Living in Singapore all my life, I personally did not encounter any intercultural conflicts with people of another race. I suppose the different cultures in Singapore are already set in my mind that they do not become an issue when I interact with them. I reckon Singapore has done exceeding well in moulding a community that embraces differences of the four races. We are able to communicate effortlessly with people of these four races, but when it comes to interaction with unfamiliar cultures, it will be more problematic.
Here, I consider a simple case study of a Singaporean supplier (S) dealing a business with a Westerner (W), assuming that each does not have an understanding of the other party’s business etiquettes and cultures. They greeted each other with a firm handshake and started the meeting. Throughout the whole negotiation process, W presented ideas and S reacted positively, nodding and smiling. At the end of the meeting, W thought that W has clinched the deal and awaited for the final confirmation from S. However, S sent an email to W to make further negotiations. W was confused and upset by W’s double-mindedness and indirectness.
To look into each character’s culture and values, we would understand why they reacted as such. As an Asian, S is more people-oriented and adapt an indirect approach to disagreement, so S rarely make a blunt ‘no’ and ‘yes’ can mean maybe and even no. S thinks that a direct ‘no’ or disagreement is rude and self-centered. Much is implied in non-verbal cues rather than verbal expressions. As a Singaporean also, the last thing S would want is to lose face in front of people, thus S controls emotions and behaviour to not to confront or criticize openly.
W is more straightforward, would not hold back to confront and would expect the other party to react the same. The Western individuals are more task-oriented, would rely on verbal expression to be more direct in order to get the task done and going. Personal relationship is second to getting the job done effectively. In this case, S would appear to be insincere and lack in integrity which in fact S was not.
All these arise from the ignorance of the difference in values and cultures. It is crucial to be aware that people from various backgrounds interpret behavioural patterns differently. Being conscious of this will aid us in relating ourselves to others better, and to minimize unnecessary misunderstandings. Proper research prior to interacting with them in any setting is definitely essential to establish effective communication arcoss different cultures. I am amazed at the diversity of intepretations of a single action. :)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hi Nappy!
ReplyDeleteUnderstanding the cultures of the business counterpart is very important to clinch a deal. Failing to understand each other's cultures, can lead to misundestanding, misinterpretation of actions and miscommunication.
However, I believe that you shouldn't stereotype and think that asians are more people oriented and take an indirect approach to reject. Not all singaporeans are afraid to lose their face and not all westerns are direct and straightforward. I do not think that sending an email to further negotiate is a sign of double mindedness and indirectness. What S has to achieve is the best for the company and S has the right to choose from the available prospective candidates for the deal. W shouldn't think that a postive reaction shown from S would definitely get W the deal as no firm and definite answer has been given from S. W has misunderstood S and thought too highly of himself.
I believe that this article is more of an miscommunication or misunderstanding rather than a cultural conflict. Perhaps you want to edit it?
Love,
shiny
Hi Nappy!
ReplyDeleteThis entry is very insightful! A small gesture from S could cause such great misunderstanding! From this experience, I learned that we need to be cautious of other people's norm and culture.
My Westerner lecturer once told me that Asians tend to be too humble and modest, while the Westerners prefer positive and constructive criticism. So when he criticized me, he meant for me to improve instead of putting me down. However, I wasn't able to get use to his criticism.
Just a side note, paragraph 3
"..S controls emotions and behaviour.." >> "..his emotion"
Other than that, I think this entry is very insightful and I could finally accept the criticism my lecturer made was indeed positive.
Thanks for sharing.
=D
~ huahua ~
Dear nappy,
ReplyDeleteI'm afraid I agree with Shiny on the way that you overgeneralize and stereotype too much in this post, especially when you write the following:
-As an Asian, S is more people-oriented ....
-The Western individuals are more task-oriented....
I disagree completely that your hypothetical characters act one way or another because they are Asian or Western. You really need to qualify statements such as these with qualifiers: "many Singaporean Chinese" or "some American males"...and even then, I think we risk overgeneralizing. I hope that in class I didn't give you the idea that such generalizations were possible without qualifiers.
Even the statement that "Personal relationship is second to getting the job done effectively" is exaggerated. You need a qualifier here.
I'd love to talk about this in class, not to make small of your effort but to explain the dangers of such stereotyping.
Can you remind me please?
Thank you, Nappy, for your work on the assignment and your effort to understand this crazy world on intercultural interaction.
Dear all,
ReplyDeleteSorry for the late reply. Thanks for the crtics! :)
I agree that I was not careful and stereotyped in this post. The main idea that i intend to express in this post is that A might mistaken B's 'no' as 'yes', if the culture of B emphasize more on non verbal cues and being less direct, and A's culture emphasize more on verbal expression and being more direct.
I could have been more cautious in selecting words! Thanks so much for correcting me and I have learnt a lot. :)
Love,
Nappy