Multicultural Communication: Back to the BasicsRhonda J. Stanton

The need for effective multicultural communication isbecoming more prevalent in the world as countries do morebusiness globally and borders disappear. To be effective inmulticultural communication we must anticipate audienceexpectations, which can be known only through the study ofthe culture. While establishing relationships with people isthe most effective way to accomplish this task, people oftendo not have this opportunity. When communicating withsomeone from a different culture, we must know some basicconcepts.

INTRODUCTION

Most, if not all, of us have heard of problems that occurredwhen slogans for products were not effectively translated ininternational advertising promotions. On the websitewww.grammarlady.com, Mary N. Bruder mentions severaltranslations gone bad. For example, when Chevrolet tried tosell the Nova to Spanish-speaking countries, it never soldwell because in Spanish, “No va” translates into “It does notgo.” Also, when Pepsi started marketing products in China,the slogan, “Pepsi Brings You Back to Life” was translatedpretty literally. The slogan in Chinese really meant, “PepsiBrings Your Ancestors Back from the Grave” (1).

Americans found that in Africa, since most people cannotread, companies routinely put pictures of what is actuallyinside the container on food labels. When Gerber firststarted selling baby food in Africa, it used the samepackaging as here in the U.S.A.—with the cute baby on thelabel (2). Africans were mortified, and the baby food did notsell well.

In his textbook Technical Communication, Mike Markelspeaks of the importance of learning about other cultures.He tells of an advertising promotion for deodorant where anoctopus is shown applying the deodorant under all of itsarms. This campaign didn’t work in Japan because in Japanthe octopus has legs, not arms (107).

Naomi Klein, columnist for the Toronto Star, tells that whenWarner Brothers began playing Looney Tunes in China, thename Bugs Bunny was translated as “Big Brother Rabbit”(2). In another incident, Ford’s new model, the Fiera, wasnot well received in South America, where the name Fierameans “ugly old woman” (2).

These mistakes and others have brought to our attention theneed to better asses how our audiences are going to interpretour messages. Audience awareness is definitely not a newtopic in technical communication; however, it seems that

when communicating with other cultures, this most basicstandard of excellence in technical communication if oftenforgotten.

In the business world, people communicate across culturesin meetings, by email, or if relocation takes place. Thebusiness world is not the only place where cross-culturalcommunication occurs, however. As classrooms acrossAmerica are embracing more and more students fromaround the globe, children and teachers must be educated incultural sensitivity.

STUDYING OTHER CULTURES

In observing other cultures, the differences are striking: theway business cards are exchanged, the way people greeteach other, dress, negotiate and resolve conflict, and eventhe way visual information is seen and perceived. Otherdifferences are topics of conversation and business customsthat have been deemed appropriate. “When NorthAmericans look at the moon, they traditionally see a face inthe dark spots—the man in the moon. When people in Indiaand parts of China look at the moon, they traditionally see arabbit; Australians see a cat; Fiji Islanders see a rat” (qtd. inAndrews 100). Also, nonverbal communication is different:the distance between us and another person when speaking,hand and facial gestures, and how long eye contact ismaintained with another person—or if it is.

In his article in Journal of Business and TechnicalCommunication, Barry Thatcher claims that while moreempirical and ethnographic research must be done, we facethe danger of “oversimplifying people, organizations, andcultures” (461). Most intercultural communication researchis based on “US assumptions of organizationalrelationships”; therefore, it is not truly valid research (462).He urges that to obtain more valid and ethical cross-culturalcomparisons, the focus should first be on similaritiesbetween cultures, and then on the differences within thosecultures (464). But the question remains: “How canintercultural researchers construct researcher-participantrelationships that are sensitive to the values oforganizational relationships in both cultures?” (462).

The academic and business worlds alike must commit tospending the time and working to develop relationshipsbetween researchers and participants that will result incareful, effective cross-cultural collaboration andunderstanding. “The amount of work that is needed

increases considerably and makes the approach a dauntingventure” (qtd. in Thatcher 467).

In researching other cultures, it is difficult to avoid our ownethnocentrism and stereotypes. Effective, appropriaterelationships between people could resolve some of thesemindsets.

OVERCOMING ETHNOCENTRISM

According to Jaime S. Wurzel in Toward aMulticulturalism, culture creates a person’s reality, the waymeaning is given to interactions. “A child’s parents,environment, religion, and social traditions are all given.These affiliations, which the child takes for granted, defineidentity. . . . Ethnocentrism is inevitable since it is rooted inthe impossibility of escaping from one’s experience” (6).Ethnocentrism can lead to a false sense of superiority. Wemust learn to combat this false belief and adopt the truth thatjust because people see things differently, they are notinferior.

Students and business people need to realize that justbecause a person cannot speak fluent English, he/she is notless intelligent or less worthy of education or a position thanthey are. In his book Bridging Differences, WilliamGudykunst claims that people must get away from the ideathat “we” are right and “they” are wrong. This mindset“exists when groups or individuals look out for their owninterests and have little concern for others’ interests” (5).This lack of concern “leads to moral exclusion,” which “. . .occurs when individuals or groups are perceived as outsidethe boundary in which moral values, rules, andconsiderations of fairness apply. Those who are morallyexcluded are perceived as nonentities, expendable, orundeserving; consequently, harming them appearsacceptable, appropriate or just” (5). Prejudices and hatecrimes could be alleviated if people would attempt tounderstand others whom they perceive as being different.

Using textbooks to study multiculturalism in an attempt toresist ethnocentric attitudes and multicultural apathy mightnot be very effective. DeVoss, Jasken, and Hayden suggestthat the problem with textbooks is that they assume thereaders are primarily from the United States, and the waythe textbooks are written insinuates that multiculturaldifferences are “problems to be dealt with,” and they “donot effectively explain the importance of contexts incommunication situations” (71).

COMMUNICATING EFFECTIVELY

Many employees and students do not have the opportunityto develop relationships with people from other culturesbefore they are required to communicate with them.

However, simply assuming messages from an Americanwill be understood is insensitive, and it violates the standardof excellence in assessing our audience.

Even if we do not have the opportunity to study othercultures in depth, some of the most important concepts toknow are the differences between high- and low-contextcultures, collectivism and individualism, reserved andexpressive cultures, what topics are appropriate fordiscussion, and how hand or facial gestures might beinterpreted.

Individualism or Collectivism

As Gudykunst explains, whether a culture practicesindividualism or collectivism is “the major dimension ofcultural variability used to explain cross-cultural differencesin behavior” (45). Where individualism is practiced,individuals are seen as “separate individuals withresponsibility for [their] own destinations and [their] ownactions” (Chaney and Martin 54). Individuals are supposedto look out for themselves and just their immediate family(Gudykunst 46).

For the collective community, the group is most important.These cultures take on the “we” identity rather than the “I”identity (Gudykunst 46). This culture focuses on “commoninterests, conformity, cooperation, and interdependence”(Chaney and Martin 54). In an individualistic culture, afather might tell his child, “You must learn to think foryourself,” but in a collectivistic culture, the father would tellthe child, “You must do what is best for the family”(Chaney and Martin 54).

Teachers need to be aware of collectivism and individualismin cultures. Students from a collectivistic culture would notthink it inappropriate to share answers or collaborate whenfinding answers. In their culture, this would not beconsidered cheating; the students might be simply helpingtheir peers. Students from these cultures also tend to have amore difficult time learning how to use documentation inresearch papers; most of my international students fromindividualistic cultures have not been taught that it isappropriate to cite an outside source.

High Context or Low Context

In many countries, business is discussed in a socialatmosphere. People in this high-context culture focus onrelationships first and on closing deals after thoserelationships are established. This might be frustrating to thetask-oriented American who does not realize that it mighttake several meetings before the client is ready to talk abouta project. The American might think the client isuninterested, which is not necessarily the case.

In a high-context culture, people are concerned withestablishing a context for the communication. They relymore on nonverbal cues than verbal. Bovée and Thillmention South Korea, Taiwan, and China as high-contextcultures: “The Chinese speaker is likely to expect thereceiver to discover the meaning in a message that usesindirectness and metaphor” (69). This could be impossiblefor the person who did not grow up in the Chinese culture orwho has not studied it. “A series of exchanges appearing tosay one thing on the surface might say quite another thingjust beneath it” (69).

In a low-context culture, expectations are usually madeknown with explicit instructions. For example, “Please waituntil I’m finished,” or “You’re welcome to browse.” Thisway the receiver of the message knows what is expected andcan respond appropriately. The United States and Germanyare low-context cultures.

Reserved or Expressive

Many cultures are quiet and reserved. People from thesecultures do not make lots of noise in public, nor do they usemany hand gestures when speaking. Others wave their arms.Students who seem apathetic in a classroom may not beapathetic but may have been taught to sit still and not tospeak in such a formal setting as the classroom. On the otherhand, students in some parts of the United States have evenbeen taught that it is acceptable to challenge the teacher’sopinions during classes, which is a huge contrast.

Author Richard Gesteland tells of holding interviews withThai men and women in an attempt to set up a businessoffice in Thailand for a U.S. company. He observed that theinterviews with the men were going fine, but the womenwere not responding to him well at all. He asked for helpfrom the human resources consultant, who “began talkingaround the issue politely.” The advisor let Gesteland knowthat he was talking too loudly, using too many animatedfacial expressions and hand gestures. Thai women wouldinterpret a loud voice as anger, and too many facial or handgestures might be a signal that someone wasn’t quite right inthe head (63–64).

Likewise, trying to negotiate in a quiet, calm way withpeople from Egypt, might lead them to the conclusion thatwhat is being said is really not important. Because theycome from a very expressive culture, they will respondbetter to a louder tone, more inflection, and more expressivegestures (Gesteland 66).

Topics of Discussion

In the United States, small talk most often includes topicsabout the weather, sports, or physical surroundings. Peoplefrom the United States have been taught to “avoiddiscussing . . . religion and politics even in family situations

because they are too controversial” (Chaney and Martin 90).These topics of conversation are perfectly fine for people inother cultures. In Germany and Iran, it would be acceptableto discuss or even argue about political issues. People froma Spanish-speaking country would not be offended if askedabout their health or the health of those in their families.However, people from Saudi Arabia would consider it rudeto ask personal questions about families during an initialmeeting (Chaney and Martin 90).

Nonverbal Language

It is very important to study nonverbal language beforespeaking with people from a different culture. Moreexpressive cultures tend to have more direct, intense eyecontact than reserved cultures. Even to walk side by sidetalking and walking at the same time would be “impersonaland cold” (Gesteland 73). In East and Southwest Asia,however, people feel uncomfortable with too much eyecontact (74). Gesteland explains, “Latins seem to wear theirhearts on their sleeves. They trust people who show theirfeelings openly and distrust those who mask their emotions.In contrast, the taciturn Japanese and Germans may regardsuch displays as childish and immature” (75). People inNorth America maintain moderate eye contact; however,most North Americans would not be comfortable with aperson who would not look them in the eye. They would seethis as a sign of dishonesty.

In addition, raised eyebrows communicate differentmessages. To North Americans, it signals interest orsurprise; the British are showing skepticism with the raisedeyebrow; the Germans are acknowledging a clevercomment; and it is a greeting with the Filipinos. While theseresponses would be harmless, it is important to note that thissame gesture of raised eyebrows means “No!” to an Arab,and it signals disagreement with the Chinese (Gesteland 75).

CONCLUSION

Because we are becoming a more globalized world and ourborders continue to disappear as companies merge withoverseas companies, marketing promotion slogans aretranslated into many languages, and new technologybecomes more prevalent. Student exchange programs arebecoming increasingly popular, and most students from ourprimary schools to our universities will eventually sit nextto someone in a class who is from another culture. If peopletravel to another country or even have writtencorrespondence with people from other cultures, audiencepreferences must be accommodated. Communicatingeffectively with people from other cultures is not simply aproblem to be overcome, and it should not be perceived assuch. It will take effort to learn the most appropriate ways tocommunicate, but it is a standard that must be achieved.

REFERENCES

(1) Bovée, C.L., and J.V. Thill. Business CommunicationToday. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2000.

(2) Chaney, L.H., and J.S. Martin. Intercultural BusinessCommunication. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River,2000.

(3) DeVoss, D., J. Jasken, and D. Hayden. “TeachingIntracultural and Intercultural Communication: ACritique and Suggested Method.” Journal of Businessand Technical Communication. Sage Publications,Thousand Oaks: January 2002, 69–94.

(4) Gesteland, R.R. Cross-Cultural Business Behavior:Marketing, Negotiating, and Managing AcrossCultures. Handelshojskolens Forlag, CopenhagenBusiness School Press, 1999.

(5) Gudykunst, W.B. Bridging Differences: EffectiveIntergroup Communication. Sage Publications,Newbury Park, 1991.

(6) Klein, N. “Cultural Potholes Litter Road toGlobalization.” Online. http://www.media-awareness.ca/eng/news/news/columns/cultural.htm.1997.

(7) Markel, M. Technical Communication. 6th ed.Bedford/St.Martin’s, Boston, 2001.

(8) Thatcher, B. “Issues of Validity in InterculturalProfessional Communication Research.” Journal ofBusiness and Technical Communication. SagePublications, Thousand Oaks: October 2001, 458–489.

(9) Wurzel, J.S. Toward Multiculturalism: A Reader inMulticultural Education. Intercultural Press, Inc.Yarmouth, Maine, 1988.

Rhonda J. StantonLecturerSouthwest Missouri State University901 South NationalSpringfield, MO 65804 USA417.836.5107rjs889f@smsu.edu

Rhonda received her MA in Technical and ProfessionalWriting from Southwest Missouri State University, where sheis a teacher of technical writing and the Senior ManagingEditor for The Journal of Public Affairs. She was awardedSTC’s Journal Editor Fellowship.