Discovering Problems in Intercultural Communication While visiting Egypt,Richard,an engineer from the United States,was invited to a spectacular dinner at the home of an Egyptian friend.And what a dinner it was!Clearly the host and hostess had gone out of their way to entertain him.Yet,as he was leaving their home he made a special effort to thank them for their dinner and sensed something he said was wrong.Something about his sincere compliments was misunderstood. In Japan he had an even less pleasant experience though he thought he had handled it well. A number of serious mistakes had occurred in a project he was supervising.While the fault did not lie with any one person,he was a supervisor and at least partly to blame.At a special meeting called to discuss the problem,poor Richard made an effort to explain in detail why he had done what he had done.He wanted to show that anybody in the same situation could have made the same mistake and to tacitly suggest that he should not be blamed unduly.He even went to the trouble of distributing materials which explained the situation rather clearly.And yet,even during his explanation,he sensed that something he was saying or doing was wrong. Even in England where he felt more at home,where he had no problems with language,this kind of misunderstanding occurred.He had been invited to take tea with one of his colleagues,a purely social,relaxed occasion.Tea was severed along with sugar and cream.As he helped himself to some sugar and cream,he again sensed he had done something wrong.But what went wrong? We should know that in Egypt as in many cultures,the human relationship is valued so highly that it is not expressed in an objective and impersonal way.While Americans certainly value human relationships,they are more likely to speak of them in less personal,more objective terms.In this case,Richard's mistake might be that he chose to praise the food itself rather than the total evening,for which the food was simply the setting or excuse.For his host and hostess it was as if he had attended an art exhibit and complimented the artist by saying,"What beautiful frames your pictures are in." In Japan the situation that may be more complicated.For this example we can simply say that Japanese people value order and harmony among persons in a group,and that the organization itself-be it a family or a corporation-is more valued than the characteristics of any particular member.While this feeling is not alien to Americans -or to any society -Americans stress individuality as a value and are apt to assert individual differences when they seem justifiably in conflict with the goals or values of the group.In this case:Richard's mistake was in the making great efforts to defend himself.Let the others assume that the errors were not intentional,but it is not right to defend yourself,even when your unstated intent is to assist the group by warning others of similar mistakes.A simple apology and acceptance of the blame would have been appropriate. When it comes to England,though there are some significant differences in language and language style,we expect fewer problems between Americans and Englishmen than between Americans and almost any other group.In this case we might look beyond the gesture of taking sugar or cream to the values expressed in this gesture:for Americans,"Help yourself";for the English counterpart,"Be my guest."American and English people equally enjoy entertaining and being entertained but they differ somewhat in the value of the distinction.Typically,the ideal
Discovering Problems in Intercultural Communication While visiting Egypt, Richard, an engineer from the United States, was invited to a spectacular dinner at the home of an Egyptian friend. And what a dinner it was! Clearly the host and hostess had gone out of their way to entertain him. Yet, as he was leaving their home he made a special effort to thank them for their dinner and sensed something he said was wrong. Something about his sincere compliments was misunderstood. In Japan he had an even less pleasant experience though he thought he had handled it well. A number of serious mistakes had occurred in a project he was supervising. While the fault did not lie with any one person, he was a supervisor and at least partly to blame. At a special meeting called to discuss the problem, poor Richard made an effort to explain in detail why he had done what he had done. He wanted to show that anybody in the same situation could have made the same mistake and to tacitly suggest that he should not be blamed unduly. He even went to the trouble of distributing materials which explained the situation rather clearly. And yet, even during his explanation, he sensed that something he was saying or doing was wrong. Even in England where he felt more at home, where he had no problems with language, this kind of misunderstanding occurred. He had been invited to take tea with one of his colleagues, a purely social, relaxed occasion. Tea was severed along with sugar and cream. As he helped himself to some sugar and cream, he again sensed he had done something wrong. But what went wrong? We should know that in Egypt as in many cultures, the human relationship is valued so highly that it is not expressed in an objective and impersonal way. While Americans certainly value human relationships, they are more likely to speak of them in less personal, more objective terms. In this case, Richard’s mistake might be that he chose to praise the food itself rather than the total evening, for which the food was simply the setting or excuse. For his host and hostess it was as if he had attended an art exhibit and complimented the artist by saying, “What beautiful frames your pictures are in.” In Japan the situation that may be more complicated. For this example we can simply say that Japanese people value order and harmony among persons in a group, and that the organization itself –be it a family or a corporation –is more valued than the characteristics of any particular member. While this feeling is not alien to Americans –or to any society –Americans stress individuality as a value and are apt to assert individual differences when they seem justifiably in conflict with the goals or values of the group. In this case: Richard’s mistake was in the making great efforts to defend himself. Let the others assume that the errors were not intentional, but it is not right to defend yourself, even when your unstated intent is to assist the group by warning others of similar mistakes. A simple apology and acceptance of the blame would have been appropriate. When it comes to England, though there are some significant differences in language and language style, we expect fewer problems between Americans and Englishmen than between Americans and almost any other group. In this case we might look beyond the gesture of taking sugar or cream to the values expressed in this gesture: for Americans, “Help yourself”; for the English counterpart, “Be my guest.” American and English people equally enjoy entertaining and being entertained but they differ somewhat in the value of the distinction. Typically, the ideal
guest at an American party is one who"makes himself at home,"even to the point of answering the door or fixing his own drink.For persons in many other societies,including at least this English host,such guest behavior is presumptuous or rude. In analyzing apparent problems of communication across cultures,it is all too tempting to look first for difficulties posed by language misinterpretation or assume some nonverbal indiscretion.But we have tried to suggest through these brief discussions of Richard's problems that the misunderstanding or misbehavior more likely resides elsewhere,in the subtler but consistent cultural patterns of behavior that become understandable when we appreciate difference in cultural values.Thus what we first need,in attempting to analyze any such situation,is not necessarily more language skill or more information about a particular culture,but rather an openness to alternatives to our own conventional behavior.If we appreciate the logic of our own actions,we can more quickly imagine alternative equally consistent with other values
guest at an American party is one who “makes himself at home,” even to the point of answering the door or fixing his own drink. For persons in many other societies, including at least this English host, such guest behavior is presumptuous or rude. In analyzing apparent problems of communication across cultures, it is all too tempting to look first for difficulties posed by language misinterpretation or assume some nonverbal indiscretion. But we have tried to suggest through these brief discussions of Richard’s problems that the misunderstanding or misbehavior more likely resides elsewhere, in the subtler but consistent cultural patterns of behavior that become understandable when we appreciate difference in cultural values. Thus what we first need, in attempting to analyze any such situation, is not necessarily more language skill or more information about a particular culture, but rather an openness to alternatives to our own conventional behavior. If we appreciate the logic of our own actions, we can more quickly imagine alternative equally consistent with other values
