Chapter 2 of the Culture Map book

Disciplina: Inglês de Negócios

Curso:1º ano de Negócios Internacionais

Trabalho realizado por:

● Iandro Ismael Alves - 23000141

● Paulo Feijó - 230001446
● Vasco Esperança - 230000563
● Martim Lobo - 230000470

Santarém, 9 Maio de 2024

 Index

● Cover …………………………………………………………………………………… Page 1

● Index ………………………………………………………………………………….… Page 2
● Introduction …………………………...………………………………………………... Page 3
● Speaking Frankly: A Gifto r a Slap in the face? ……………………………………….. Page 3
● Upgraders, Downgraders, and the art of Translation …………………………………... Page 3
● Difference between “Direct negative feedback” and “Indirect negative feedback” …… Page 4
● Graphic analysis …………………………………………………………………. Page 4 and 5
● Low-Context and Direct Negative Feedback …………………………………………... Page 5
● High-Context and Direct Negative Feedback ………………………………………….. Page 5
● Low-Context and Indirect Negative Feedback …………………………………... Page 5 and 6
● High-Context and Indirect Negative Feedback ………………………………….. Page 6 and 7
● What does it mean to be Polite? ……………………………………………………….. Page 7
● Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………………... Page 7
 INTRODUCTION

The Culture Map focuses on how culture changes perceptions. It is a great guide for global managers
and leaders to understand cultural idiosyncrasies and tailor their communication accordingly for
different parts of the world.

In “The Culture Map”, Erin Meyer defines eight areas in which cultural differences are most likely to
lead to misunderstandings in business communications. She also theorizes about why such differences
occur and presents strategies for working with people from different cultures.

Today we are going to analyze the second chapter of the book, “Evaluation”, and determine why it is
important to understand the way different cultures provide feedback, in order to avoid
miscommunication when providing criticism.

SPEAKING FRANKLY: A GIFT OR A SLAP IN THE FACE?

To improve the effectiveness of a team, giving criticism is important to acknowledge and correct
mistakes made by the coworkers, but the way to give criticism is different depending on the culture,
and if you are not careful, you can insult and disrespect the person that is receiving the criticism
without even noticing.

One such example is provided in the book, where Willem, a manager from the Netherlands, had an
American colleague that would call into team meetings while driving her children to school, because
she had no alternative because of the distance between her home and where she worked.

When Willem spoke to her about the distraction of the kids and asked her to find a better solution, she
took offense. That's because in Dutch culture, it's normal to give criticism directly, but the Americans
are much more indirect, and that's why Willem did not understand why his comment would be
insulting to her.

This example shows the importance of recognising the different ways cultures aspect the way we give
criticism, as to avoid cross-cultural misunderstandings.

UPGRADERS, DOWNGRADERS, AND THE ART OF TRANSLATION

One way to understand how a culture handles negative feedback is by listening carefully to the types
of words people use.

Direct cultures tend to use what linguists call “upgraders”, words preceding or following negative
feedback that make it feel stronger, such as “absolutely”, “totally” or “strongly”.

But indirect cultures use more downgraders, words that soften the criticism, like “kind of”, “sort of”,
“a little”, “a bit”, “maybe” and “slightly”.
Another type of downgrader is a deliberate understatement, a sentence that describes a feeling the
speaker experiences strongly in terms that moderate the emotion. For example, saying “We are not
quite there yet” when you really mean “This is nowhere close to complete”.

It's important to note that all cultures use downgraders, but some more than others.

Understanding if the culture of your colleagues values direct or indirect feedback is important so that
you can change the way you speak to avoid problems, because if the person giving criticism is form a
direct culture and the person receiving is form an indirect one, the person giving the criticism is
risking being perceived was aggressive and intolerant.

If the contrary happens, the person giving criticism risks the other not understanding the gravity of a
situation and not changing its behavior, work ethic, or whatever is the problem in question.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
“DIRECT NEGATIVE FEEDBACK” AND “INDIRECT NEGATIVE FEEDBACK”

Direct negative feedback is characterized by negative feedback being provided frankly, bluntly and
honestly. Negative messages stand alone, not softened by positive ones. Absolute descriptors are often
used when criticizing. And criticism may be given to an individual in front of a group.

European countries fall to the direct side of the scale.

Indirect negative feedback is characterized by negative feedback being provided to a colleague softly,
subtly and diplomatically. Positive messages are used to wrap negative ones. Qualifying descriptors
are often used when criticizing. And criticism is given only in private.

On the indirect side of the scale fall most Asian countries.

On the middle of the scale fall American and British cultures, with Latin America and South America
in the middle right.

But it is important to know that several countries have different positions on the Evaluating scale from
those they occupy on the Communicating scale.

Graphic ANALYSIS
Okay, so now talking about my analysis of this graphic, we can see that in quadrant A, the
Netherlands is the most direct country, followed by Germany, which is also direct, and Denmark,
which is the least low-context country. Australia is a low-context country but not as direct.

Moving into quadrant B, Israel is the most direct country and the least high-context, while Russia is
also direct. Spain falls in the middle, France is more of a high-context country, and Italy is the least
direct country and the most high-context among the countries in quadrant B.

LOW-CONTEXT AND DIRECT NEGATIVE FEEDBACK

In cultures where communication is straightforward, like the Netherlands, people tend to speak
directly. They value honesty and transparency, even when giving negative feedback. It's seen as a sign
of respect for being straightforward and honest. Take Willem and Maarten, for example, both from the
Netherlands. They don't hesitate to give or receive criticism directly. Willem appreciated Maarten's
direct feedback, seeing it as constructive rather than offensive.

When interacting with colleagues from such cultures, it's crucial to understand that their directness
isn't meant to be rude but rather a way of showing respect for honesty. If you receive direct criticism,
it's best to take it positively as an opportunity to improve. However, it's risky to mimic this style if it's
not native to you, as it could lead to misunderstandings or even conflicts, as seen with Kwang
Young-Su, a Korean manager who misunderstood the Dutch directness and ended up alienating his
colleagues.

HIGH-CONTEXT AND DIRECT NEGATIVE FEEDBACK

In high-context cultures, such as Russia, communication often involves implicit meanings and
nuances, but when it comes to negative feedback, the approach is direct and straightforward. For
example, Russians have a reputation for expressing criticism, which can be unsettling for colleagues
from other cultures who are not accustomed to such directness. This directness can surprise those
from other cultures who are not used to it. For instance, Anna Golov, a Russian, was straightforward
in her communication, which made her British colleagues uncomfortable. However, by recognizing
the cultural differences and adjusting her approach, she was able to improve the situation.

When dealing with colleagues from such cultures, it's essential to understand these nuances. By being
aware of how negative feedback is perceived in their culture, you can adapt your communication style
accordingly. This ensures effective collaboration and prevents misunderstandings.

LOW-CONTEXT AND INDIRECT NEGATIVE FEEDBACK

This title describes a situation in which negative feedback is provided directly and clearly, without
relying on a broad context shared between interlocutors, but is still communicated in a subtle or
indirect way, rather than being addressed in a frank and explicit way.
This excerpt highlights cultural differences in giving feedback, particularly negative feedback,
between Americans and individuals from other cultures.

The American style, characterized by explicit communication and the practice of softening negative
feedback with positive messages, may be perceived as insincere or confusing by those from cultures
where indirect communication is more common.

For example, the Dutch find American positivity exaggerated and even demeaning, while the French
are accustomed to more direct and critical feedback, which they see as routine rather than
discouraging. The American tendency to use positive language liberally, such as "excellent" for
routine tasks, can lead to misunderstandings, as these terms carry different weights in other cultures.

The excerpt also illustrates how individuals from non-American cultures may have difficulty adapting
to this style of feedback. Sabine Dulac's experience at a committee meeting in Chicago shows the
contrast between her direct criticism and the tendency of her American colleagues to focus on
positives before addressing the negatives.

To effectively navigate these cultural differences, the excerpt suggests several strategies. Firstly, it
advises being explicit and low-context in both positive and negative feedback, ensuring that positive
comments are genuine and detailed. Secondly, it recommends seeking a balance in the amount of
positive and negative feedback given over time. Finally, it suggests framing feedback in cultural terms
and promoting discussions about cultural misunderstandings to build awareness and understanding
among individuals from different backgrounds.

HIGH-CONTEXT AND INDIRECT NEGATIVE FEEDBACK

"High-context and indirect negative feedback" refers to the practice of communicating criticism or
negative feedback subtly and indirectly in cultures where communication is highly contextualized and
relies on nuances and implicit understandings. In contrast to more direct approaches, high-context
cultures tend to use ambiguous or indirect language to convey negative messages, aiming to avoid
direct confrontations or embarrassments. This type of feedback is often delivered privately and
gradually, with an emphasis on preserving harmony and interpersonal relationships.

The text addresses the issue of negative feedback in different cultures, highlighting the differences in
approach between low-context and indirect cultures, represented by "quadrant D," and the American
approach, which is low-context and direct.

● Quadrant D Cultures: In these cultures, such as Mexican and some Asian cultures, negative
feedback is given subtly and indirectly, avoiding embarrassments or direct confrontations.
Giving negative feedback in public is considered unacceptable, and it is preferable to give
negative feedback privately. Strategies for giving feedback include avoiding group

● Informal lunches or praising positive aspects while leaving out the negative.
 ● Personal Experiences: Experiences of individuals who have had difficulties applying the
practices of negative feedback from their own culture in different cultural contexts are shared.
Examples include an American manager in Mexico and an international consultant in
Indonesia.

● Feedback Strategies: The text offers some strategies for giving negative feedback effectively
in quadrant D cultures, such as giving feedback privately, gradually, and indirectly, using
informal methods such as lunches, and emphasizing positive aspects while avoiding directly
mentioning the negatives.

● Cultural Adaptation: Finally, the importance of understanding and adapting to local cultural
norms when providing negative feedback in multicultural environments is emphasized,
highlighting that direct and confrontational methods may not be effective and may even cause
offense or misunderstandings.

WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE POLITE?

Being polite means acting in a way that demonstrates respect, consideration, and kindness towards
others. This involves following social norms and etiquette, as well as showing courtesy and good
manners in interactions with others.

In the context of feedback, politeness can vary greatly depending on cultural norms. For example,
Maarten's statement about Dutch feedback being direct yet polite highlights the cultural perspective
on what constitutes politeness. In Dutch culture, being direct is considered polite, whereas in other
cultures, such directness may be perceived as rude or offensive.

Ultimately, politeness is subjective and can be perceived differently by individuals from different
cultural backgrounds. The key to navigating cross-cultural interactions politely is to adapt one's
behavior, demonstrate humility, consider the cultural context, and invest in building positive
relationships. By doing so, it's possible to be perceived as polite in various cultural settings around the
world.

CONCLUSION

Understanding cultural differences in feedback is vital for effective global communication. "The
Culture Map" sheds light on diverse approaches to criticism, from direct to indirect, across cultures.
Examples like Willem's encounter with his American colleague highlight how misinterpretations can
arise. Language nuances, like upgraders and downgraders, play a significant role. The text
underscores the need for adaptability and empathy in cross-cultural interactions, emphasizing the
subjectivity of politeness. In essence, "The Culture Map" is a valuable resource for navigating cultural
diversity in communication, fostering understanding, and promoting collaboration in multicultural
workplaces.