese business delegation, acknowledging and respecting hierarchical structures and formalities, such as addressing senior members with appropriate titles and gestures of deference, can cultivate trust and goodwill.

Transparency and Openness

Transparency breeds trust in cross-cultural negotiations.

Sharing information openly, providing clear explanations, and avoiding ambiguity can instill confidence and demonstrate a commitment to honesty and integrity.

For instance, in negotiations between a European company and an African counterpart, openly discussing financial projections, potential risks, and decision-making processes can alleviate concerns about hidden agendas or ulterior motives.

Consistency and Reliability

Consistency in actions and words is paramount for building trust in any relationship – but especially across cultural divides.

Delivering on promises, honoring commitments, and demonstrating reliability over time can establish a foundation of trustworthiness.

For instance, a European company is negotiating a partnership with a Middle Eastern counterpart.

The European company commits to delivering a proposal by a specific deadline and ensures that it is not only met but also includes all promised details and specifications.

They also consistently provide accurate and transparent information throughout the negotiation process, demonstrating integrity and reliability.

By consistently demonstrating reliability in their actions and words, the European company earns the trust of their Middle Eastern counterparts.

Active Listening and Empathy

Actively listening to the perspectives, concerns, and priorities of counterparts and demonstrating empathy can foster trust by signaling genuine interest and understanding.

For example, a tech company in Silicon Valley is negotiating a partnership with a manufacturing company in China.

The Chinese company expresses concerns about maintaining control over certain aspects of the project to ensure alignment with their production standards and timelines.

Instead of dismissing these concerns or pushing their own agenda, the Silicon Valley team takes the time to understand the underlying reasons behind these preferences.

They engage in active listening by asking clarifying questions and seeking to empathize with the challenges faced by their counterparts.

They acknowledge the importance of quality control in manufacturing and express a genuine desire to find a solution that meets the needs of both parties.

This approach fosters a sense of trust and mutual respect between the two parties, laying a solid foundation for a collaborative partnership based on open communication and shared understanding.

Building Bridges of Trust

Trust serves as the linchpin that holds relationships together and propels agreements forward.

By embracing cultural sensitivity, transparency, consistency, and empathy, negotiators can bridge cultural divides, foster trust, and lay the groundwork for successful collaborations that transcend borders.

Ultimately, building trust in cross-cultural negotiations is not just about reaching agreements; it’s about forging enduring bonds of mutual respect, understanding, and cooperation in an increasingly interconnected world.

Cultural Values and the Negotiation Table: Unlocking the Impact of Individualism vs. Collectivism, Hierarchy, and Uncertainty Avoidance

23. February 202423. February 2024by J. WittwerLeave a comment

Negotiation, the art of reaching agreements, is not merely a transactional exchange of offers and counteroffers; it’s a complex dialect of cultural values, beliefs, and norms.

Understanding how cultural values influence negotiation outcomes is essential for achieving results in the global arena.

So, let’s take a look at the impact of cultural values such as individualism versus collectivism, hierarchy, and uncertainty avoidance on negotiation strategies and outcomes.

Individualism vs. Collectivism

Welcome to the boardroom.

On one side of the table: a U.S. company; on the other: a Japanese firm.

While discussing a joint venture, their priorities differ, based on their individualist versus collectivist values.

The American negotiators emphasize their company’s strengths and seek to secure the best possible deal for their organization.

The Japanese negotiators prioritize building trust, fostering mutual respect, and ensuring alignment with their company’s broader goals and values.

One of the most fundamental cultural dimensions impacting negotiation is the degree of individualism versus collectivism within a society.

In individualistic cultures like the United States, negotiation is often approached from a competitive standpoint, with an emphasis on individual goals, autonomy, and personal achievement.

Negotiators may prioritize their own interests and seek to maximize their outcomes, even at the expense of others.

Conversely, in collectivistic cultures such as Japan or China, negotiation is viewed through a communal lens, emphasizing harmony, cooperation, and group cohesion.

Negotiators may focus on building relationships, consensus-building, and ensuring the well-being of the collective.

In these cultures, concessions may be made to preserve group harmony and maintain long-term relationships.

Hierarchy

The boardroom, round two.

On one side: a German company; on the other: a Brazilian company.

While discussing a partnership agreement, their priorities differ based on their views of hierarchy.

The German negotiators expect a collaborative approach, with decisions made based on merit and expertise rather than hierarchical considerations.

The Brazilian negotiators defer to senior executives and prioritize building rapport and respect for authority.

Hierarchy, or the degree of social stratification within a society, significantly influences negotiation dynamics.

In hierarchical cultures like those found in many Asian and Latin American countries, respect for authority, status, and seniority plays a central role in negotiation interactions.

Negotiators may defer to higher-ranking individuals, and decisions may be made by those in positions of authority.

In contrast, in egalitarian cultures such as those in Northern Europe or Australia, negotiation tends to be more egalitarian, with an emphasis on equality, meritocracy, and consensus-building.

Negotiators may engage in open dialogue, challenge assumptions, and seek input from all stakeholders, regardless of rank or status.

Uncertainty Avoidance

The boardroom, round three.

On one side: a Swedish company; on the other: a Saudi Arabian company.

While discussing a business partnership, their priorities differ based on their level of uncertainty avoidance.

The Swedish negotiators are more open to exploring creative solutions and adapting to changing circumstances.

The Saudi negotiators prefer clear agreements, detailed contracts, and a structured approach to minimize uncertainty and risk.

Uncertainty avoidance, or the degree to which a culture tolerates ambiguity and uncertainty, shapes negotiation outcomes.

In cultures with high uncertainty avoidance, such as those found in many Asian and Middle Eastern countries, negotiators may prefer clear rules, detailed contracts, and predictable outcomes.

Negotiation strategies may focus on minimizing risk and ensuring stability.

Conversely, in cultures with low uncertainty avoidance, such as those in the United States or Northern Europe, negotiators may be more comfortable with ambiguity and uncertainty.

Negotiation approaches may be more flexible, adaptive, and open to innovative solutions, with less emphasis on rigid rules or formalities.

Come to the Negotiation Table Prepared

Cultural values – particularly individualism vs collectivism, hierarchy, and uncertainty avoidance – play a profound role in shaping negotiation outcomes, influencing everything from communication styles to decision-making processes.

By understanding and respecting cultural differences, negotiators can adapt their strategies and approaches to navigate diverse cultural landscapes successfully.

Going Dutch: The Importance of Learning the Proper Meal-Sharing Etiquette in Foreign Countries

19. January 2024by J. WittwerLeave a comment

Imagine showing up for a meal in your new host country with only the knowledge of your own cultural expectations regarding who will pay.

Once the ticket lands on the table, confusion or even anger may ensue, as you discover those you’re sharing a meal with expect you to pay for it in its entirety – or refuse to let you pay for yourself.

This latter method of payment is called “going Dutch” in much of the Western world, and it’s becoming much more commonplace.

The Origins of “Going Dutch”

It’s not clear if “going Dutch” is actually a norm of the Dutch, as the origins of the phrase are believed to be rooted in the enmity between the Dutch and the English.

Dictionary.com states,

It’s popularly thought the expression originated as a British slur towards the perceived stinginess of Dutch people.”

Much like the phrases, “Irish Exit” and “French Leave,” the term was likely introduced as a slur to indicate rude behavior.

But it is now used in a more or less benign way to describe how to divide up pay at a restaurant.

Other areas of the world have similar phrases to indicate the same act (some of which were also originally an insult).

In Egypt, for instance, going Dutch is called “Englizy” – or “English-style.”

And in Latin America, the Spanish phrase, “pagan a la Americana,” means “to pay the American-style” and indicates the same method of divvying up the bill.

Contrasting Customs

While “going Dutch” might be spreading, many cultures still approach the question of who foots the bill in their own unique ways.

The U.S. – In the United States, the etiquette around paying for a meal can vary depending on the region and social context. It’s not uncommon for friends to split the bill, especially in casual settings. Sometimes, the split is even, regardless of the meal each individual ordered; other times, everyone requests their own bill. Neither is considered rude. However, in more formal or business settings, the host may take the initiative to cover the entire bill as a gesture of hospitality.
Japan – In Japan, the concept of “going Dutch” is relatively rare. The person who extended the invitation is typically expected to pay for the entire meal. There’s a cultural emphasis on reciprocity, and guests often express gratitude rather than attempting to share the financial burden.
China – In China, the host is also expected to cover the bill, but there may be a polite dance where guests offer to pay as a sign of respect. It’s common for the host to decline the offer initially, but guests may insist before the bill is settled.
France – French dining etiquette tends to lean towards a more formal approach. The person extending the invitation is generally expected to pay and attempting to split the bill may be perceived as gauche. However, close friends might find it acceptable to share expenses.
India – In India, the norm is for the host to pay, especially in social or family settings. However, similar to China, there’s often a dance of politeness where guests offer to pay, and hosts may genuinely appreciate the gesture. In modern, urban settings, splitting the bill is becoming more acceptable among friends.

Learning a Culture’s Norms

Learning and adapting to a culture’s values and norms is one of the key steps to cultural integration.

Cultural expectation surrounding shared meals is an important piece of information to have in your back pocket.

After all, you don’t want to be considered rude.

While the Dutch approach emphasizes equality and shared responsibility, other cultures will have different values that they bring to the table (pun intended).

As we indulge in culinary experiences around the globe, understanding and respecting these cultural differences can enhance our enjoyment of shared meals across borders.

Going Green: How Culture Plays A Part In Green Marketing & Advertising Strategies

3. November 2023by J. WittwerLeave a comment

“Go green, breathe clean.”

“If you cannot reuse, refuse.”

“Better environment, better tomorrow.”

These slogans may rhyme (sometimes), but do they stick with you?

That might depend on your culture.

As climate and the environment become an increasingly hot topic (no pun intended), green product advertisers face the challenge of both pushing consumers toward sustainable products and retaining public interest.

In a world focusing more and more on sustainable consumption and production, driving change in consumers’ unsustainable habits is paramount.

But for advertisers, a greener future is not yet clear.

Essential to clarifying it are the cultural underpinnings that shape consumers’ motives for buying and consumption.

That’s where cultural research comes in.

This study dissects the role of cultural value orientation in environmental behavior, particularly in consumer preferences for green products.

Horizontal Individualism vs. Vertical Collectivism & Green Motivation

The primary goal of this study was to unravel the influence of horizontal individualism and vertical collectivism on consumers’ attitudes toward green products and their purchase intentions.

The study also aimed to dissect the role of environmental responsibility as a mediator in the relationship between these cultural values and consumers’ green product attitudes.

Collecting data from two distinct cultures that represent both extremes – Pakistan (vertical collectivism) and Finland (horizontal individualism) – the study found that environmental responsibility connected positively with cultural values in both countries, showing a shared commitment to environmental protection.

And, in fact, environmental responsibility didn’t just play a supporting role; it was a full mediator in the relationship between cultural values and consumers’ attitudes towards green products.

Consumers Believe in Their Role

Findings showed that consumers in both cultures believe they’re responsible for taking an active role in issues related to environmental protection, ultimately shaping positive attitudes towards green products.

The results encourage a shift in focus, with a recognition that HI and VC consumers harbor a unique sense of environmental responsibility that guides their choices.

For the VC-Pakistan culture, embracing eco-consciousness can serve as a status symbol, appealing to their desire to display social status and fulfill in-group and family obligations.

Marketers should weave these themes into their advertising messages to promote the purchase and consumption of green products.

In contrast, HI-Finland consumers seek uniqueness and self-reliance in their surroundings.

Therefore, marketers targeting this group should craft messages that emphasize these merits, showcasing how green products can make them stand out and express self-reliance in environmental protection.

In order to advance their agenda, multinational companies should apply these findings, adapting their green marketing and advertising strategies to resonate with the prevailing cultural values in each country.

The larger implication is clear: to foster a greener future, green marketing and advertising should not merely rely on economic and status benefits but should also convey the importance of environmentally responsible consumption.

Cause-related, socially responsible, environmentally friendly, and mindful consumption messages can ignite the demand for green products.

How Does Personal Control & Relationship Strain Affect Well-Being in Independent/Interdependent Cultures

1. July 2023by J. WittwerLeave a comment

Do you feel personal control contributes most to your health and well-being?

How does relational strain come into play?

To investigate the relationship between culture and well-being, a cross-cultural survey was conducted, focusing on two hypotheses and the two very different cultures of Japan and America.

The Hypotheses

The first hypothesis suggests that individuals are influenced by the predominant cultural norms of either independence (emphasizing personal control) in the United States or interdependence (emphasizing relational harmony) in Japan.

The second hypothesis proposes that individuals attain well-being and health by aligning with the cultural mandates of their respective societies.

Ethnocentricity & Previous Studies

Previous studies, predominantly conducted in North America, have consistently found that personal control and mastery are strong predictors of well-being and health (Lachman and Weaver, 1998; Schneiderman et al., 2001).

However, this may be a somewhat ethnocentric view.

The present research, utilizing diverse age groups from both the United States and Japan, reveals that the impact of these factors is contingent on cultural context.

While biological factors certainly play a role in health, this survey highlights the significant influence of culture-specific psychological variables, such as personal control and relational harmony or strain, on various health outcomes.

The Results

Consistent with the first hypothesis, it was found that Americans who felt their personal control was compromised and Japanese individuals experiencing strained relationships reported higher levels of perceived constraint.

As expected, the study revealed that the strongest predictor of well-being and health in the United States was personal control, whereas in Japan, the absence of relational strain played a significant role.

The data revealed relatively small but statistically significant effects of relational harmony or relational strain on wellbeing and health among Americans.

The overall results highlight the existence of culturally distinct pathways to achieving positive life outcomes.

In the United States, personal control emerges as a crucial factor, whereas in Japan, the absence of relational strain is key.

These findings underscore the influence of cultural values on individual well-being and emphasize the importance of understanding cultural nuances when studying and promoting positive life outcomes.

Values & Communication: How Cultural Perspective Colors Our Speech

9. June 2023by J. Wittwer1 Comment

You’re flying to London, and you’re sitting by someone from another culture on the plane.

You decide to try and strike up a conversation.

You start chitchatting, sharing about your visit to London, asking about their final destination, wondering what their plans are…but they seem reluctant to speak.

They avoid eye contact and offer only short answers. After a while, you catch a clue and give them the solace of silence.

You walk away from the attempt at small talk with the impression that they’re shy.

While you may be right that they’re more introverted, their communication style may also simply be part of their culture.

In this study in the International Education Journal, titled “Why do they not talk?”, unique habits of communication were found in individualist and collectivist cultures.

The study evaluated the communication tactics of Australian and Chinese students to discover the distinct cultural differences that set each apart.

The Australians

The Australian students demonstrated a more independent self, emphasizing individuality in their communication.

They expressed themselves openly and asserted their unique inner qualities in interactions with friends, parents, and in class.

Their behavior was guided by their individual personalities rather than predefined roles.

They appeared nonchalant about others’ opinions, focusing on being their own person while still desiring their parents’ pride.

The Chinese

In contrast, the Chinese students displayed a high degree of self-monitoring.

They exhibited an interdependent self, prioritizing group harmony and considering others’ perceptions.

They were sensitive to others’ feelings and often hesitated to voice their opinions, particularly in class or group settings, for fear of imposing on others.

Some researchers suggested that their attentiveness to others’ expectations might compromise their verbal fluency and creative expression.

Additionally, the Chinese students tended to downplay their abilities and engage in self-effacement, adhering to societal expectations and valuing humility.

The Chinese students also demonstrated a strong inclination toward affiliating with groups that shared their language and cultural background.

This sense of security and belonging contributed to their intense focus on working collectively and cooperatively as a group.

It’s important to note that interdependence does not negate individual judgment, opinions, or abilities.

Instead, it highlights the adaptive nature of Chinese students who navigate interpersonal situations by balancing their self-awareness and agency.

As one student put it,

“As long as I know I am good, enough already. We were not brought up to brag about ourselves.”

Individualism vs. Collectivism

To sum up, the Australian students emphasized their individuality and personal expression in communication, while the Chinese students prioritized group harmony and were attuned to others’ perceptions.

This is common in individualist versus collectivist cultures.

These cultural differences shape communication styles and strategies, highlighting the diverse ways in which individuals navigate social interactions.

The Theory of a Universal Structure of Human Values

2. June 2023by J. WittwerLeave a comment

What values do you consider “collectivist”? How about “individualist”?

If you had to explain your own values, under which headline would they fall?

This study examines the values of American, Indian, and Japanese populations.

The intent of this cross-cultural research was to measure the individualist, collectivist, and mixed values in each culture to see where they fell.

First off, what constitutes an “individualist” versus a “collectivist” value?

The Values

The researchers used the theory of a universal structure of human values, proposed by Schwartz and Bilsky in 1987 (revised in 1992).

Each value is labeled individualist, collectivist, or mixed and are as follows:

Power: Attainment of social status, dominance, and control. (Individualist)
Achievement: Personal success and competence. (I)
Hedonism: Pleasure and enjoyment. (I)
Stimulation: Excitement, novelty, and a thrilling life. (I)
Self-Direction: Independent thought, action, and autonomy. (I)
Benevolence: Preserving and improving the welfare of others. (Collectivist)
Tradition: Respect for and acceptance of cultural customs and traditions. (C)
Conformity: Restraint of behaviors to maintain social order and harmony. (C)
Universalism: Understanding, tolerance, and protection for the welfare of all. (Mixed)
Security: Stability of self, relationships, and society. (M)
Spirituality: Finding meaning, inner harmony, and having a spiritual life. (M)

These values encompass a range of motivations and goals that individuals may prioritize in their lives.

The Results

Along with these value types were subcategories of value traits.

And of these value traits, Americans, Indians, and Japanese participants were compatible in 14 of the 22 individualist values.

Of the collectivist values, participants were compatible in 13 out of 15.

Lastly, of the mixed values, there was compatibility in 9 out of 15 (and absolutely none regarding spiritual values).

The American participants, as expected, scored high on individualist values and mixed types. They had a preference for standing out from the crowd.

Indians, on the other hand, were drawn to collectivist and mixed values. They believed in the power of unity.

The Japanese students threw a bit of a curveball. They didn’t follow any clear pattern of individualism or collectivism.

This study suggests that no country – including the United States, India, or Japan – can be neatly labeled as just individualist or collectivist. Each has a melting pot of values.

Independent variables like gender, race, income, or media usage may also help us understand why individualistic and collectivist orientations coexist in the same cultures.