One of the most recent incidents arising from intercultural differences happened during my exchange program in Canada. My housemate, who was also an exchange student from NUS, was doing a school project with a group consisting of Canadians and Europeans.
Throughout the semester, my friend tried to plan project meetings, only to be brushed off by his group mates, who claimed that they had “more important stuff on”. As the deadline of their project approached, my friend got increasingly frustrated as none of his group mates seemed to care about the project. When they finally agreed on a meeting date, my friend was the only one who turned up on time. In addition, the project meeting ended quickly because the others had to go for lunch and had other commitments.
I was pretty surprised after hearing his complaints, as I thought that us exchange students were usually the more laidback ones, because we only needed a passing grade for the modules we took. It was apparent that there was a clash in working styles. Aside from personality differences, I believe that cultural upbringing also came into play in this situation.
Hofstede’s measurement of Long-term Orientation (LTO) is the extent to which a country foster values such as thrift and perseverance. It was probable that his group mates came from cultures measuring lower in LTO. Hence, they are less result oriented and seek instant gratification, as seen from how they were unwilling to sacrifice their lunch and other commitments for the sake of their project. On the other hand, Singapore scores higher on LTO. We emphasize on long-term goals and hard work, shown from how my friend prioritized the project above everything else.
Reflecting on my friend’s experience, I realized the importance of understanding and hence communicating across different cultures. In this case, there is no easy way of resolving conflict as values and beliefs are deep-rooted and hard to change. Perhaps a way of tackling this issue would for my friend to allocate work to each of his group member, along with a given deadline. This way, his group mates get to work at their own pace, and the project still gets completed.
In my view, as an exchange student in a foreign country, your friend should have first assimilated (redefine and change as mentioned in the class) and adopt the host country’s working style instead of trying to impose his working style on his team mates. Even though you did not mention, I presume the project was still completed by the deadline. This will mean that both working styles albeit different, are still able to yield similar results.
ReplyDeleteIn addition, I am slightly uncomfortable with the negative portrayal of a country which scores low on LTO. I do not find it wrong that the meeting had to end because the team mates had to go for lunch or had other commitments. Instead, I think this reflects a healthy culture where work-play boundaries are encouraged to be clearly demarcated. However, with regards to team mates being late for meetings, it does lead one to question their dedications to the project. Therefore, a low LTO culture may be a double-edged sword which one should view with neutrality instead of negativity.
Your case study is a perfect illustration of the concept of differences between cultures, in which Eastern cultures generally have “a greater sense of urgency” and Western cultures tend to be more “laid-back”. The knowledge that I have gained about inter-cultural communication has allowed me to understand why Westerners seemed to place a greater emphasis on leisure time and work-life balance. In the context of the LTO concept, such cultures probably aim to enjoy a better quality of life now rather than work hard now and enjoy later.
ReplyDelete