Introduction
Not so long ago, nurturing the idea of flying abroad to study or work was an idea that was viewed by majority of people as unattainable dream. In Africa for example, people who had traveled abroad for work or study related purposes were carried with much awe in their own villages. There were many assumptions doing rounds in the villages and towns about the West. I vividly remember an assumption I had when I was a little kid that in Western countries, there is no day or night. Of course there were so many other assumptions held by people from different cultures as regards Western countries. But this trend has changed since many people are now crossing the cultural divide to go and stay, study, or work in cultures that are radically different from their own. In going abroad, the visitor always have set perceptions about the foreign land. The hosts too harbor pre-determined assumptions about the visitors, which may not be necessarily true (Living abroad, 2008). Below I attempt to look at the assumptions held by the hosts, while drawing on the case study of Martha and Reza.
Assumptions made by Hosts towards foreigners
People always communicate with others all the times regardless of their cultural backgrounds. But communication is hard no matter how well we think we understand the other group. In the course of communicating, various assumptions and misconceptions are made. This happens more when the parties involved are from different cultural backgrounds as culture always forms the basis of all communication challenges (DuPraw & Anxner, 1997). In our case, Martha held some mistaken assumptions about Reza basically because they were from two different cultures.
The first assumption made by Martha was that, Reza was just a typical refugee, drably dressed, and unsure of himself. This is an assumption that is held by many hosts in their interaction with foreigners, especially for the first time. This is all because of misunderstanding the cultures of other people. In a layman’s language, culture refers to a cluster of individuals or community who share some common experiences that have continued to shape their way of thinking and their world view. Martha failed to really understand the culture from where Reza came from but instead used generalizations to stereotype or to write-off Reza as someone who was unsure of himself (DuPraw & Anxner, 1997).
Martha also assumed that Reza will be able to express himself by coming to the West and articulate his identity in ways that he could not do back home in Kabul. This is an assumption made often by the hosts to newcomers in their country. What they fail to internalize is that different cultures has different communication styles. Different cultures also have varying attitudes towards disclosure. Some cultures do not allow people to be open and frank about their emotions or personal information. Martha should have considered the variations present among cultures as regards approaches toward revelation of information. By noting the variations, people will always have an accurate perception of other people no matter the differences in culture.
Martha also assumed that Reza was always angry and desolate. This is because he refused to talk about himself or about his culture. This assumption is brought about by not understanding the patterns of cultural differences that persists among communities. When people are faced by an interaction that they neither comprehend nor understand, they tend to label the others as “weird,” “abnormal,” “desolate,” and always on the “wrong.” This forms the basis of prejudice (DuPraw & Anxner, 1997).
Perhaps the most notable assumption that Martha made was assuming that there were no decent medical facilities in Kabul. This assumption often happens because of one viewing their culture as superior to other cultures. Of course Martha had relied on Media stories to judge the health facilities but it turned out to be a misconception. People always carry their culture, language, religion, and country superior to others, thus bringing conflict in cross-cultural communication. The other person may feel offended by the misconception thus breaking off any communication with the perceived aggressor (Hart, 2008).
The most damaging communication misconception occurs when we assume that the other person perceives the world the way we do and they share our thoughts on things that we may try to teach them (Hart, 2008). This is what made Martha assume that Reza would always be able to express himself by coming to the West and articulate his identity better than he could on his home soil.
My experience in Japan
It was during the summer of 2006 when I received a letter from my local church confirming that I had indeed been selected to join a religious and cultural exchange program that was to commence immediately I went for School holidays. I had been selected to travel to Japan, along with five members of our church. I remember the stiffening bolts of confusion and anxiety that I experienced when I first received the letter of invitation.
I was eager to travel to Asia, a part of the world that I had never been to. But I didn’t know what to do with the feelings that kept on engulfing me about how we will be treated upon landing in Japanese soil. No one in our group except the team leader knew anything about the Japanese culture or their language. I was also deeply stressed by the stories I read on the internet concerning Japanese food and their religion. But all in all, I had to go since I had been selected.
Our departure time finally came and we flew out to Japan. We were met at the airport by our hosts, who were all Japanese. From that time onwards, problems started to crop up in the way we communicated and associated with one another. Everything, from casual greetings to the mode of dressing had to be changed – of course without prior communication. Our guides assumed that we looked and interpreted events from the same looking glass as they did. They wanted to teach us from their own perspective and worldview, without actually giving much thought on the way we thought and felt. This gave rise to many assumptions and misconceptions that threatened to tear the group spirit apart.
Our Japanese hosts assumed that everything, from their food to their facilities was above ours. They didn’t care much about our patterns of culture and how we express our emotions. They generalized our culture as Western and imperialistic, and full of all evils. This of course hurt my group members so much that some were even thinking about terminating the exchange program halfway. To us, there was no exchange taking place since the Japanese wanted us to follow their worldview. This was heartbreaking. It was the result of inadequate preparation in cross-cultural communication.
The Japanese assumed that there was only one rightful way of communication, their way. This of course brought a breakdown in communication channels. To our dismay, our Japanese friends assumed that communication breakdown occurred since our group was on the wrong track. They didn’t look out for ways that could make our interaction with them work.
As Reza was disappointed in Canada, we were all disappointed in Japan and wronged to go back to our respective countries. Our instructors in the exchange program failed to listen to our views actively and empathetically. They failed to put themselves in our shoes, bearing in mind that our perceptions and ideas were radically different from theirs. This made the cultural and religious exchange program to fail miserably. We flew back a disgusted lot.
Judging from my visit to Japan, culture shock played a major role in making our stay there disoriented. We were faced by overbearing anxiety that was a result of our loss to all familiar values, norms, signs, and symbols of our social interaction. The Japanese attitude towards our suffering in foreign land made us even more frustrated and aggressive towards the hosts. When they sensed our hostility and disorientation, they also responded with hostility and tried to avoid us (Oberg, 2006).
What we should know to understand others better
Cultural variations are at the centre of all cross-cultural misconceptions. Many people are now aware of the difficulties involved in dealing with people from other cultures. But failures arise when cultures perceived to be superior assume that other cultures must make an effort of being like them. For example, English is recognized as an international language. But English speaking countries particularly in the West always assume that other cultures must make an attempt to stomach their linguistic imperialism (Hart, 2008).
To understand other people better, people should always discover how to work together across cultural ranks as persons and as a community. We should always strive to be aware of our cultural variations, but this should not be used as a factor of dividing us from one another. We can be able to communicate more effectively if and only if we become more conscious about our cultural differences and explore our similarities. This is the initial step towards understanding, acknowledging, accommodating and respecting one another.
People communicate using different ways. Striving to learn the different ways of communication is also a step in the right direction in ensuring effective cross-cultural communication. It is only by learning the different ways of communication that we will get to internalize different worldviews, attitudes, and philosophies that people hold dear to them. The philosophies are the groundwork of their culture.
Of most important is striving to learn about the cultures of others. Learning their cultures will always give us a reference point by which we compare ourselves with. This gives us a chance to confront our assumptions and perceptions of doing things the “right” way and offer us a range of approaches. We can learn from other cultures some new ways of solving problems that confront us. Learning other peoples’ culture makes us to become less lonely, a key ingredient of stereotypes and prejudice. People should always know that talking to people who are different from others always give us hope and re-energizes us to accommodate the challenges of improving our communities and the world in general (DuPraw & Anxner, 1997).
Lessons Learnt in cross-cultural communication
Cross-cultural communication offers many lessons. First, I have seen that communication involves an exchange of meaning. It involves any attempt to let an individual know what another individual want to mean. I have seen that different cultures communicate differently. It is in this vein that cross-cultural communication confronts individuals with restrictions to their interpretations, assumptions, perceptions, and evaluations. Cross-cultural viewpoints have a tendency of rendering everything, including our communication, uncertain.
From the experience, I have learnt that cross-cultural miscommunication is seen to occur when an individual from one culture does not understand the intended message from an individual of another culture. This shows that communication does not essentially result to understanding. There is a lot of misunderstanding involved primarily because of various misinterpretations, misperceptions, and misevaluations held by people from two different cultures (Cross-Cultural Communication, 2006).
I have also learnt that cross-cultural miscommunication give rise to stereotyping. This is a form of cataloging that systematizes our experiences and guides our actions and attitudes towards other cultural and national groups. We should always learn from generalizations about cultures of other people but never should we use these generalizations to write-off or stereotype our thoughts and actions towards other people (DuPraw & Anxner, 1997).
Conclusion
In conclusion, we should always strive to understand other people ways of doing things by practicing to know their culture. Practicing is the foremost step in understanding cross-cultural communication. We should also never assume that our own ways are the only right ways of communicating and our culture is better than other cultures. We should never assume that communication breakdowns occur because other people from other cultures are on the wrong paths. This is a wrong perception which brings stereotypes. We should always learn to be active listeners and act empathetically in our relations with people from different cultures. We should always respect their decisions about whether they are willing to engage in actively communicating with us. In everything we do, we should always keep in mind that our cultural norms, values, perceptions and assumptions may not be valid to the behaviors and thoughts of other individuals from other cultures (DuPraw & Anxner, 1997).
References
A world of differences: Understanding cross-cultural communication. (n.d.) 2008. Web.
Cross-cultural communication. (2006). Web.
Cross-cultural communication. (2008). Web.
DuPraw, M.E, Marya, A. (1997). Working on common cross-cultural communication challenges. 2008. Web.
Fowler, K., James, M. Effective cross cultural communication: Collaborative efforts a must. Mind tools. 2008. Web.
Hart, G. (2008). Successful cross-cultural communication requires us to test our assumptions. Web.
Levine, D.R., Mara, B.A. (1992). Beyond language: Cross-cultural communication (2nd ed). Prentice hall. 2008. Web.
Kingsley, R.S., Dakhari, J.O. (2006). Culture shock. Web.
Living Abroad: Cross-cultural communication & culture shock. (2008).Universal class. Web.
Mead, R. (2004). International management: Cross-cultural dimensions (3rd ed). Blackwell publishers. 2008. Web.
Milton, T.J. (1997). Understanding culture shock. Foreign area officer association. 2008. Web.
Oberg, L. Culture shock & the problem of adjustment to new cultural environments. 2006. Worldwide classroom. Web.
Storti, C. (1994). Cross-cultural dialogues: 74 Brief encounters with cultural difference. Intercultural press. Web.
Tan, J.S. (2004). Strategies for effective cross-cultural negotiation: The F.R.A.M.E. approach. McGraw-Hill companies. 2008. Web.
Teaching cross-cultural communication. (2005). Intermundo. Web.