MARKET CLOSENESS AND SPEAKING THE LANGUAGE OF THE CUSTOMER: A PERSPECTIVE PROVIDED BY THE CONCEPT OF COMMUNICATION COMPETENCE

5TH IMP CONFERENCE, PENN STATE UNIVERSITY, 5-7 SEPTEMBER 1989*

DR NIGEL J. HOLDENMANCHESTER SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENTUNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTERINSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

APRIL 1989

* This paper is based on a presentation at a research meeting of the IMP (International Marketing and Purchasing) Group, held at Gysinge, Sweden, 24 -27 February 1989.

287

-2-

If thinking is an intellectual response to a problem, then the absence of a problem leads to the absence of thinking.'

Theodore Levitt: Marketing Myopia (1960)

INTRODUCTION

The study of language in relation to the broad area of marketing is in its infancy. With reference to domestic marketing, language is seen by marketing scholars to be primarily related to advertising and branding, but there is a growing interest in the applicability of semiotics (the science of signs, which subsumes language) to wider aspects of consumer behaviour (see: Umiker-Sebeok, 1988).

An investigation into the treatment of language and international marketing has shown that marketing writers have three main preoccupations: (a) language as a facet of culture;(b) language as an obstacle to cross-cultural business; and(c) problems of translating advertising copy (as opposed to other forms of company documentation) into foreign languages. However, although marketing writers' touch upon an amazing diversity of linguistic topics, their comments are uncritical, naive, misinformed and consciously (or unashamedly) chauvinistic 1 (Holden, 1987). As a result there is no broad appreciation of how the general problem area (viz) of language and international marketing is to be conceptualised.

First and foremost it is necessary to acknowledge that 'the bewildering multiplicity and variousness of languages spoken on this crowded planet 1 (Steiner, 1975) somehow influence the initiation, progressing and perceptions of cross-cultural business relationships. This would appear to be uncontentious. The next step is to try to to relate this multiplicity and variousness to the essential problem of 'language and management': namely, how to investigate and describe the use and influence of languages in relation to man's exploitation of the resources of this planet through the competitive interventions of governments fand their agencies) at one level and of firms at another.

There has been, it would seem, very little systematic study, either by management scholars or by language specialists, into the function of language or the role of individual languages in terms of man's global economic or resource-seeking activity (see: Holden, 1989). There has, however, been (in the UK and USA) a steady stream of literature which purports to show that there is a direct correlation between foreign-language proficiency and (as they say) export success. But these

-3-

outpourings are hardly studies in any academic sense; they are often emotional appeals to prompt the businessmen of the UK and USA to learn foreign languages and use them in their international business contacts.

Marketing writers, and to a large extent (we may asume) marketing practitioners, are conscious that in complex ways language barriers act as a potential intensifier of cultural differences and perceptual mismatches. Under some circumstances these barriers may inhibit interactions; under others their effect may be minimal. Yet, the marketer interested in language issues must somehow find a general conceptual framework to explain such seemingly contradictory effects in cross-cultural interactions. One way forward is to pose a key question which is capable of sustaining social-scientific enquiry. Such a key question is: what is the effect of language barriers on firms' performance in given foreign markets?

LANGUAGE BARRIERS AND FIRMS' PERFORMANCE

Turnbull and Cunningham's (1981) major study of buyer-seller relationships in five European markets has strongly suggested that the existence of a language barrier can impede interactions in four ways, by (a) reducing the ability to communicate effectively the product offering to the customer; (b) interfering with the ability of the seller to understand the needs of the customer; (c) standing in the way of close interaction, which can do so much for mutual understanding and cooperation; and (d) creating negative, indeed hostile, attitudes among buyers.

Researches of my own into the international marketing activities of industrial firms suggest that the existence of language barriers between buyers and sellers has a far greater impact on marketing performance than is normally appreciated. For example, firms lacking a capability in a foreign language are: inclined not to be so thorough in their marketing research; are (in the case of UK firms) likely to become over-dependent on English-speaking market intermediaries; tend to be less familiar with key aspects of local business life, eg use of media for publicity, opportunities for business socialisation; lack awareness of the activities of local and exogenous competition; are likely to take a shorter term view of market development - in other words have a less clear idea of customer requirements now and in future (Holden, 1986).

My own investigations also suggest that market-specific sociolinguistic phenomena appear to have a major impact, but on a differential basis, on cross-cultural relationship-building. The following factors come to the fore:

O W

-4-

1. The degree to which the written forms of language present a barrier, information source or mixture of both to outsiders.

2. The differential emphasis, in business dealings, on the role of oral as opposed to written communication in particular societies.

3. The sociolinguistic settings as an influence on the language behaviour of participants.

4. Distinctions in the social use of language (eg for the Frenchman, language [ie the French language] is an intellectual tool, an instrument of analysis; for the Japanese, language is used to create an atmosphere for harmonious interaction).

5. Different attitudes to the level of proficiency in the language of the market that is expected of, or even respected in, foreigners.

Taking all these points together, what is evident is that language barriers in international business act as impediments to closeness between buyers and sellers. Put conversely, language barriers are a contributor to social (or psychic) distance, a term which refers to 'difference in perceptions between buyer and seller regarding either needs or offers' (HalleVi & Wiedersheim-Paul, 1984). Thus a language barrier does not only exercise an influence -on, say, exchange of information or even of products, it is also an inalienable factor in the atmosphere of business relationships. Atmosphere may be taken to be 'the sum of the feelings, intentions, will, and interest 1 (Halle*n & Sandstrom, 1989) of actual or would-be business partners. Yet precisely how language barriers exercise this type of influence or affect the business atmosphere in cross-cultural encounters is not clear, but the five above-mentioned sociolinguistic factors may give clues.

Perhaps the really crucial point to grasp is that language barriers blunt the corporate capacity to interpret foreign business environments. This point is not apprehended by the generality of management and marketing writers, even though business decisions are based as much on interpretations as so-called 'hard facts' (which may themselves be interpretations 1) But equally important is the fact that foreign language knowlesdae by itself cannot overcome the wider effects of language barriers; neither at personal nor at corporate levels of interaction. I have termed the capacity of firms to overcome the effects of language barriers communication competence, which should be seen as of an organisational attribute and not as a form of personal expertise related to multilingual proficiency.

-D-

1 COMMUNICATION COMPETENCE'

Communication competence is the capacity of an organisation, using the various channels of communication and feedback at its disposal, to interpret, and anticipate, changes in, foreign business environments. Communication competence implies a capacity to overcome the effects of formal language barriers, these effects being by no means confined to the linguistic level of interaction; it suggests a prior knowledge of the response characteristics of foreign business environments and, as a result, a corresponding knowledge of how to handle uncertainty in relationships. In short, communication competence implies an organisational capacity to modify attitudes and behaviour to secure and maintain closeness with foreign business environments in order to satisfy mutual purposes, needs and desires in interactions.

Communication competence acknowledges that within any society language has social effects, such as those alluded to in items 1-5 in the preceding section, and that the more an organisation has the capacity to understand the motivations for them, the more it is able (in principle) to direct and achieve its objectives within other people's frame of reference. But to re-emphasise the point made earlier: foreign language knowledge as an organisational resource does not necessarily entail this interpretative ability associated with communication competence.

INTRODUCTION TO THE MODEL OF COMMUNICATION COMPETENCE

One of the values of communication competence is that it emphasises the relationship between language behaviour in general (ie it allows for the role of native language as well as foreign language capability) and the achievement of closeness in a given market environment. But, whilst communication competence may be useful for heuristic purposes, it can have little explanatory power unless it can model corporate communication performance, exemplifying and highlighting this relationship between language behaviour and market closeness.

The model of communication competence which I have evolved is described in detail in my supplementary notes 'Communication competence: notes and empirical descriptions.' This model derived from extensive empirical studies of five UK manufacturing firms' interactions with three markets which contrast starkly with each other sociolinguistically and in terms of economic structure and business systems: France, the USSR, Japan. Figure 1 below shows this basic model, according to which firms' behaviour is associated with four interlocking diensions AO - dimension of spoken language and cooperation; BO - dimension of written language and uncertainty reduction; CO - dimension of market control; DO - dimension of technical

-o-

closeness. Boxes 1, 2, 3 and 4 list factors which are associated with each dimension. See the supplementary notes for a detailed explanation of the model against real data supplied by the five UK firms on their business interactions with France, the USSR and Japan.

spoken language; cooperation goodwilltrust/understanding interpersonal/inter- organisational bonding

written language;technical literatureon-the-spot decodingabilitypersonal mobility

market control;feedbackbusiness constraintsintermediaries

technical closeness;responsivenessadaptation

ABCD = high low

FIG.l BASIC MODEL OF COMMUNICATION COMPETENCE

The purpose of the model is to measure a firms' individual competence along each dimension in relation to a specific sociocultural business environment (ie market). Points ABCD representing the maximum level attainable respectively. Joining points representing levels attained, as shown in fig.2, gives the overall picture of communication competence; and fig. 3 contrasts the communication performance of two firms X and Y in a given market. This figure suggests that firm X is an altogether more resourceful communicator with (ie interpreter of) a given environment.

-7-

B

FIG. 2 MODEL SHOWING A FIRM'S COMMUNICATION COMPETENCE IN RELATION TO AN UNSPECIFIED MARKET

B

WXYZ KLMN

FIRM X FIRM Y

FIG- 3 MODEL CONTRASTING THE COMMUNICATION COMPETENCE OF FIRMS X AND Y IN RELATION TO AN UNSPECIFIED MARKET

TWO

COMMUNICATION COMPETENCE AND THE LANGUAGE OF THE CUSTOMER

It might be said that communication competence represents the capacity (as they say) to speak 'the language of the customer'. Although used a good deal both by marketing writers and language specialists, the expression 'language of the customer 1 is deceptively problematical; and the following attempt to formalise a description does not make any special claim for itself - except "hat it may the first attempt of

its kind. As for language experts, they appear to have in mind a type of concrete linguistic reality associated with the official language, or one of the official languages, of a sovereign state. For example, a language specialist would say that the language of the customer in Japan is Japanese, in Sweden Swedish, in Switzerland any one of four official languages. But there are two major problems with this type of characterisation.

First, it does not take account of the legitimate ie 'closeness-enhancing role 1 of non-indigenous languages in certain markets; for example, the role of German, French, English and Italian in a number of East European markets (See: Merlin, 1983/84) ; or English as a neutral medium of business communication between nominally non-English-speaking countries. Second, the language specialists have a naive view of the customer, who is seen as a flesh-and-blood figure and often the target of (unscrupulous) salesmen. These specialists do not readily grasp the customer, especially in organisational and industrial markets, as a composite entity or set of influences.

Marketing scholars do not, of course, see the language of the customer in such simplistically clear-cut linguistic terms, but they too tend to use the term in an uncritical, imprecise way. I suggest that marketers use it as a portmanteau word to refer to a metaphorical channel of communication, shared by or capable of being shared by suppliers and buyers for mutual benefit. The capacity of the channel of communication to serve both parties may be seen to be a measure of their adroitness in engaging in and sustaining exchange relationships.

Accordingly, from the marketing point of view, the term 'language of the customer' may not strictly speaking have anything to do with language in any formal sense. Marketers are more inclined to regard the language of the customer as vaguely representing a social reality which reflects, and is reflected in, distinctive sociocultural business environments and the associated business mentality. As such, it is a respository of values and aspirations as well as rules or codes pertaining to prevailing standards of business conduct. Thus when the marketer uses the expression 'the language of the customer 1 , he appears to be alluding both to a metaphorical channel of communication AND a form of actual and potential knowledge necessary for communicating obiectives into the customer's frame of reference. Hence, the term 'market closeness 1 may be considered to be the result of successfully exploiting this channel and applying this knowledge.

-9-

This idea is keeping with the comments of Terpstra and David (1985), the only American management writers to show a serious preoccupation with language and international business, who note that: 'Speaking the customer's language, literally and figuratively. is a cardinal rule of marketing 1 (my emphasis). 'Figuratively' is of course the operative word, for it implies the importance of understanding ways of thinking or world-views, conditioned by a multiplicity of factors and associated with given business contexts.

It might furthermore be suggested that the word 'figuratively' also implies that, even if one does know a language other than one's own, one can always learn something about other people's ways of thinking or their world-view in order to create a framework for mutually agreed action or develop relationships across formal language barriers. But, and this is the crucial point, ways of thinking and world-views are culture-specific and as such shaped by language.

As the cybernetician, Colin Cherry (1980), has pointed out: 'The language of a people largely constrains their thoughts', noting that : 'Its words, concepts, and syntax, out of all the signs people use, are the most important determinant of what they are free and able to think. It makes their particular epistemology, their special view of the world, what they notice and do not notice. It directs their attention.' Thus, what is in fact popularly known as the language barrier stems only in part from an incapacity to understand a language as a formal linguistic system. It is also the difference in underlying world-view which creates both literally and figuratively 'zones of silence and razor-edges of division 1 (Steiner, 1975).

Communication competence recognises the importance of this figurative element of the language of the customer and emphasises accordingly the necessity of awareness of how language acts, not just as a means of communication, but as a phenomenologically significant manifestation which influences the thought, behaviour and attitudes of actual and would-be business partners in relation to each other; which is why in turn language is considered to be such a vital factor in the atmosphere surrounding buyer-seller relationships.

Seen in this light, the term 'language of the customer 1 acguires dimensions and qualities which have great relevance in relation to a wide range of marketing functions, which may be seen to be much preoccupied (positively) with discerning needs and (less positively) with exploiting impressionability among particular target groups in foreign markets. Seen in this light, too, language has more greater relevance to the development of international marketing theory than has so far been recognised. Indeed, whereas marketers have accepted that

-10-

language is a facet of culture, they may come find it more productive to see culture as a facet of languagei

Such a transformation of perspective should help to generate new insights into the nature and characteristics of exchange processes in cross-cultural settings, whilst enhancing the quality of formal treatment of language issues in at least two exteremely important areas, where there is scope for improvement; first, international advertising and, second, guidance on producing questionnaires in foreign languages.

COMMUNICATION COMPETENCE AND INTERPRETATIVE SENSITIVITY

The concept of communciation competence, as advanced here, must certainly be a very rare example of the application of a well-established linguistic notion to help elucidate corporate communication behaviour. It therefore thoroughly endorses the view that 'the potential of language theory for building a theory in intercultural communication is quite significant' (Asuncion-Lande, 1983). For just as in personal relationships, in which speaker and listener are actively seeking to establish 'a common set of interpretative procedures which allow the speaker's intentions to be (i) encoded by the speaker, and (ii) correctly interpreted by the listener' (Giles, & Smith, 1979), so firms behave in strikingly similar ways with respect to foreign business environments.

Firms are continually involved in encoding their own intentions and interpreting in turn the intentions of customers and competitors and a host of third parties in their exploitation of resources to develop new markets. Indeed businessmen and companies the world over are perpetually engaged in trying to interpret each other's behaviour, attitudes and especially intentions. Acts of interpretation tend to evoke a response; communication competence attempts to match correctness of interpretation with appropriateness of response.

Thus communication competence may be seen to be a measure of firms' interpretative sensitivity. A major challenge for those who accept this line of thinking is to characterise communication competence as an organisational attribute more closely. To what extent is it related to attitudes to exporting, or to types of firms in terms of product/customer profiles, or to formal and informal structures and systems for processing environmental information? How is it related to firms' capacity to make adaptations, physical ones affecting products and psychic ones, concerned with customer orientation? How, if at all, is it related to processes of internationalisation?

-11-

Investigation of these issues is very likely to yield new insights into the interactive behaviour of firms as well as provide much-needed conceptual underpinnings to those well-worn phrases 'effective communication 1 and 'language of the customer.' The very notion of the internationally operating firm as a communicator with, and interpreter of, foreign business environments, may prove to be of value to those concerned with putting international marketing theory on a stronger footing.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I am endebted to Mr Vincent-Wayne Mitchell, a PhD student at the Manchester School of Management, for his constructive comments on an earlier draft.

REFERENCES

Asuncion-Lande, N. Language theories and linguistic principles. In: Gudykunst, W. (ed). (1983). Intercultural communication theory: current perspectives. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

Cherry, C. (1980). On human communication: a review, a survey, and a criticism. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

Giles, H. & Smith, P. M. Accommodation theory: optimal levels of convergence. In: Giles, H. & St. Clair, R. (eds). (1979) Language and social psychology. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Hallen, L. & Sandstrom, M. (1989). Relationship atmosphere in international business. Uppsala: University of Uppsala, Department of Business Studies.

Hallen, L. & Wiedersheim-Paul, F. (1984). The evolution of psychic distance in international business relations. In: Hagg, I. & Wiedersheim-Paul, F. (eds). Between market and hierarchy. Uppsala: University of Uppsala.

Holden, N. J. (1986). The development of the concept of communication competence in relation to firms' interactions in overseas markets. PhD thesis: Manchester Business School. For a summary article see: Holden, N. J. (1987). The development of the concept of communication competence to evaluate firms' performance in cross-cultural interactions. R D Management. Vol. 17. No. 2.

Holden, N. J. (1987). The treatment of language and linguistic issues in the current English-language international management literature. Multilingua: Journal of cross-cultural and interlanguage communication. Vol. 6-3.

-12-

Holden, N. J. (1989). Towards a functional typology of languages of international business. Language problems and language planning. Vol. 13. No. 1. (forthcoming).

Levitt, T. (1960). Marketing myopia. Harvard Business Review, July-August.

Merlin, J-P. (1983/84). Comment approcher les pays de 1'est. Revue francaise du marketing. No.95.

Steiner, G. (1975). After Babel: Aspects of Language and Translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Terpstra, V. & David, K. (1985). The cultural environment of international business. Cincinnati: South-Western Publishing Co.

Turnbull, P. W. & Cunningham, M. T. (1981). International marketing and purchasing. Basingstoke: Macmillan.

Umiker-Sebeok, J. (ed) (1988). Marketing and semiotics: new directions in the study of signs for sale. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.