Unit 1 test

With a partner, quickly review the concepts of:

Individualism vs. collectivismMonochronic vs. polychronicInternal control vs external controlLow power distance vs. high power

distanceDoing vs. being Turn in your journals for unit 1.

LESSON 2.1 DIRECT VS. INDIRECT COMMUNICATION STYLES

Essential QuestionWhat is the difference between direct and

indirect communication styles.

Focus: Defining Direct – Indirect Communication Activity: 10 minutes

Within your groups, write out a sentence definition of what you think is an example of direct communication and what you think is an indirect communication style. You are not allowed to use the words “direct” or “indirect” in your definitions. You have 3 minutes.

Examples of Direct – Indirect Communication Activity: 10 minutes

Think of examples from your daily lives when you are/have been both direct/indirect. Agree on one example representing each communication style to report back to the larger group.

Activities

Applying Direct-Indirect Communication Meanings Activity: 30 minutes

In your groups, view the video on Direct/Indirect Communication (found in the resources section above). After you view the video, complete the Direct-Indirect Communication Styles Activity sheet that has the descriptions of both communication styles. Each group should receive the descriptions for each communication style, take about 15 minutes to review the information in the handout, and answer the questions as listed on page two of the handout.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCIAb6hvPgY

Indirect/high ContextContext refers to the amount of innate and largely unconscious understanding a person can be expected to bring to a particular communication setting. In high context cultures, such as Thailand, which tend to be homogenous and collectivist, people carry within them highly developed and refined notions of how most interactions will unfold, of how they and the other person will behave in a particular situation. Because people in high context cultures already know and understand each other quite well, they have evolved a more indirect style of communication. They have less need to be explicit and rely less on words to convey meaning— and especially on the literal meaning of the spoken word— and more on nonverbal communication. People often convey meaning or send messages by manipulating the context. Because these cultures tend to be collectivist, people work closely together and know what everyone else knows. The overriding goal of the communication exchange is maintaining harmony and saving face.

Direct/Low Context—Low context cultures, like the United States, tend to be more heterogeneous and individualist and accordingly have evolved a more direct communication style. Less can be assumed about the other person in a heterogeneous society, and less is known about others in a culture where people prefer independence, self-reliance, and a greater emotional distance from each other. They cannot depend merely on manipulating context—not doing or not saying something that is always done or said in that situation—or communicating nonverbally to make themselves understood; they must rely more on words, and on those words being interpreted literally. Getting or giving information is the goal of most communication exchanges.

Direct-Indirect Communication Research Activity: 30 minutes Distribute the Direct – Indirect Communication Research Activity Handout

and ask students to indicate where they think their countryis on the direct-indirect communication style continuum, and explain what makes them think that their country leans towards one communication style more than the other. Then ask each groupto share their ideas and explanations.

Arabic-speaking World – can be both direct as well as indirect; their directness, though, will look different than the U.S. directness. Egypt (pp. 148-158)Kuwait (pp. 288-298)Saudi Arabia (pp. 426-436)

Chinese-speaking World – can be both direct as well as indirect; their directness, though, will look different than the U.S. directness.China (pp. 89-99)Hong Kong (pp. 100-103)Taiwan (pp. 495-505)

Spanish-speaking World – can be both direct as well as indirect; their directness, though, will look different than the U.S. directness.Colombia (pp. 104 - 112)Mexico (pp. 313 - 321)Spain (pp. 469-476)

Perceptions of Direct and Indirect Communication Styles: 10 minutesEach group will sort the different attributes in the table

below. As you sort these items, talk about the following items:

Reasons for the perceptionGiven the previously studied definition of culture as

“programming of the mind”, and given the strong connection between culture and communication styles, could we say that we are all “programmed” by our culture to communicate in one way or another?

List of attributes to be given to each group:insensitive, dishonest, uncaring, unclear, secretive, rude, not

knowledgeable, evasive, insulting, bluntDirect about IndirectCommunicationsReason for the perception Indirect about Direct CommunicationsReason for the perception

Answer Key:Direct about Indirect: dishonest, unclear,

secretive, not knowledgeable, evasiveIndirect about Direct: rude, blunt,

insensitive, uncaring, insulting

EXTENDING KNOWLEDGECOMMITTEE MEETING

1st PCV (US) in Egypt: How did it go with the committee members?2nd PCV (US): A lot easier than I was expecting.1st PCV: Really? Did you ask about buying the new equipment?2nd PCV: Yes. I explained we had to have it and told them how much itwould cost.1st PCV: And?2nd PCV: There was no discussion. They said fine and asked me tomove on to the next item

Committee MeetingThe mistake here is assuming that if people have a problem

with a proposal at a meeting, they’ll tell you, even in front of other people. While this may be characteristic behavior in direct, low context cultures, it is less common in indirect cultures. Indirect communicators, worried about face saving and wanting to preserve harmony, usually try to avoid publicconfrontation. They will avoid discussing a matter rather than clash over it in public (which may be why there was no discussion here) and even say “fine” when things aren’t fine. The PCV makes the mistake of assuming that no comment means approval, as it often does in the United States, and that a person who says “fine” is pleased. But the worse error here (worse than these misinterpretations) may be bringing up a potentially controversial topic in a public forum like this, especially if this is the first time the subject has been raised.

We’ll GET BACK TO YOUHCN (China): How did it go at the clinic?PCV (US): Very well, I think, for the first meeting.HCN: When will you see the director again?PCV: In the end, I didn’t meet with the director. I met with hisassistant.HCN: Did she ask you a lot of questions about your proposal?PCV: A few.HCN: When are you going back?PCV: Probably next week.HCN: You’re not sure?PCV: I asked for another appointment and she said she would get back to me.

We’ll Get Back To YouRemember that in high context cultures the message is often not

found in what people say or do but in what they fail to say or do. In this dialogue, it may be significant that the director did not meet with the PCV as originally planned but instead sent his assistant. And it may be of further significance that the assistant asked few questions and scheduled no subsequent appointment. In other words, no one is going to specifically tell the PCV that there is no interest in her proposal—that could cause an embarrassing loss of face—but the message is nevertheless going to be communicated. The other possibility, of course, is that there is a perfectly innocent explanation for all this: the director was unavoidably detained at the last minute; the assistant had few questions because she knew the proposal very well; and no new meeting date was set because the assistant simply forgot! The point is that in some cases in some cultures, you may need to read more into the nonverbal communication

TRANSFER1st PCV (US) in Mexico: I asked the director for a transfer yesterday.2nd PCV (US): What did she say?1st PCV: Not much. She asked me how I was getting along with Josethese days.2nd PCV: What did you say?1st PCV: I told her nothing had changed, that I wanted out because ofhim.2nd PCV: Then what?1st PCV: She said she understood my problem, that she knows Joseisn’t easy.2nd PCV: Do you think she’ll transfer you?1st PCV: Oh, I’m sure. She said she’d had a lot of complaints aboutJose over the years.

TransferThere’s a good chance the PCV has misread this

exchange and is not being transferred. On the surface—which one learns to be wary of in indirect/high context cultures—the director has been sympathetic and understanding, but she does not appear at any point to have specifically said she will transfer the PCV. That in itself is meaningful. All she has said is that she’s had a lot of complaints about him. If the PCV sees a transfer in those words, that’s his prerogative, but remember that in indirect cultures people often go to great lengths to avoid using the word no, to avoid a scene, and will happily say yes whenever the opportunity presents itself—and even, on occasion, when it doesn’t.

reflectionWhat is the difference between direct (low

context) and indirect (high context) communication styles?