Concepts and notions

Concepts and notions

Part of the superficial public behavior we have cited above is cultural in origin, and yet we can adopt these manners without prejudice to our own core beliefs. Actions are not difficult to emulate, even different varieties of speech can be imitated to some extent. Thought is a different matter. We cannot see it, we cannot hear it, it may be revealed to us with reluctance, simulation or cunning. Cross-cultural problems arise not so much on account of our unfamiliarity with a bow, a Gallic shrug or chopsticks. Our society has trained us to adopt certain concepts and values. We know that many of these concepts are shared by other cultures. We can teach a Spaniard nothing about honor, the Japanese are masters of courtesy, Swedes, English and Germans are all convinced of their own honesty. It is remarkable, given the size of the world, its long history and immeasurable variety, how many common concepts are rooted so firmly in a similar manner in wildly different societies. Honor, duty, love, justice, gratitude and revenge are basic tenets of the German, Chinese, Arab and Polynesian alike. A Tasmanian knows his or her duty as clearly as a Greenlander does. What we often overlook is the fact that everyone has different notions of these concepts which appeal to so many cultures. Chinese duty is not American duty. Romantic love is seen differently in France and Finland. The English notion of revenge bears little similarity to the Sicilian.

Extreme differences

We readily accept that cultural diversity is vast and formidable. If we take an extreme example, the barriers against communication or mutual comprehension between an Eskimo and an African Bushman might prove insurmountable. Given their different backgrounds, what could they talk about? They would be completely unaware of the structure or politics of each other's society; it is hardly likely that they could imagine the opposite extremity of climate; their religion, taboos, values, aspirations, disappointments and life style would be in stark contrast. Subjects of conversation (if they had some mode of communication) would be minimal, approaching zero. Weather, sex and food, you say? Those are certainly basic issues. Yet if they met in a temperate climate (say England in spring) the Eskimo would find it hot, the Bushman cold. Their notions of sexual attractiveness would differ so strikingly that it is hardly likely that they would want to indulge in wife swapping. A tasty snack? Here, try this bit of blubber - ugh!

The wildly differing notions of time, space, life after death, nature and reality held by isolated societies will have little impact on international business (although they may contribute usefully to our morals or philosophy). The Navahos with their nuclear concept of speech, the Zulus with their 39 greens, the Eskimos with their 42 types of snow, the Aborigines with their dreamtime, the Lapps with their eight seasons, all provide us with cultural gems, striking insights, unique thought and speech processes which intrigue and fascinate those of us who have time to study them. We are thrilled by these phenomena, take joy in their appreciation. We see, learn and sometimes understand. Deceived we are not. They are differences which we perceive, acknowledge and accept. We know, more or less, where we stand with these people. They live in another world and we know we live in ours.

Closer to home

In our world, there are others who are more like us. They have modern civilizations, political parties, factories, cars and stocks and shares. We meet them regularly and their clothes resemble ours. We appear to have similar concepts and values. They seem to talk 'our language'. Yet for some reason, French and Germans don't always get on. In Belgium half of society dislikes the other. Chinese and Japanese are wary of each other, to say the least; neighborly Swedes and Norwegians snipe at each other, and the mutual exasperation that British and American cousins experience is only too well documented.

Truth

The concepts are shining and clear: our notions of them are different. Both Germans and British people conducting a business meeting wish for a successful outcome. The German notion is that truth, absolute honest truth, even if somewhat unpalatable, will achieve this. The British, by contrast, give priority to not rocking the boat. But die Wahrheit ist die Wahrheit say the Germans. Not so, the Chinese would add - these is no absolute truth. Two conflicting views may both be correct. Most Orientals and many Italians would agree with the Chinese.

In Germany, Sweden and Finland, where people are generally concerned about what the neighbors think, the drive towards conformity imposes checks and constraints on a person's ability to refashion veracity. Brits and Americans, with that wonderfully idiomatic, nuance-rich tool of expression (the English language) at their disposal, are economical with the truth. The French, Italians and other Latins are not famous for their candor, which might interfere with the smooth social intercourse they are so fond of. In Japan, where no one must face exposure, be confronted or lose face, truth is a dangerous concept. In Asia, Africa and South America, strict adherence to the truth would destroy the harmony of relationship between individuals, companies and entire segments of society.

Contracts and ethics

As the globalization of business brings executives more frequently together, there is a growing realization that if we examine concepts and values, we can take almost nothing for granted. The word 'contract' translates easily from language to language, but notionally it has many interpretations. To a Swiss, German, Scandinavian, American or British person it is something that has been signed in order to be adhered to. Signatures give it a sense of finality. But a Japanese regards a contract as a starting document to be rewritten and modified as circumstances require. A South American sees it as an ideal which is unlikely to be achieved, but which is signed to avoid argument.

Members of most cultures see themselves as ethical, but ethics can be turned upside down. The American calls the Japanese unethical if the latter breaks the contract. The Japanese says it is unethical for the American to apply the terms of the contract if things have changed. Italians have very flexible views on what is ethical and what is not, which sometimes causes Northern Europeans to question their honesty. When Italians bend rules or 'get round' some laws or regulations, they consider they are less ideal bound than, say, the Swiss, and actually closer to reality. They do not consider themselves corrupt, or immoral, nor do they admit to illegality. There are many grey areas where 'short cuts' are, in Italian eyes, the only intelligent course of action. In a country where excessive bureaucracy can hold up 'business' for months, currying favor with an official is a matter of common sense.

Silence

Silence can be interpreted in different ways. A silent reaction to a business proposal would seem negative to American, German, French, Southern European and Arab executives. In countries as dissimilar as the USA, Peru and Kuwait, conversation is a two-way process, where one partner takes up when the other one leaves off. The intervening silence is two or three seconds in Britain or Germany, less than that in Greece or Kuwait and hardly noticeable in France, Italy and America. However, the 'listening cultures’ of East Asia find nothing wrong with silence as a response. 'Those who know do not speak; those who speak do not know', says an old Chinese proverb. Japanese and one European nation (Finland) do not quarrel with this assertion. In both these countries silence is not equated with failure to communicate, but is an integral part of social interaction. What is notsaid is regarded as important and lulls in conversation are considered restful, friendly and appropriate. Silence means that you listen and learn; talking a lot merely expresses your cleverness, perhaps egoism and arrogance. Silence protects your individualism and privacy; it also shows respect for the individualism of others. In Finland and Japan it is considered impolite or inappropriate to force one's opinions on others - it is more appropriate to nod in agreement, smile quietly, avoid opinionated argument or discord.

⇐ Предыдущая 123 4 Следующая ⇒