Communication Patterns in Multicultural Organizational Meetings: The Influence of Language and Culture

This article presents empirically based models of four communication patterns that arose in intercultural organizational meetings. The dynamics of the intercultural communication process, as influenced by both language proficiency and cultural factors, are explored for each of the patterns. Introduction Meetings are an integral part or feature of organizational life in all societies. By talking together in face-to-face situations (sometimes aided by electronics media in modern times), individuals satisfy their personal needs of connectedness and the organizational purposes of coordinating work. The communication dynamics are altered in meetings attended by individuals with limited second-language competency or eminating from cultures of differing context levels. By systematically analyzing and categorizing these communication dynamics, it becomes possible to identify differing patterns of intercultural communication. This article presents empirically based models of four communication patterns that arose in expatriate-local personnel intercultural meetings occurring in 14 local and multinational corporations (MNCs) operating in Taiwan. In the Taiwanese MNCs environments encompassed in this study, expatriate managers and Chinese local managers did adjust their communication approaches and were able to make effective use of meetings. Through changing and adapting their natural communication styles and methods, the expatriates and the Chinese personnel were able to compensate for their second-language deficiencies and to overcome cultural differences. The information exchange in meetings was an integral part of the total communication system; these exchanges formed a framework for other communication in the MNCs and also had the positive impact of increasing contact among expatriates and local personnel. Owing to the structured and mandatory nature of the intercultural meetings, Chinese individuals with lower second-language (L2) proficiency were not excluded from the intercultural communication process. The present study disclosed four communication patterns in the intercultural meetings that reflected efficient information exchange; namely, (a) communication initiated by expatriates without feedback requests, (b) communication initiated by expatriates with requested feedback, (c) local personnel initiated communication, and (d) interactive communication between expatriates and local personnel. Language and cultural factors prompted the development of these communication patterns. The Chinese managers in these organizations possessed higher English language skills as compared to the expatriates’ spoken Chinese; thus. the communication medium in the intercultural meetings was entirely in English (except for side conversations among the Chinese personnel). In addition, the communication transactions took place between individuals eminating from low context cultures (expatriates) and a high context culture (Chinese locals). For each pattern the analysis focuses on: (a) a diagram and a corresponding explanation of the communication flow and (b) the cultural and language proficiency factors impacting the communication flow. Collectively, these patterns of formalized communication provided reinforcing system of intercultural communication between expatriates and local personnel. Theoretical framework of the study Teboul, Chen, and Fritz (1994) reported in a comprehensive review of the research studies on the communication process in multinational firms that there was a surprising absence of empirical studies in investigating organizational communication in multinational corporations. Even though there is an absence of previous studies on which to build a research strategy, there fortunately is a growing body of theory in two areas (second-language communication and cultural studies) that can be utilized as the theoretical framework for the present study. Reflecting these developments, the following theoretical framework section is divided into two sections. First, there is a review of L2 proficiency and its impact on communication. The second section discusses the concept of culture and its impact on communication. This section also includes an analysis of face behaviors in high-context cultural societies. Language Competency and Communication Where there exists a deficiency of second-language competency among those attending meetings, adjustments are required in order to insure that efficient information exchange is accomplished. Hamzah-Sendut (1989) provides evidence that the effectiveness of communication relies on interlocutors’ proficiency in the language used. Speakers with low secondlanguage proficiency communicate fewer ideas and provide less detailed descriptions in meetings than do native speakers or individuals with high second-language proficiency. The dynamics of the communication process in such situations is different from those meetings in which all meeting participants can use their native language to communicate. The mix of first-and secondlanguage speakers and their various levels of secondlanguage proficiency complicate the communication process in intercultural meetings. Culture and Communication Hofstede's classic study (1980, 1991) differentiated between individualistic and collective cultures; Table 1 summarizes the dimensions of Hofstede's individualistic and collective cultures. Hall (1976) developed a comparative model that is directly related to interpersonal communication. According to Hall, individuals from different societies and cultures communicate differently; and, as did Hofstede's paradigm, his model has contrasting polar dimensions: low-context versus high-context style of communication. In low-context communication, the verbal part of the message contains more of the information and the majority of the transmitted information is vested in explicit codes. Verbal messages are extremely important to the low-context style of communication and these messages are usually explicitly coded unless they pertain to highly sensitive issues. In contrast, in high-context communication, more of the information lies either within the context or within the shared culture of the counterparts who are parts of the interaction. Less of the meaning is provided in the coded, explicitly transmitted part of the message. Table 1: Key Differences in the Collectivistic-lndividualistic Dimension Collectivist Individualist Identity is based on the social Identity is based on the individual. network Harmony should always be Speaking one’s mind is a maintained and direct confrontations characteristic of an honest person. avoided. Relationship prevails over task. Task prevails over relationship. Collective interests prevails over individual interests prevail over individual interests. collective interests. Consensus in society is ultimate goal. Self-actualization by every individual is ultimate goal. Source: Adapted from Hofstede, G. (1991), pp. 67 and 73 The basic Communication Model (See for example, Bovee & Thill, 1993; Guffey, 1994; Richmond & McCroskey. 1992) describes the communication process in all cultures and includes the components of sender, receiver, and feedback Although this model describes the communication process in all cultures, the importance of the components within the communication process differs among cultures. People from collective cultures tend to use high-context language. High-context communicators are sensitive to their surroundings or environments; and as such, speech interactants integrate verbal messages and contextual variables to form their complete information source. In communicating, the sender first assesses the communication environment or context and then encodes the verbal message. As the message is sent, the receiver also assesses the communication environment before interpreting the meaning of words in the verbal message. The syntax, taken by itself, may be vague and indirect, especially when dealing with sensitive interpersonal issues. Interlocutors instinctively receive contextual or environmental variables as part of the message, so a verbal message that might be considered incomplete or vague in itself becomes complete by adding the context dimension to the communication process. In high-context communication, the verbal message constitutes only one part of the total communication. To connect the approaches of Hofstede and Hall, it can be inferred that individuals from collective cultures (Hofstede) use high-context language (Hall) and individuals from individualistic cultures (Hofstede) prefer lowcontext language (Hall). In the context of the current study, it can be noted that Taiwan is a collectivistic culture and Mandarin (Pu-tong-hua) is a highcontext language, whereas countries from which the expatriates emanate are classified as individualistic and theoretically utilize low-context language. Face and Communication. Face considerations also impact the communication process. "Face” behavior is the dominant social dynamics in the high-context Chinese culture. While all cultures give importance to “saving-and giving-face”, Hsu (1971) points out that the possibility of losing face has a potentially significantly higher detrimental effect on Chinese than on Western individuals. He states that losing face is the ultimate social sanction and is a real dread affecting the social system even more than physical fear. To guard against a loss of face, Chinese individuals unconsciously factor in face considerations in composing and sending messages. Consequently, in composing and sending messages, Chinese do make sure that the content of the message is correct or cannot be questioned. The Chinese individuals are likely to wait to respond in meetings and to delay reporting until projects are completed or results are certain (Du-Babcock & Babcock, 1987). This face-saving behavior of Chinese people is distinct from face-saving or enhancing behavior of Westerners. As contras