Various national cultural profiles of China, Saudi Arabia, and Mexico
The various national cultural profiles of China, Saudi Arabia, and Mexico have been discussed by Hofstede and are pertinent to cross-cultural commercial communications. Hofstede analyzed a variety of cultural factors, including indulgence, long-term orientation, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity, individualism, and power distance. Important components of international communication include the legal, political, economic, and ethical systems (Hofstede, 2011).
Arabic Kingdom
The distance between each individual and the next is known as the power distance. In comparison to the other two countries, Saudi Arabia had the highest rating of 95. How much influence or persuasiveness a person has over another is another way to measure power gap. This cultural dimension is recognized mostly in the Middle-Eastern culture than in the U.S. (Hofstede, 2011). The ethical and economic systems of Saudi Arabia and other Middle East countries encourages a polychronic culture. Polychronic culture is about multitasking which can be easily distracted, and one may easily change plans.\\nMexico
Mexico
Uncertainty avoidance is described as the way a certain culture deals with the situations that the imminent future cannot be identified. Mexico had the highest score of 82 of the four cultures. This shows that Mexico is more intolerant and stern of unconventional actions since they have a higher inclination for circumventing ambiguity. Mexico also exhibited a higher level of indulgence with a score of 97 demonstrating how important leisure time is in their culture. The ethical and political systems of Mexico and other Latin American countries also encourage a polychronic culture (Brett, 2011).
China
Long term orientation is a cultural dimension described as a measure of how every culture maintains some connection with the past while dealing with current challenges and future challenges. China was the highest with a score of 87 demonstrating the ability to adapt easily to traditions with the tendency of being thriftier. The Chinese culture is highly viewed as collectivism which emphasizes on personal relationships than that of work. Unlike China, the U.S. is more individualistic where selective responsibilities are provided and held accountable (Brett, 2011).
Cultural variables had numerous implications on the communication with each team representative
Different representative portrayed cultural variables that had certain implications. For instance, some representatives used nonverbal communications such as body posture, facial expressions, and eye contact which differs across the cultures. The implications of these nonverbal communication cues had different implications, like direct eye contact, can be a sign of disrespect (Ada, 2015).
Nonverbal behavior is used to accentuate and accent verbal communication. The most typical form of nonverbal communication is smiling and can be viewed differently in different cultures. For instance, in most Asian cultures a smile can be thought as being embarrassed or in pain, while in Scandinavian cultures it can be interpreted as a sign of weakness. Another example of nonverbal communication is the eye contact with several cultural differences. In America, eye contact is vital as it is interpreted as a sign of showing each other respect, while in Asian cultures prolonged eye contact can be seen as belligerent.
Effective Communication among Participants
During the meeting with the team representatives, certain biases and barriers in the cross-cultural business communication interfered with effective communication. These barriers include culture shock, communication apprehension, and ethnocentrism. Ethnocentrism is a process of dividing cultures by using words like "them" and "us." The members of an individual's culture are regarded as in-group and others as out-group. This was evident when some members referred to people of their cultures as to greater ones than others during the meeting. Ethnocentrism encourages hostility and affects the understanding of the message. Communication apprehension is a personal level of anxiety or fear related to either anticipated or real communication with another person. General personality traits like reticence, shyness, and quietness, often precipitate communication apprehension. When the desire and ability to participate in a discussion are present, but the verbalization process is hindered, reticence or shyness occurs. The degree of shyness varies from an individual to individual (Brett, 2011). Factors that may lead to communication apprehension include cultural divergence in communication norms, low social self-esteem, speech skill deficiencies, and low intellectual skills. Moreover, culture shock is the experience an individual may have when moving to a cultural environment that is different from his original culture. Culture shock can have one of the four distinct phases, adaptation, adjustment, negotiation, and honeymoon. The common problems associated with culture shock include infinite regress, formulation dependency, generation gap, language barrier, information overload, and boredom (Ada, 2015).
To avoid misinterpretation and communication barriers. Issues such as listening properly, avoiding jargon, keeping an open mind, and being aware of cultural differences should be considered. In most work environments, people fight to be heard which has affected their ability to listen leading to misinterpretation and communication barriers. To avoid this mistake, one has to be attentive to understand the other person. This way, one will avoid any misunderstandings between the two parties. Jargon is an insider language which can alienate people in a conversation. Certain terms or abbreviations might not be known to a new person making them feel like outsiders. Thus, one must communicate in a way that everyone understands. Furthermore, people interpret words differently and look at situations differently as well. It is important to keep an open mind and recognize that variations in understanding and perspective are natural. By keeping an open mind, communication barriers and misinterpretations can be minimized. Finally, cultural sensitivities differ from place to place making it vital to be aware of cultural differences in communication. Therefore, one has to know how to overcome some common communication barriers (Johnson, Lenartowicz & Apud, 2006).
Negotiations can be uncomfortable and hinder the formation of strong relationships because of the mistakes that may be committed by the negotiating parties. Numerous communication mistakes that can affect effective communication include reacting and not responding, not being assertive, avoiding difficult conversations, failure to prepare enough, and failing to keep an open mind when meeting new people. A person may fail to respond and start reacting by shouting with frustration to a colleague. This type of emotional reaction can ruin a person's reputation giving an impression of lack of emotional intelligence and self-control. Moreover, assertiveness entails stating one's need, while considering the needs of others. It also means saying "no" when one needs to and explains how to turn down requests assertively while maintaining strong relationships. At some point, business negotiations involve giving negative feedback which can cause problems. Difficult conversations should not be avoided instead should be handled with care. People should learn to give actionable and clear feedback and to use tools like the situation-behavior-impact technique (Johnson, Lenartowicz & Apud, 2006).
References
Ada S. (2015). Project Communication Tips: Nonverbal Communication in Different Cultures. http://www.brighthubpm.com/monitoring-projects/85141-project-communication-tips-nonverbal-communication-in-different-cultures/
Brett R. (2011). Cultural Differences – Monochronic versus Polychronic / Brett Rutledge August 28, 2011 from http://thearticulateceo.typepad.com/my-blog/2011/08/cultural-differences-monochronic-versus-polychronic.html
Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online readings in psychology and culture, 2(1), 8.
Johnson, J. P., Lenartowicz, T., & Apud, S. (2006). Cross-cultural competence in international business: Toward a definition and a model. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(4), 525-543.
