Manual for Students
.pdfConflict specialist David Augsburger identifies six key Western assumptions – conflict myths – and notes their inadequacies in intercultural settings:
–people and problems can be separated cleanly: interests and positions can be distinguished sharply. In most cultures of the world, equal attention must be given to both person and problem, to relationship and goals and to private interests as well as public positions if a creative resolution is to be reached.
–Open self-disclosure is a positive value in negotiations. An open process of public data shared in candid style is assumed necessary for trust. “Open covenants, openly arrived at”, Woodrow Wilson insisted, as did Harry Truman, were the basis for setting up the United Nations. However, when constituents can hear what is being sacrificed in reaching an agreement, then compromise becomes improbable and often impossible precisely because of that openness. The real negotiation is done in corridors or behind closed doors, and is announced publicly when agreements have been reached. Virtually nothing of any substance is agreed on in the official public UN debates.
–Immediacy, directness, decisiveness, and haste are preferred strategies in timing. The Western valuation that time is money can press the negotiator to come to terms prematurely. Many different cultures find that the best way to reach an agreement is to give the matter sufficient time to allow adjustments to be made, accommodations to emerge, and acceptance to evolve and emerge. Believing that “time is people”, they are in less haste to reach closure.
–Language employed should be reasonable, rational, and responsible. In some cultures, deprecative language, extreme accusations and vitriolic expressions are used as a negotiating power tactic.
–“No is no” and “yes is yes” (an affirmation is absolute, a negation final). In some cultures, one does not say no to an offer; requests are not phrased to elicit negations; when an offer is affirmed, the real meanings are weighed and assessed carefully. Many negotiators have left a meeting with a perceived agreement only to find that the real position was more subtle, more concealed, and the reverse of their public expectations.
–When an agreement is reached, implementation will take care of itself as a logical consequence. The agreements negotiated may mean
371
different things to parties in a reconciliation. Built-in processes, ongoing negotiations, open channels for resolving problems as they arise in ongoing interpretation, and circumstances that would warrant renegotiation are all useful elements for ensuring ongoing success.
7.5.4 Mediation
Sometimes two individuals or groups cannot work through conflict on their own. They may request an intermediary, or one may be assigned to intervene. In some societies, these third parties may be rather informal. In Western societies, though, they tend to be built into the legal and judicial system. For example, lawyers or counselors may act as mediators to settle community or family disputes.
Contemporary Western mediation models often ignore cultural variations in conflict processes. Fortunately, more scholars and mediators are looking at other cultural models that may work better in intercultural conflicts. Augsburger suggests that the culturally sensitive mediator engages in conflict transformation (not conflict resolution or conflict management). The conflict transformer assists disputants to think in new ways about the conflict – for example, to transform attitudes by redirecting negative perceptions. This requires a commitment by both parties to treat each other with goodwill and mutual respect [2, p. 202]. Of course, this is often much easier said than done. Behavior can be transformed by limiting all action to collaborative behavior; this can break the negative cycle but requires a commitment to seek a noncoercive process of negotiation even when there has been intense provocation.
Traditional societies often use mediation models based on non-direct means. The models vary but share many characteristics. Whereas North American mediation tends to be more formal and structured, involving direct confrontation and communication, most traditional cultural models are more communally based, with involvement by trusted leaders. Indirect communication is preferred in order to permit individuals to save face. In addition, the process is more dynamic, directed toward resolving tension in the community – the responsibility of the disputants to their larger community is central [ibid., p. 204].
372
The author provides the example of mediation in the Gitksan Nation, in northwest British Columbia, where mediation of disputes begins with placement of the problem “in the middle of the table”. Everyone involved – including those in authority and the witnesses – must make suggestions in a peaceful manner until they come to a decision all can live with. Even conflicts ending in murder are resolved in this consensus-oriented fashion. For instance, land would be transferred as compensation to help deal with the pain of the loss. The murderer might be required to give up his or her name and go nameless for a period to show respect for the life taken [ibid., p. 213]. Eventually, however, the land or anything else that was given up would be returned, when the pain has passed and time has taken care of the grief Augsburger points out that this traditional communal approach to mediation is based on collectivistic beliefs that make individualistic solutions to conflicts unacceptable [ibid.].
Contemporary mediators have learned some lessons from the traditional non-Western models, and mediation is used increasingly in Canada, United States and Europe to resolve conflicts. Mediation is advantageous because it relies on the disputing parties’ active involvement in and commitment to the resolution. Also, it represents the work of all involved, so it is likely to be more creative and integrative. Finally, mediation is often cheaper than adversarial legal resolution.
SUMMARY
– In this chapter, we took various approaches to understanding conflict. Intercultural conflict may be characterized by ambiguity, language issues, and combinations of conflict management styles. There are two very different cultural orientations to conflict – conflict as opportunity and conflict as destructive force – as well as various cultural differences in viewing conflict. The interpersonal approach to understanding conflict focuses on cultural differences, types of conflict (affective conflict, conflict of interest, value conflict, cognitive conflict, and goal conflict), and conflict styles (dominating, integrating, compromising, obliging, and avoiding). The choice of conflict style depends on cultural background and on gender and ethnicity. For example, people from individualistic cultures may tend to use dominating styles, people from collectivistic cultures may prefer
373
more integrating, obliging, and avoiding styles. However, the type of conflict and the relationship the disputants have will mediate these tendencies.
–Conflict may be productive or destructive. Productive conflict is more likely to be managed or resolved. One theme of destructive conflict is a competitive atmosphere.Acooperative atmosphere is more conducive to conflict management or resolution. Suggestions for dealing with intercultural conflicts include staying centered, maintaining contact, recognizing the existence of different conflict management styles. It would be also rationale to identify a preferred style, to be creative and expand one’s conflict style repertoire, recognize the importance of conflict context, and to be willing to forgive.
–Transforming methods of mediation are commonly used in many cultures. A conflict transformer helps the disputing parties change their attitudes and behaviors.
PRACTICE
ØAnswer the Following Questions:
–How does the conflict as opportunity orientation differ from the conflict as a destructive force orientation?
–Why is it important to understand the context in which intercultural conflict occurs?
–How are conflict strategies used in social movements?
–How does an attitude of forgiveness facilitate conflict resolution?
–What are some general suggestions for dealing with intercultural conflict?
Ø Cultures in Conflict. For this assignment, work in groups of four. As a group, whereas select two countries or cultural groups that are currently in conflict or that have historically been in conflict. In your group, form two pairs. One pair will research the conflict from the perspective of one of the two cultural groups or countries; the other pair will research the conflict from the perspective of the other group or country. Use library and community resources (including interviews with members of the culture if possible). Outline the major issues and
374
arguments. Explore the role of cultural values, and political, economic, and historical contexts that may contribute to the conflict. Be prepared to present an oral or written report of your research.
REFERENCES
1.Ambler T. Doing Business in China / Timothy Ambler, Mark Witzel. – New York : Columbia University Press, 2000. – 165 p.
2.Augsburger D. Conflict Mediation across Cultures / David Augsburger. – Louisville : Louisville University Press, 1992. – P. 61 – 76, 202 – 213.
3.Cai D. A. Conflict Style Differences between Individuals and Collectives / DinA. Cai, Elvin L. Fink // Communication Monographs. – 2002. – No. 69. – P. 67 – 87.
4.Canary D. J. Relationship Conflict / Donavan J. Canary, Wince R. Cupach, Samuel J. Messman. – London : Thousand Oaks, 1995. – P. 37.
5.Cole M. Interpersonal Conflict Communication in Japanese Cultural Contexts / Mark Cole. – London : Tempe, 1996. – P. 68 – 101.
6.Collier M. J.AComparison of Conversations among and between Domestic Culture Groups: How Intraand Intercultural Competencies Vary / Mary J. Collier // Communication Quarterly. – 1988. – No. 36. – P. 122 – 147.
7.Deutsch M. The Resolution of Conflict: Constructive and Destructive Process / Marcus Deutsch. – New Haven : HarperCollins, 1973. – P. 41.
8.FilleyA. C. Interpersonal Conflict Resolution /Anthony C. Filley. – Glenview : HarperCollins, 1975. – P. 66.
9.Folger J. P. Working through Conflict: Strategies for Relationships, Groups, and Organizations / Jill P. Folger, Michael S. Poole, Ronald K. Stutman. – New York, 1993. – P. 19.
10.Hocker J. L. Interpersonal Conflict / Joyce L. Hocker, William W. Wilmot. – Dubuque : IA Press, 1991. – P. 59 – 81.
11.Kraybill D. The Riddle of Amish Culture / David Kraybill. – Baltimore : HarperCollins, 1989. – P. 231.
12.Lindsley S. L. A Layered Model of Problematic Intercultural
375
Communication in U.S.-Owned Maquiladoras in Mexico / Sheryl L. Lindsley // Communicative Monographs. – 1999. – No. 66. –
P.145 – 167.
13.Lulofs R. S. Conflict: FromTheory toAction / Roxane S. Lulofs. – Scottsdale : MIT Press, 1994. – P. 279 – 284.
14.Martin J. N. Intercultural Communication in Contexts / Judith N. Martin, Tomas Nakayama. – New York : McGraw Hill Higher Education, 2000. – P. 372 – 390.
15.Martin J. N. ReentryTraining for Intercultural Sojourners / Judith N. Martin, Tom Harrell // Handbook for Intercultural Training. – London : Thousand Oaks, 1996. – P. 307 – 326.
16.Pike G. R. Reciprocity of Marital Communication / George R. Pike,Allan L. Sillars // Journal of Social and Personal Relationships. – 1985. – No. 2. – P. 303 – 324.
17.Ting-Toomey S. Intercultural Conflict Competence / Stella TingToomey // Competence in Interpersonal Conflict. – New York, 1997. – P. 140 – 227.
376
-8-
THE OUTLOOK FOR INTERCULTURAL
COMMUNICATION
Overview
Now that we are nearing the end of our journey through this textbook, you might ask– How do youreallyknow whether you are a goodintercultural communicator? We have covered a lot of topics and discussed some ideas that will help you be a better communicator. You can’t learn how to be a good communicator merely by reading books, though. Just as in learning to be a good public speaker or a good relational partner, it takes experience. In this chapter we want to leave you with some specific ideas and suggestions for improving your skills in communicating across cultures.
We can approach intercultural competence in several ways. We will begin this chapter with the social science approach, identifying specific components of competence: motivation, knowledge, attitudes, behavior, and skills. We then turn to interpretive and critical approaches, emphasizing the contextual issues in competence. Finally, we continue our dialectical perspective, combining individual and contextual elements to offer specific suggestions for improving intercultural relations by building alliances and coalitions across cultures.
Topics covered include: Components of Competence; Applying Knowledge about Intercultural Communication; Entering Into Dialogue; Interpersonal Allies; Coalitions, Forgiveness and Transformation.
Key words: Conscious Competence, Conscious Incompetence, Empathy, Intercultural Alliances, Motivation, Non-Judgmentalism, Selfknowledge, Tolerance, Transpection, Unconscious Competence, Unconscious Incompetence.
————————————————————————————
8.1 The Components of Competence
What are the things we have to know, the attitudes and behavior, to make us competent communicators? Do we have to be motivated to be good at intercultural communication? Communication scholars Brian
377
Spitzberg and William Cupach studied interpersonal communication competence in U.S. contexts from a social science perspective, and other scholars have tried to apply their findings in intercultural contexts. These studies resulted in a list of basic components, or building blocks, of intercultural communication competence [15, p. 317]. We present these components here because we think they serve as a useful starting point. However, we offer three cautionary notes. First, this is only a starting point. Second, the basic components are interrelated; it is difficult to separate motivation, knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and skills. Third, it is important to contextualize these components – to ask ourselves: “Who came up with these components? Are they applicable to everyone?” For example, if a group of Native American scholars came up with guidelines for what it takes to be interculturally competent, would these guidelines apply to every cultural context?
8.1.1 Individual Components
Motivation. Perhaps the most important dimension of communication competence is motivation. If we aren’t motivated to communicate with others, it probably does not matter what other skills we possess. We can not assume that people always want to communicate. And yet, motivation is an important aspect of developing intercultural competence.
Why might people not be motivated to engage in intercultural communication? One reason is that members of large, powerful groups often think they do not need to know much about other cultures; there is simply no incentive. In contrast, people from less powerful groups have a strong incentive to learn about and interact with more powerful groups. For example, female managers in corporations are motivated to learn about and adjust to the dominant male norms, Latinos are motivated to learn European American norms, and visitors overseas are motivated to learn about and adjust to the norms of foreign cultures. The survival of these less powerful groups often depends on members’ motivation to succeed at intercultural interaction [9, p. 408].
Sometimes people can become motivated to learn about other cultures and to communicate interculturally. For example, the events of
378
9/11 motivated many U.S. Americans to become more aware of how U.S. worldviews and behavior, on both a personal and a political level, are intertwined with those in other cultures and countries. As an essay in the Christian Science Monitor reported, educators scrambled to incorporate more material about Islam and the Middle East in their curricula, in order to help students make some sense out of the historical and political reasons for the terrorist attacks.
For educators the rush for knowledge has been gratifying. But to some it dramatically underscores the fact that an inward-lookingAmerica routinely fails to ground its citizens in the complexities of world history. Most schools serve up little or no material related to the Middle East or a basic understanding of Islam. “Maybe there are courses about the Middle East in some of the more affluent school districts” – says Bill Schechter, a history teacher at Lincoln-Sudbury Regional High School in Sudbury, Massachussets. “But in most schools there’s just a bit about the crusades in world history, and then 30 minutes at some point during the school year to talk about the current crisis” [3].
A second reason that people are not motivated is because intercultural communication can be uncomfortable. As discussed previously, anxiety, uncertainty, and fear are common aspects of intercultural interactions. And yet, moving out of our communication comfort zone often leads to insights into other individuals, groups, and cultures.
Psychologist Beverly Tatum suggests that people do not address delicate intercultural issues out of fear – fear of being isolated from friends and family members who may be prejudiced and not motivated themselves. She points out that this fear and the resulting silences have huge costs to us, as individuals and society. Individually, when we are not motivated to reach out across cultural divides, we suffer from distorted perception (we do not really know how individuals from other cultures may view us or a particular situation) and a lack of personal growth. On the societal level, when we are not motivated to embrace other cultures and other ways of thinking and behavior, our organizations suffer from a loss of productivity and human potential (not everyone gets the opportunity to contribute ideas) [14, p. 199].
Third, motivation is lacking in contexts in which historical events or political circumstances have resulted in communication breakdowns. For
379
example, it is understandable, given the history of animosity in the Middle East, that Israeli and Arab students would not be motivated to communicate with each other. It is also understandable why a Serbian student would not want to room with a Croatian student, or why a Greek Cypriot would not want to forge a friendship with a Turkish Cypriot, given that these two ethnic communities have been engaged in one of the most protracted international disputes of all time.
The point here is that it does not matter how good a communicator you are if you are not motivated to use those communication skills. For some people, the first step in developing intercultural communication competence may be to examine their motivation to reach out to others who are culturally different.
Knowledge. The knowledge component comprises various cognitive aspects of communication competence; it involves what we know about ourselves and others, and about various aspects of communication. Perhaps most important is self-knowledge – knowing how you may be perceived as a communicator and what your strengths and weaknesses are. How can you know what these are? Sometimes you can learn by listening to what others say and by observing how they perceive you.
Acquiring self-knowledge is a long and sometimes complicated process. It involves being open to information coming in many different ways.AWhite student describes her growing awareness of what it means to be White in the United States after listening to Chicano and African American guest speakers: They each spoke about their experiences that they have had [with others prejudging them] … We discover our White identity by listening to others. We hear these hardships that they have had to endure and we realize that we never have had to experience that. You learn a lot about yourself that way … By listening to our guest speakers today, I realized that sometimes other ethnicities might not view my culture very highly.
We often do not know how we are perceived because we do not search for this information or because there is not sufficient trust in a relationship for people to reveal such things. Of course, knowledge about how other people think and behave will help you be a more effective communicator. However, learning about others in only abstract terms can lead to stereotyping.
380