Cultural Factors

Adrian Jasper C. Cruz, MBA-TQM

Doctor of Philosophy in Management
De La Salle Araneta University
Communication Moves Organizations

“Without the right words, used in the

right way, it is unlikely that the right
actions will ever occur.”

“Communication and action within

organizations . . . are inseparable.”

Eccles, R.G. & Nohria, N. (1992). Beyond the hype:

Discovering the essence of management. Boston:
Harvard Business School Press.
Top competency for global
leaders is effective
communication.

- ability to communicate,
motivate others and knowledge
about communication style
differences.
Wibbeke, E.S. & MacArthur, S. (2014). Global
business leadership. (2nd ed.). New York; Routledge.
The problem for American business is
that too many organizations have
operated with an ethnocentric
approach to their ventures abroad.

Ethnocentric mindset means that US

business leaders consider language,
values, and behaviors as standardized
throughout the world.

Wibbeke, E.S. & MacArthur, S. (2014). Global business

leadership. (2nd ed.). New York; Routledge.
Ethnocentrism vs. Culture Relativism

Ethnocentrism is judging another culture solely by the

values and standards of one's own culture. Having or
based on the idea that your own group or culture is
better or more important than others.

Cultural relativism - to see the different habits, traits

and values of an individual in the relevance of his or
her cultural values. No culture gets to be termed as
superior or inferior one. All the values, norms and
traits get to be seen in the cultural relevance where it
being understood that one value appropriate for one
specific culture can be inappropriate for the other.
All communication is cultural.
People communicate by drawing on
learned patterns, rules and norms.

Wibbeke, E.S. & MacArthur, S. (2014). Global

business leadership. (2nd ed.). New York; Routledge.
References:
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1984). Information richness: A new approach to managerial behavior and
organizational design. Research in Organizational Behavior, 6, 191-233.
Daft, R. L., Lengel, R. H., & Trevino, L. (1987). Message equivocality, media selection, and manager
performance: Implications for information systems. MIS Quarterly, 11(3), 354-366.
Non-Verbal Communications
What Is Nonverbal Communication?
Nonverbal communication describes the way
people send and receive information to each other
beyond words.

Although nonverbal communication is a universal

phenomenon, meanings of nonverbal cues are not.

- important in a high-context cultures.

Tidwell, C. (n.d.). Non-Verbal Communication Modes. Retrieved from

http://www.andrews.edu/~tidwell/bsad560/NonVerbal.html.
The Theory of High & Low
Context Cultures (Hall, 1979)
To further understand the nuances of
nonverbal communication across cultures,
it is important to know the differences .

“High-context” cultures rely heavily on

nonverbal communication, using elements
such as the closeness of their relationships,
strict social hierarchies and deep cultural
knowledge to convey meaning.

In contrast, “low-context” cultures depend

largely on words themselves.
Communication tends to be more direct.
Proxemics is the study of human use of space and the effects
that population density has on behavior, communication,
and social interaction.
Meanings of nonverbal cues are not universal

Although nonverbal communication is a universal

phenomenon, meanings of nonverbal cues are not,
in fact, universal. They vary tremendously across
cultures and are often ambiguous. Because of this
fact, it is crucial for those who work in international
business settings to have at least a rudimentary
understanding of the ways nonverbal cues are
communicated across and within foreign cultures.
 Global leaders and
communication

De-hua, W. & Hui, L. (2007). Nonverbal language in cross-cultural

communication. Sino-US English Teaching. 4, (10 ).
Cultural Differences in Non-verbal Communication

Tidwell, C. (n.d.). Cultural Differences in Non-verbal Communication

Retrieved August 1, 2017 from
https://www.andrews.edu/~tidwell/bsad560/NonVerbal.html

1. General Appearance and Dress

Americans, for instance, appear almost

obsessed with dress and personal
attractiveness. Consider differing cultural
standards on what is attractive in dress
and on what constitutes modesty.
2. Body Movement
We send information on attitude toward
person (facing or leaning towards another),
emotional statue (tapping fingers, jiggling
coins), and desire to control the environment
(moving towards or away from a person).

More than 700,000 possible motions we can

make — so impossible to categorize them all!
But just need to be aware the body
movement and position is a key ingredient in
sending messages.
3. Posture

a. Bowing “pagyuko” (not done, criticized, or

affected in US; shows rank in Japan)

b. Slouching “nakayuko” (rude in most Northern

European areas)

c. Hands in pocket (disrespectful in Turkey)

d. Sitting with legs crossed (offensive in Ghana,

Turkey)

e. Showing soles of feet “talampakan” (Offensive in

Thailand, Saudi Arabia)
4. Gestures
- using hands to point and count differ.

Pointing: US with index finger; Germany

with little finger; Japanese with entire
hand (in fact, most Asians consider
pointing with index finger to be rude)

Counting: Thumb = 1 in Germany, 5 in

Japan, middle finger for 1 in Indonesia.
5. Facial Expressions

Many Asian cultures suppress facial expression as

much as possible.

Many Mediterranean (Latino / Arabic) cultures

exaggerate grief or sadness while most American
men hide grief or sorrow.

Too much smiling is viewed in as a sign

of shallowness. Women smile more
than men.
6. Eye Contact and Gaze

In USA, eye contact indicates: degree of

attention or interest, influences attitude change
or persuasion, regulates interaction,
communicates emotion, defines power and
status, and has a central role in managing
impressions of others.
Western cultures — see direct eye to eye
contact as positive.
Arabic cultures make prolonged eye-contact. —
believe it shows interest and helps them
understand truthfulness of the other person. (A
person who doesn’t reciprocate is seen as
untrustworthy)

Japan, Africa, Latin American, Caribbean —

avoid eye contact to show respect.
7. Touch
Why do we touch, where do we touch, and what meanings do we
assign when someone else touches us?

Illustration: An African-American male goes into a

convenience store recently taken over by new Korean
immigrants. He gives a $20 bill for his purchase to Mrs.
Cho who is cashier and waits for his change. He is upset
when his change is put down on the counter in front of
him. What is the problem?
Traditional Korean (and many other Asian countries)
don’t touch strangers., especially between members of
the opposite sex. But the African-American sees this as
another example of discrimination (not touching him
because he is black).
Basic answer:
Touch is culturally determined! But each culture has a
clear concept of what parts of the body one may not
touch.

USA — handshake is common (even for strangers), hugs,

kisses for those of opposite gender or of family (usually)

Islamic and Hindu: typically don’t touch with the left

hand. To do so is a social insult. Left hand is for toilet
functions. Mannerly in India to break your bread only
with your right hand (sometimes difficult for non-
Indians)
Islamic cultures generally don’t approve of any
touching between genders (even hand shakes).
But consider such touching (including hand
holding, hugs) between same-sex to be
appropriate.
Many Asians don’t touch the head (Head houses
the soul and a touch puts it in jeopardy).

Basic patterns: Cultures (English , German,

Scandinavian, Chinese, Japanese) with high
emotional restraint concepts have little public
touch; those which encourage emotion (Latino,
Middle-East, Jewish) accept frequent touches.
8. Smell
1. USA — fear of offensive natural smells (billion
dollar industry to mask objectionable odors with
what is perceived to be pleasant)

2. Many other cultures consider natural body

odors as normal (Arabic)

3. Asian cultures (Filipino, Malay, Thai) stress

frequent bathing — and often criticize USA of not
bathing often enough!
9. Paralanguage
Vocal characterizers (laugh, cry, yell, moan,
whine, belch, yawn). These send different
messages in different cultures (Japan — giggling
indicates embarrassment; India – belch indicates
satisfaction)

Vocal qualifiers (volume, pitch, rhythm, tempo,

and tone). Loudness indicates strength in Arabic
cultures and softness indicates weakness;
indicates confidence and authority to the
Germans, indicates impoliteness to the Thais;
indicates loss of control to the Japanese.
 Hofstede’s National Culture

G. Hofstede identified five

dimensions of national culture:
individualism-collectivism,
uncertainty avoidance,
masculinity-femininity, power
distance, and time orientation.
Individualism-Collectivism

Individualism-Collectivism
“Pursuit of self- or group interest”
 Individualism-Collectivism
• In an individualistic culture like the
United States, employees expect to
be hired, evaluated, and rewarded
based on their personal skills and
accomplishments.
• In a collectivist culture, employees
are more likely to have a voice in
decisions. “Union”, “Strike”
 Uncertainty Avoidance

Uncertainty Avoidance
refers to the degree to which people prefer
structured rather than unstructured
situations.
 Uncertainty Avoidance
Cultures with a strong uncertainty avoidance
orientation (e.g., Japan, Russia) favor
structured situations. Religion, law, or
technology in these countries socialize people
to seek security through clear rules on how to
act.
In a culture with weak uncertainty avoidance
(e.g., Jamaica, Hong Kong), employees cope by
not worrying too much about the future.
 Masculinity-Femininity

Masculinity-femininity
refers to the extent to which the culture
values behavior considered traditionally
masculine (competitiveness) or feminine
(helpfulness)
 Masculinity-Femininity
Examples of “masculine” cultures include
Japan, Germany, and the United States.
Here assertiveness and competitiveness
are valued.
In contrast, in a culture such as the
Netherlands, a higher value is likely placed
on quality of life, helping others, and
preserving the environment.
 Power Distance

Power distance
refers to expectations for the unequal
distribution of power in a hierarchy.
“How people talk to one another”
 Power Distance
Power distance
refers to expectations for the unequal
distribution of power in a hierarchy.

India, Mexico, and Russia, for example, have

great power distance. This means that people
attempt to maintain differences between
various levels of the hierarchy.
 Power Distance
In high power distance countries such as
Mexico and Japan, people address each
other with titles (Señor Smith, Smith-san).

At the other extreme, in most situations in

the United States people use first names
—behavior that would be disrespectful in
other countries.
 Time Orientation

Time orientation
refers to the degree to which a culture
focuses on the future rather than the
past and present.
 Time Orientation

In cultures with a short-term orientation,

such as the United States, Russia, and
West Africa, the orientation is toward the
past and present. These cultures tend to
emphasize respect for tradition and social
obligations.
 Time Orientation

A culture with a long term orientation,

such as Japan and China, values such
traits as thrift and persistence, which
pay off in the future rather than the
present.
References

Berlo's SMCR Model of Communication ( 2017). Retrieved August 2, 2017 from

https://www.businesstopia.net/communication/berlo-model-communication
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1984). Information richness: A new approach to managerial
behavior and organizational design. Research in Organizational Behavior, 6, 191-233.
Daft, R. L., Lengel, R. H., & Trevino, L. (1987). Message equivocality, media selection, and
manager performance: Implications for information systems. MIS Quarterly, 11(3), 354-366.
De-hua, W. & Hui, L. (2007). Nonverbal language in cross-cultural communication. Sino-US
English Teaching. 4, (10 ).
Dessler, D. (1989). What’s at Stake in the Agent ‐Structure Debate?. International
Organization, 43 (3), 441‐473.
GateKeeping Theory. (n.d.). Retrieved August 2, 2017 from
http://communicationtheory.org/gatekeeping-theory/
Litwin, G. H. & Stringer, R. A. (1968). Motivation and organizational climate. Harvard:
Harvard Business School Publications.
Tidwell, C. (n.d.). Non-Verbal Communication Modes. Retrieved from
http://www.andrews.edu/~tidwell/bsad560/NonVerbal.html.
Tidwell, C. (n.d.). Retrieved August 1, 2017 from
https://www.andrews.edu/~tidwell/bsad560/NonVerbal.html
Wibbeke, E.S. & MacArthur, S. (2014). Global business leadership. (2 nd ed.). New York;
Routledge.