This assignment is to examine and compare the methods of communication by people who have a different culture. Nowadays, people have been sorted into a different kind of culture by identifying their expectation of beliefs, norms, traditions, value systems, ideologies, etc. (The Business Communication, n.d.). The diversity of culture may lead to certain unintentionally misunderstanding. Therefore, cross-cultural interaction has to study and improve to avoid these unnecessary problems. For this assignment, I have interviewed two students who came from the country Malaysia and Japan respectively. In fact, both of the students have experienced part-time job after they graduated from secondary school.
Thus, they might provide more information and personal thought toward the problems that we are going to discuss. The reason why I selected these two students is that I believed the two countries might share a very similar culture but it turned up differently after I have done some research on the internet. The interviews’ questionnaire is mainly focus on the six dimensions of Hofstede’s theories and the context and contact of communications. The interviews were carried out separately and both of the interviews were quite fun. Some of the questionnaires that I constructed even came out with some unexpected answers.
According to the research, Malaysia and Japan are considered as high context interaction cultures (Maclachlan, M, 2010). A high context communicator can be defined as a person who conveys message indirectly but the receivers are expected to understand well. For this kind of people, social structures are built and centralized by concerning the close relationship between individual. Nevertheless, they will also prefer to express their emotion by using their body language or even voice tone. It is known as an art to interact with people (Southeast University, 2016). From the interviewees, both of them have been practised and taught to interact that way where the good relationship is emphasized. Although western country might think that this kind of communication could be, misunderstand and troublesome that is the fact how most of the Asian country practice.
127 our experts are availableright now
To compare two different nationalities, I have selected the value from severe dimensions by Hofstede’s insight to justify it. One of the characteristics is the power distance index (PDI). A high PDI country will have an obvious hierarchy level trend where inequalities among people can be accepted. Conversely, a low PDI society will have a mature authoritarian system where final decision-making have to agree or interact with every authority (Kenton, W, 2019). By referring to Hofstede’s insight, Malaysia has a score of 100 while Japan scores only 54. This means that the leadership in Malaysia cannot be a question and the hierarchical order is emphasized. On the other hand, Japan practices a meritocratic society norm where everyone born equally and hardworking is the only way to be outstanding (Hofstede’s insight, n.d.). However, both of the interviewees think that anyone has the right to speak out their opinion or question others when making a decision. Both of the students show low PDI towards the questionnaire unexpectedly.
The next factor that we need to compare is the individualism index (IDV). According to Hofstede’s insight, Malaysia and Japan both got a low score, 26 and 46 respectively. The main reason why Japan score intermediate marks is that the Japanese are still loyal to their family and local community no matter compared to what else (Hofstede’s insight, n.d.). Individualism concentrate on personal rights, privacy and even pleasure. On the contrary, collectivistic culture emphasizes the relationship, collaboration and interest sharing (Anastasia, 2015). Nevertheless, from the answer of the interviewees, both of them have preferred to accomplish task in-group. In short, the survey results on the internet have aligned with the interviewees’ answer.
Besides, the uncertainty avoidance index (UAI) should be taken into account to evaluate the interaction between people in a culture. To work with people from different culture, we must first understand their tendency to tolerate different perspective and behaviour in order to prevent unnecessary misunderstanding. In fact, a high UAI society will feel uncomfortable towards the uncertainty but attempt to follow instruction or rules and regulations. Adversely, the low UAI culture will be more relax and tolerate risk-taking (Conflict Resolution, 2013). From the resources on the internet, it was no surprise that Japan scores highly in this index, 92 but Malaysia got only 36 out of 100 (Hofstede’s insight, n.d.). Japan is considered as a disciplined country where they put a lot of effort on their feasibility education and how they prepare for natural disasters like earthquake, tsunami, etc. (Dayman, L, 2018). Besides, the UAI can be shown in the interviewees too by looking at their opinion towards rules and laws. The Malaysian student would take the rules as guidelines but Japanese student treats it as inevitable.
Other than that, the indulgence level would also be considered to analyse the methods of interaction. An indulgence culture can be display through people who always satisfy their desires and impulses. There is no restriction to voice out their own thought. On the contrary, a restrained society people have to communicate carefully. This is due to the strict norms of self-behaviour where it controls their desires to speak and do (Anastasia, 2015). In this dimension of Hofstede’s insight, both Japan and Malaysia score 42 and 47 respectively. Both Asian countries have very strong norms and regulations whereby most of the people behaved (Hofstede’s insight, n.d.). This could also be explained by the people tend to emphasize on a close relationship between one another. They have practised to care and respect each other feeling (Hofstede’s insight, n.d.). Nevertheless, from my interviewees’ opinions, both of them think that they have the rights to speak freely as long as they do not talk about sensitive topics and offend one’s dignity.
Masculinity Index (MAS) and femininity index (FEM) of a specific culture could be portrait the peculiarity of interaction methods between people. Virtually, the true meaning of masculinity and femininity to describe a culture have nothing to do with gender. Actually, MAS is defined as goal orientation. Successfulness and competition are the systems practised by the high MAS country. They believe that this system would bring perfection and wonderful to their life (Smit, C, 2012). In contrast, a femininity country emphasized on the process. People tend to enjoy every moment of life. The fundamental aspect is to get motivation in order to achieve success (Smit, C, 2012). By referring to the Hofstede’s insight, Japan scores almost full in MAS while Malaysia scores only half (Hofstede’s insight, n.d.). The references obtained from the internet are quite tally with the interview. Even though both of the country score differently for this aspect, but both Japan and Malaysia, interviewees support society to have benign competition among people. They have stated that competition could bring improvement but the main goal to participate in any activity is to learn and enjoy.
References
- Anastasia. (2015). Understanding Cultures & People with Hofstede Dimensions. Retrieved 24May, 2019, from https://www.cleverism.com/understanding-cultures-people-hofstede-dimensions/
- Conflict Resolution. (2013). High and Low Uncertainty Avoidance. Retrieved 24 May, 2019,from https://viaconflict.wordpress.com/2013/10/15/high-and-low-uncertainty-avoidance/
- Culture and Leadership. (n.d.). Dimensions of Culture Questionnaire. Retrieved 24 May, 2019,from http://people.uncw.edu/nottinghamj/documents/slides6/Northouse6e%20Ch15%20Culture%20Survey.pdf
- Dayman, L. (2018). 8 Ways Japan Prepares for Earthquakes. Retrieved 24 May, 2019, from
- Hofstede Insights. (n.d.). Country Comparison. Retrieved 24 May, 2019, from
- International Development. (2016). Intercultural Communication: High- and Low-Context Cultures. Retrieved 24 May, 2019, from https://online.seu.edu/articles/high-and-low-context-cultures/
- Kenton, W. (2019). Power-Distance Index (PDI). Retrieved 24 May, 2019, from https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/power-distance-index-pdi.asp
- Maclachlan,M. (2010). Cross-Cultural Communication Styles: High and Low Context. Retrieved 24 May, 2019, from https://www.communicaid.com/cross-cultural-training/blog/high-and-low-context/
- Smit, C. (2012). Masculinity and Femininity; Masculine and Feminine Gender Examples. Retrieved 24 May, 2019, from https://culturematters.com/masculinity-and-femininity-gender-examples/
- The Business Communication. (n.d.). Meaning of Cross-Cultural Communication. Retrieved 24 May, 2019, from https://thebusinesscommunication.com/cross-cultural-communication/
