Page 214 - Essentials of Human Communication
P. 214

Membership, Leadership, and Culture   193

                          One obvious consequence of this difference in orientation can be
                      seen in how individualistic and collectivist groups treat members who
                      commit serious errors. A group governed by individualistic norms is
                      likely to single out, reprimand, and perhaps fire an errant member.
                      Further, the leader or supervisor is likely to distance himself or herself
                      from this group member for fear that the error will reflect negatively on
                      his or her leadership. In a more collectivist culture, the error is more
                      likely to be seen as a group mistake. The group is unlikely to single out
                      the member—especially not in public—and the leader is likely to bear
                      part of the blame. The same is true when one member comes up with a
                      great idea. In individualist cultures that person is likely to be singled
                      out for praise and rewards, even though the effort was to benefit the
                      group. In collectivist cultures the group is recognized and rewarded for
                      the idea.


                      HIGH and lOw POwer dIstanCes                                        ViewPOInts
                      In high-power-distance cultures, power is concentrated in the hands   Power distances
                      of a few, and there is a great difference between the power held by these
                      people and the power held by the ordinary citizen; examples include   In low-power-distance cultures, there is a general feeling of
                                                                                    equality, which is consistent with acting assertively; so
                      the cultures of Malaysia, Panama, Guatemala, Philippines, Venezuela,   you’re expected to confront a friend, partner, or supervisor
                      Mexico, China, the Arab world, Indonesia, and Ecuador (Hofstede,   assertively (Borden, 1991). In high-power-distance cul-
                      Hofstede, & Minkov, 2010; Singh & Pereira, 2005). In low-power-   tures, direct confrontation and assertiveness may be
                      distance cultures, power is more evenly distributed throughout the   viewed negatively, especially if directed at a superior. How
                      citizenry; examples include Austria, Israel, Denmark, New Zealand,    would you describe the cultures of the group in which you
                      Ireland, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Switzerland, and Costa Rica    participate—face-to-face and online?
                      (Hofstede, Hofstede, & Minkov, 2010).
                          The power distance between groups will influence the group of
                      friends you develop, as well as whom you might date (Andersen, 1991).
                      For example, in India (which is high-power distance) your group of friends is
                      expected to be chosen from those within your cultural class (as are your dating
                      partners). In Sweden (which is low-power distance), a person is expected to form friendships
                      (and romances) on the basis not of class or culture but of individual
                      factors such as personality, appearance, and the like.
                          In high-power-distance cultures, you’re taught to have great respect for authority; peo-
                      ple in these cultures see authority as desirable and beneficial and generally do not welcome
                      challenges to authority (Westwood, Tang, & Kirkbride, 1992; Bochner & Hesketh, 1994). In
                      low-power-distance cultures, there’s a certain distrust of
                      authority; it’s seen as a kind of necessary evil that should be limited as much as
                      possible. This difference in attitudes toward authority can be seen in the classroom. In high-
                      power-distance cultures, there’s a great power distance between students and teachers; stu-
                      dents are expected to be modest, polite, and totally respectful. In
                      low-power-distance cultures, students are expected to demonstrate their knowledge and
                      command of the subject matter, participate in discussions with the teacher, and even chal-
                      lenge the teacher—something many members of high-power-distance cultures wouldn’t
                      think of doing.
                          High-power-distance cultures rely on symbols of power. For example, titles (e.g., Dr.,
                      Professor, Chef, Inspector) are more important in high-power-distance cultures. Failure to
                      include these honorifics in forms of address is a serious breach of etiquette. Low-power-
                      distance cultures rely less on symbols of power, so there is less of a problem if you fail to use a
                      respectful title (Victor, 1992). Regardless, you still may create problems if, for example, you
                      address a medical doctor, police captain, military officer, or professor with “Ms.” or “Mr.”
                          The groups in which you’ll participate as a member or a leader will vary in power dis-
                      tance; some will be high-power-distance groups and others will be low. You need to recog-
                      nize which is which, to follow the cultural rules generally, and to break the rules only after
                      you’ve thought through the consequences.
   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219