Manual for Students
.pdfhas changed through the adaptation process and has become a different individual [14, p. 310]. The person who returns home is not the same person who left home. The customs, attitudes, habits, and values appear different to him. Returnees also recognize that their friends and families expect them to be a little different (more educated) but basically the same as before they went off to school. This lack of interest on the part of friends and family can be especially detrimental for corporations that send employees overseas. The home corporation often does not take advantage of the knowledge and skills that returnees have acquired during their overseas assignments. Rather, employees in the home office often expect the returnees to fit back in, as if the overseas assignment had never happened.
6.5.2 Living on the Border
As international migration increases and more and more people travel back and forth among different cultures, the lines between adaptation and reentry become less clear. More and more people are living on the border physically, making frequent trips between countries, or living on the border psychologically between bicultural identities. The trend calls for a new view of cultural boundaries and adaptation “as new immigrant populations continuously interact across borders and between the home country and the host society, constructing ... a transnational sociocultural system. Shaping new identities, lives …” [16, p. 88].
Thetransnationalismcalls into question comfortingnotions like nationstates, national languages, and coherent cultural communities. People who move back and forth between cultural worlds often develop a multicultural identity [12, p. 295]. Technological developments have made global travel much easier, and we can change cultural contexts as never before. Yet the movement between cultures is never as simple as getting on a plane. Often, in adapting to new cultural contexts, people may find themselves challenged to be cultural-competent by behaving in ways that may be contradictory to their personal identities. For example, a Muslim woman may feel that she can not wear her chador in certain foreign contexts and thus can not express her religious identity.The dialectic calls for a balance between the individual and contextual demands.
341
Point of View
A Clash of Cultures
White Teeth tells the story of three families, one Indian, one white, and one of mixed race, in North London and Oxford from World War II to the present day. In this extract, Samad Iqbal, a Bangladeshi immigrant to London, is asking his son Magid why he wants to take part in his school’s Harvest Festival, a Christian celebration.
Samad growled, “I told you already. I don’t want you participating in that nonsense. It has nothing to do with us, Magid. Why are you always trying to be somebody you are not?”
There was a mutual, silent anger as each acknowledged the painful incident that was being referred to. A few months earlier, on Magid’s ninth birthday, a group of very nice-looking white boys with meticulous manners had turned up on the doorstep and asked for Mark Smith.
“Mark? No Mark Smith here”, Alsana had said, bending down to their level with a genial smile, “Only the family Iqbal here. You have the wrong house”. But before she had finished the sentence, Magid had dashes to the door, ushering his mother out of view.
“Hi, guys” “Hi, Mark”.
“Off to the chess club, Mum”.
“Yes, M-M-Mark”, said Alsana, close to tears at this final snub, the replacement of "Mum" for "Amma". "Do not be late, now".
“I GIVE YOU A GLORIOUS NAME LIKE MAID MAHFOOZ MURSHED MUBTASIMIQBAL!" Samad had yelled after Magid when he returned home that evening and whipped up the stairs like a bullet to hide in his room. “AND YOU WANT TO BE CALLED MARK SMITH!” But this was just a symptom of a far deeper malaise. Magid really wanted to be in some other family. He wanted to own cats and not cockroaches, he wanted his mother to make the music of the cello, not the sound of the sewing machine; he wanted to have a trellis of flowers growing up one side of the house instead of the ever growing pile of other people’s rubbish; he wanted a piano in the hallway in place of the broken door off cousin Kurshed’s car; he wanted to go on hiking holidays to France, not day trips to Blackpool to visit aunties; he wanted the floor of his room to be shiny wood, not the orange and green swirled carpet left over from the restaurant; he wanted his father to be a doctor, not a onehanded waiter; and this month Magid had converted all these desires into a wish to join in with the Harvest Festival like Mark Smith would. Like
everybody else would [12, p. 83 – 84].
342
SUMMARY
–In this chapter, we highlighted the main issues in moving from one culture to another. We stressed the importance of a dialectical perspective in examining the migration needs at both an individual level and a sociopolitical level. Migrant groups vary in the length of the migration and the degree of voluntariness. Given these two criteria, there are four types of migrants: sojourners (short-term voluntary), immigrants (longterm voluntary), and refugees (long-term or short-term involuntary). With regard to short-term culture shock and longer-term cultural adaptation, some migrant groups resist rather than adapt to the host culture. There are four modes of relationships between migrants and host cultures: assimilation, separation, integration, and marginalization.
–Four models can be used to explain adaptation issues: the anxiety and uncertainty management model, the U-curve model, the transition model, and the communication system model. Communication plays a crucial role in migration. Individual characteristics such as age, gender, preparation level, and expectations influence how well people adapt to new cultures. They can affect the personal outcomes of adaptation, which include good psychological health, functional fitness, and an intercultural identity. Cultural adaptation and identity are interrelated in many ways. Migrants who return to their original homes also face readjustment, or cultural reentry. Those who make frequent or multiple border crossings often develop multicultural identities.
PRACTICE
ØAnswer the Following Questions:
–Why does culture shock occur to people who make cultural transitions?
–Why are adaptations to cultures difficult for some people and easier for others?
–What is the role of communication in the cultural adaptation process?
–How do relations of power and dominance affect adaptation?
–What factors affect migration patterns?
343
ØClash of Cultures. Read the excerpt from the novel “White Teeth” by Zadie Smith and answer the following questions: (a) How is this text representative of the immigrant experience? (b) What problems can immigrants experience in terms of clashes between their native culture and the culture of the country they live in? (c) Do you think that the older and younger generations of immigrants in Ukraine have the same disagreements as Samad and Magid?
ØCulture Shock. Meet with other students in your class in small groups and explore your own experiences of cultural adaptation. Find out how many students experienced culture shock when traveling or studying abroad? How about re-entry shock? If there are differences in students’ experience, explore why these differences exist. Are they due to differences in individual experience? In contexts?
REFERENCES
1.Adler P. S. The Transition Experience: An Alternative View of Culture Shock / Peter S. Adler // Journal of Humanistic Psychology. – 1975. – No. 15. – P. 13 – 30.
2.Bennett M. J. Towards Ethnorelativism: ADevelopmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity / Melvin J. Bennett // Education for the Intercultural Experience. – 1993. – P. 21 – 72.
3.Delaney L. Global Marketing Gaffes / Laurel Delaney // Electronic Resource : Internet Access :
http://www.marketingprofs.com.
4.Featherstone J. International Migration: Work Flows / Jack Featherstone // Financial Times Expatriate. – No. 1. – 2002. – P. 3 – 25.
5.Guanipa C. Department of Counseling and School Psychology / Carmen Guanipa // [Electronic Resource]. – Internet Access :
http://www. cdweb.sdsu,edu/people/Cguanipa/cultshok.html.
6.Gudykunst W. B. Communicating With Strangers: An Approach to Intercultural Communication / William B. Gudykunst, Stella TingToomey. – New York : McGraw-Hill, 2003. – P. 101.
7.Henderson M. Forgiveness: Breaking The Chain of Bate / Mark Henderson. – Wilsonville : MIT Press, 1999. – P. 74.
344
8.Kealey D. J.AStudy of Cross-Cultural Effectiveness: Theoretical Issues, Practical Applications / Dan Kealey // International Journal of Intercultural Relations. – 1989. – No. 13. – P. 387 – 427.
9.KimY. Y. Cross-CulturalAdaptation: CurrentApproaches / Young Y. Kim, William B. Gudykunst // International and Intercultural Communication Annual. – 1988. – No. 11. – P. 46.
10.Lisgaard S.Adjustment inAForeign Society: Norwegian Fulbright Grantees Visiting The United States / Sverre Lisgaard // International Social Science Bulletin. – 1995. – No. 7. – P. 45 – 51.
11.Martin J. N. Comparing Predeparture Expectations and PostSojourn Reports: A Longitudinal Study of U.S. Students Abroad / Judith N. Martin, Lowrence Bradford, Ben Rohrlich. – New York : Newbury Park, 1995. – P. 273.
12.Martin J. N. Intercultural Communication in Contexts / Judith N. Martin, Tomas Nakayama. – New York : McGraw Hill Higher Education, 2000. – P. 264 – 282.
13.Martin J. N. International Migration: Facing the Challenge / Judith N. Martin, Jack Widgren // Population Bulletin. – 2002. – No. 57. – P. 1 – 43.
14.Martin J. N. ReentryTraining for Intercultural Sojourners / Judith N. Martin, Tom Harrell // Handbook for Intercultural Training. – London : Thousand Oaks, 1996. – P. 307 – 326.
15.Oberg K. Cultural Shock: Adjustment To New Cultural Environments / Kalvero Oberg // Practical Anthropology. – 1960. – No. 7. – P. 177 – 182.
16.Oboler S. Ethnic Labels, Latino Lives: Identity and the Politics of (Re)presentation in The United Stats / Susan Oboler. – Minneapolis : MU Press, 1995. – P. 88.
345
-7-
CULTURE, COMMUNICATION,AND CONFLICT
Overview
The need to understand intercultural conflict seems more important now than ever. One thing we can be sure of is that conflict is inevitable. Conflicts are happening all around the world, as they always have, and at many different levels: interpersonal social, national, and international. For example, at the interpersonal level, friends or romantic partners may disagree about their relationship among themselves or with friends and family. At the social level, cultural differences of opinion regarding the importance of preserving the environment compared with the importance of developing industry may fuel conflict between environmentalists and business interests.
There are three significant approaches to understanding conflict. One is the interpersonal approach, which focuses on how cultural differences cause conflict and influence the management of the conflict. The other two approaches – the interpretive and the critical – focus more on intergroup relationshipsand oncultural, historical,and structural elementsas theprimary sources of conflict. These three approaches emphasize different aspects of the individual-contextual dialectic [14, p. 372].
Understanding intercultural conflict is especially important because of the relationship between culture and conflict. That is, cultural differences can cause conflict, and once conflict occurs, cultural backgrounds and experiences influence how individuals deal with it. Culture shapes what people consider valuable and worth fighting over; it influences official positions taken and interpretations of others’ actions. We should say up front that little is known about how to deal effectively with intercultural conflict. Most research applies almost exclusively to majority culture members. Our challenge is to review this body of research, take what can be applied in intercultural contexts, and perhaps suggest some new ways to think about conflict.
In this chapter we identify characteristics of intercultural conflict, extending our dialectical perspective, and outline two broad orientations to conflict. We examine intercultural conflict in interpersonal contexts,
346
incorporating more interpretive and critical theories into our understanding of conflict. We also examine how cultural background can influence conflict management. Finally, we discuss guidelines for viewing and engaging in conflict across cultural borders.
Topics covered include: Intercultural Conflict; Interpersonal Approach to Conflict; Types of Conflict; Strategies andTactics for Dealing with Conflict; Gender, Ethnicity, and Conflict; Value Differences and Conflict Styles; Interpretive and Critical Approaches to Social Conflict; Managing Intercultural Conflict; Productive vs Destructive Conflict; Competition vs Cooperation; Conflict Mediation.
Key words: Conflict, Confrontation, Dialogue, Intercultural Conflict, Intermediary, International Conflict, Mediation, Obliging Style, Pacifism, Social Conflict, Social Movements.
————————————————————————————
7.1 Characteristics of Intercultural Conflict
One way to think about intercultural conflict is from a dialectical perspective. Let us see an example taken from a course book Intercultural Communication in Contexts. The principal of a junior highschool inFrance refusedto let threeMuslimgirlswear their chadors – the scarves traditionally worn by Muslim women to cover their hair in public. In response, the family called in representatives of two Islamic fundamentalist organizations to talk to the principal. The principal defended his action on the grounds of separation of church and state. A high-ranking government official said that, if the school could not persuade the family to change its mind, the girls’ education came first, and they should not be expelled. This recommendation did not satisfy anyone, and the dispute quickly became part of a broader national discourse onimmigration, integration, and religious and human rights. The issue was never satisfactorilyresolved on the national level; it only faded from view after media coverage decreased and the nation turned its attention elsewhere.
The key point is that disputes often are more complicated than they first appear. For example, the dispute can be seen as rooted in personal actions taken by the principal and three students. But at the same time, the context in which the dispute occurred is important – a school setting
347
in a town characterized by tension between emigrants from North Africa and native-born French. Similarly, the individual-cultural dialectic can be invoked. That is, the conflict occurred among several individuals – the principal and the three students, as well as family members, clerics, and government officials. But the conflict was also cultural, with the backgrounds of the disputants (French and North African) reflecting different values and religious beliefs and practices. Also, the historypresent dialectic helps us understand the conflict. The details of the dispute itself were important, but the history of negative feelings toward immigrants fed the dispute and helped push it onto the national stage. For many years, tensions have been high between North African immigrants (France’s largest minority) and native-born French. The French often see the North Africans as showing little interest in integrating, while the NorthAfricans bemoan consistent discrimination in jobs, housing, social services, and social interaction. In this historical context, right-wing politicians used the dispute to point out the supposed evils of immigration and the problems created by foreigners.
Another important historical point was the belief of educators in France that the important role of secular education in promoting democratic values had been increasingly eroded. These teachers, already feeling their authority threatened, linked the scarf incident to other examples of Muslim students refusing to attend gym classes or objecting to biology, music, and even art classes on religious grounds [15, p. 324].
Intercultural conflict may be characterized by ambiguity, which causes us to resort quickly to our default style – the style that we learned growing up – in handling it. If your preferred way of handling conflict is to deal with it immediately and you are in a conflict situation with someone who prefers to avoid it, the conflict may become exacerbated as you both retreat to your preferred style. As the confronting person becomes increasingly confrontational, the avoider simply retreats further.
Issues surrounding language may be important to intercultural conflict. When individuals do not know the language well, it is verydifficult to handle conflict effectively. At the same time, silence is not always a bad thing. Sometimes it provides a “cooling off” period, allowing things to settle down. Depending on the cultural context, silence can be very appropriate.
348
Intercultural conflict may also be characterized by a combination of orientations to conflict and conflict management styles. Communication scholar Sheryl Lindsley interviewed managers in maquiladoras – sorting or assembly plants along the Mexican-U.S. border – and found many examples of conflict. For example, Mexican managers thought that U.S. managers were often rude and impolite in their dealings with each other and the workers. The biggest difference between U.S. Americans and Mexicans was in the way that U.S. Americans expressed disagreement at management meetings. One Mexican manager explained:
When we are in a meeting together, the U.S. American will tell another manager, “‘I do not like what you did”. Mexicans interpret this as a personal insult. They have a difficult time understanding that U.S. Americans can insult each other in this way and then go off and play golf together. Mexicans would be polite, perhaps tell the person in private, or make a suggestion, rather than confronting [12, p. 158]. As Lindsley points out, the conflict between the Mexican and U.S.American managers in their business meetings needs to be understood as a dialectical and “layered” process in which individual, societal, and historical forces are recognized [ibid.].
7.2 Two Orientations to Conflict
It is not always easy to figure out the best way to deal with conflict. And what does culture have to do with it? To answer some of these questions, we first describe two very different ways of thinking about conflict. Then we outline some of the ways in which culture and conflict are related.
7.2.1 Conflict as Opportunity
The opportunity orientation to conflict is the one most commonly represented in U.S. interpersonal communication texts. Conflict is usually defined as involving a perceived or real incompatibility of goals, values, expectations, processes, or outcomes between two or more interdependent individuals or groups [1]. According to theologian and mediator David Augsburger, this approach to conflict is based on four assumptions:
349
–conflict is a normal, useful process;
–all issues are subject to change through negotiation;
–direct confrontation and conciliation are valued;
–conflict is a necessary renegotiation of an implied contract – a redistribution of opportunity, release of tensions, and renewal of relationships [2, p. 74].
Let us examine these assumptions more fully. Conflict may be a difficult process, but it ultimately offers an opportunity for strengthening relationships. Although this orientation to conflict recognizes that many people do not enjoy conflict, it emphasizes the potentially positive aspects. The main idea is that working through conflict constructively results in stronger, healthier, and more satisfying relationships. From this perspective, there are additional benefits for groups working through conflict: they can gain new information about other people or groups, diffuse more serious conflict, and increase cohesiveness [8, p. 66].
Consider the second and third assumptions. Individuals should be encouraged to think of creative and even far-reaching solutions to conflict. Furthermore, the most desirable response to conflict is to recognize it and work through it in an open, productive way. In fact, many people consider conflict-free relationships to be unhealthy. In relationships without conflict, they suggest, partners are ignoring issues that need to be dealt with [4, p. 37]. Finally, because conflict represents a renegotiation of a contract, it is worthy of celebration. This Western-based approach to conflict suggests a neutral-to-positive orientation, but it is not shared by all cultural groups. Let us look at another orientation.
7.2.2Conflict as a Destructive Force
Many cultural groups view conflict as ultimately unproductive for relationships, a perspective that may be rooted in spiritual or cultural values. Although we must be cautious about generalizing, this viewpoint is generally shared by many Asian cultures (reflecting the influence of Confucianism and Taoism) and in the United States by some religious groups, such as Quakers and the Amish. According to Augsburger, four assumptions underlie this perspective:
– conflict is a destructive disturbance of the peace;
350