Culture Matters

To have your eyes widened and your organ of belief stretched, whilst remaining discreetly submissive, seems to me a faculty the [traveler] ought to cultivate. When you have submitted to looking about you discreetly and to observing with as little prejudice as possible, then you are in a proper state of mind to walk about and learn from what you see.
Philip Glazebrook, Journey to Kars

I didn’t expect a Peace Corps manual to be so enlightening. While it is, of course, geared towards those serving in other countries, I think it is still a useful tool in cultural self-awareness. It is a workbook so some of the activities will be a little strange, though, if you’re unfamiliar with Peace Corps.

It’s wildly interesting (to me, at least) to look at such an intangible, incredibly complex concept and condense it down into a small enough amount of words to fit inside a book. Culture Matters makes different, usually invisible, aspects of culture visible. You start to see behind the curtain and really understand why people act the way they do in nearly every aspect of life.

Understanding Culture

Culture includes abstract concepts such as the underlying values and assumptions of a society. It also informs concrete behaviors that are derived from those values and assumptions. Culture is a filter through which we make meaning of events in the world. What makes cross-cultural encounters so difficult is that people from different cultures can view the same behavior differently.

Culture can be modeled as an iceberg; part of it is visible and apparent while some (the majority) is submerged and invisible. Surface behaviors are things we can observer like facial expressions, literature, gestures, and food. Beneath-the-surface aspects of culture are things like concept of time, values, or work ethic. The behaviors and relics of culture that we see are informed by the underlying values and assumptions.

The reason any behavior makes sense is simply because it is consistent with what a given person believes in or holds dear. Conversely, when we say that what someone has done “makes no sense,” what we mean is that that action contradicts what we believe that person feels or wants.

Not every human behavior or value is cultural, however. It is just one dimension that explains it along with two other dimensions, universal and personal. Some behaviors are shared by us all, while others are unique to individuals.

• Universal. Ways in which all people in all groups are the same. Because of universal behavior, not everything about a new culture is going to be different from your own.
• Cultural. What a particular group of people have in common with each other and how they are different from every other group
• Individual. Ways in which each of us is different from everyone else, including those in our group. Not everything you learn about a new culture is going to apply to every individual from that culture.

People get their culture through a process of cultural conditioning. This is how we all learn what our culture believes is right and wrong. We usually learn cultural behaviors but we are also learning the underlying values and beliefs that inform those behaviors. The process for childhood and adult cultural conditioning is the same but adults usually require unlearning and relearning an already acquired behavior:

1. Observation/Instruction. You are aware of a particular behavior but haven’t tried it yourself.
2. Imitation. You try the behavior but it is awkward and you are conscious of what you’re doing, trying to avoid mistakes.
3. Reinforcement. People encourage you when you do it right and correct you when you do it wrong.
4. Internalization. You now know how to do the behavior without needing reinforcement. You may still need to pay attention to what you’re doing but not nearly as much.
5. Spontaneous Manifestation. You no longer need to think about what you are doing and naturally begin doing it.¹

When we observe reality, what is really happening is that our mind is interpreting what the eyes see and assigning meaning to it. And because our minds are shaped by culture, the meaning that gets assigned can be completely different for two people. Any behavior can then be interpreted in two ways: the meaning given to it by the person doing the action and the meaning given to it by the observer of the action. Successful communication happens when these two meanings are the same. In other words, communication is successful when the meaning that was intended by the doer is what was understood by the observer.²

Fundamentals of Culture

There are many dimensions and aspects of culture but this book looks at the four most important ones separately. How societies view these four concepts explains the most significant ways they differ. Note that each of these are a spectrum, not a dichotomy. No culture is exclusively one or the other (and especially not the individuals within the culture) but most tend to lean towards one end of the spectrum.

Concept of Self – Individualism vs. Collectivism

Concept of self refers to how individuals see themselves in relation to others. One pole is individualism:

Individualist— The individual identifies primarily with self, with the needs of the individual being satisfied before those of the group. Looking after and taking care of oneself, being self-sufficient, guarantees the well being of the group. Independence and self-reliance are greatly stressed and valued. In general, people tend to distance themselves psychologically and emotionally from each other. One may choose to join groups, but group membership is not essential to one’s identity or success.

Individualist cultures are more likely to be meritocracies, be more confrontational as a means to clear the air, people switch jobs frequently, and people hold cocktail parties and potlucks.³ On the other end of the spectrum is collectivism:

Collectivist— One’s identity is in large part a function of one’s membership and role in a group, e.g., the family or work team. The survival and success of the group ensures the well-being of the individual, so that by considering the needs and feelings of others, one protects oneself. Harmony and the interdependence of group members are stressed and valued. Group members are relatively close psychologically and emotionally, but distant toward nongroup members.

Collectivist cultures are more likely to have separate words for mother’s brother and father’s brother, have arranged marriages, and answer the phone with the name of the organization rather than their own name.

Personal and Societal Obligations – Universalism vs. Particularism

This fundamental of culture refers to balancing obligations to family and friends on one hand and the wider society on the other: in-group vs. out-group. The two poles of this dimension are universalism and particularism.

Universalism— Certain absolutes apply across the board, regardless of circumstances or the particular situation. Wherever possible, you should try to apply the same rules to everyone in like situations. To be fair is to treat everyone alike and not make exceptions for family, friends, or members of your in-group. Where possible, you should lay your personal feelings aside and look at the situation objectively. While life isn’t necessarily fair, we can make it more fair by treating people the same way. [emphasis mine]

Those in universalist cultures are more likely to generally trust everyone, very rarely offer exceptions, and write contracts even if it’s between friends.

Particularism— How you behave in a given situation depends on the circumstances. You treat family, friends, and your in-group the best you can, and you let the rest of the world take care of itself. Their in-groups will protect them. There can’t be absolutes because everything depends on whom you’re dealing with. No one expects life to be fair. Exceptions will always be made for certain people. [emphasis mine]

Those in particularist cultures are more likely to hire people if someone can vouch for them, take personal relations into account for work performance reviews, and have ethics that change depending on the given circumstances.

Concept of Time – Monochronic vs. Polychronic

Time isn’t a constant; it’s a cultural phenomenon. On either ends of this spectrum are monochronic and polychronic.

Monochronic— Time is the given and people are the variable. The needs of people are adjusted to suit the demands of time—schedules, deadlines, etc. Time is quantifiable, and a limited amount of it is available. People do one thing at a time and finish it before starting something else, regardless of circumstances.

People in monochronic cultures are more likely to interpret being late as rude, hold schedules as sacred, be more individualistic, see interruptions as bad, and stand in line.⁴

Polychronic— Time is the servant and tool of people. Time is adjusted to suit the needs of people. More time is always available, and you are never too busy. People often have to do several things simultaneously, as required by circumstances. It’s not necessary to finish one thing before starting another, nor to finish your business with one person before starting in with another.

People in polychronic cultures are more likely to see waiting as normal, be more collectivist, view deadlines as an approximation, and digress from the set agenda.

Locus of Control – Internal vs. External

Locus of control refers to the degree to which people can control or manipulate the external world and shape their own destiny. Do you have control over what you do or do things instead happen to you? These two poles are also called activism and fatalism, respectively.

Internal— The locus of control is largely internal, within the individual. There are very few givens in life, few circumstances that have to be accepted as they are, that cannot be changed. There are no limits on what I can do or become, so long as I set my mind to it and make the necessary effort. Life is what I do.

Characteristics of internal locus of control (activist) cultures include doing something to improve your unhappiness, making your own luck, and usually equating new with better.

External— The locus of control is largely external to the individual. Some aspects of life are predetermined, built into the nature of things. There are limits beyond which we cannot go and certain givens that cannot be changed and must be accepted. Life is in large part what happens to me.

Those in external locus of control (fatalist) cultures value stoicism, seeing life as it really is (instead of having a positive attitude), and believe that the external world is too complex of a mechanism to ultimately be known.

He would come, he meant, if Allah willed it. His wanting to come and his being permitted to come were not one and the same. In Morocco, unlike America, where there’s a will there is not necessarily a way.
PCV Morocco

American Culture and Diversity

It seems strange to learn about a culture that you come from. Because we are part of that culture, it is often difficult to really understand it instead of simply embodying it. Here are 13 aspects of culture and a summary of how the average American views each.⁵ These are often the direct result of American geography or the nature of the immigrants who first settled here.

• Attitude towards age. Americans are focused on doing and achieving so age isn’t highly valued. Newer is usually better.
• Concept of fate and destiny. Americans believe in self-determination. As children, we hear that we can become whatever we want, we just have to go and do the work.
• View of human nature. People are assumed to be good and trustworthy. If someone detracts from that, we want an explanation for what “went wrong.”
• Attitude towards change. Things can always be improved and newer is usually better. Making progress pushes us closer and closer to perfection. Traditions may be useful but aren’t always superior.
• Attitude towards taking risks. There will always be enough opportunity to go around so you can always start over. Experimentation and being entrepreneurial are important ways to improve. No risk, no reward.
• Concept of suffering and misfortune. We are in full control of our lives and destiny so being depressed is basically a choice. Do whatever it takes to be happy again.⁶
• Concept of face. People can take care of themselves so saving face isn’t important. We appreciate directness and honesty.
• Source of self-esteem/self-worth. You are what you achieve and you create your own worth rather than it being handed to you. You’re judged by markers of success such as your job title, how much money you make, or material possessions.
• Concept of equality. American culture is egalitarian. We’re not all the same but we are all of equal value.
• Attitude towards formality. Americans tend to be casual and informal because of our culture of egalitarianism. We don’t use titles or ranks when addressing each other in normal social situations.
• Degree of realism. Bad things happen for a reason. Americans are generally optimistic because individuals are in control and there’s no reason not to be.
• Attitude towards doing. Walking the walk is more important than talking the talk. Concrete results are valued more than other pursuits like academia or the arts. Practicality is valued.
• View of the natural world. The natural world is something that can be studied, predicted, and manipulated. It is not to be feared.⁶

Americans ignore history…. The national myth is that of creativity and progress…. They believe in the future as if it were a religion; they believe that there is nothing they cannot accomplish, that solutions wait somewhere for all problems, like brides.
Frances Fitzgerald, Fire in the Lake

Communication Styles

There are many different styles of communication but one of the most important is the direct/indirect spectrum:

Indirect/High Context— Context 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, … which tend to be homogeneous 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. [emphasis mine]

People imply or suggest what they mean and you have to read between the lines to really understand. They might use a qualified yes to mean no (putting a condition on the yes), tell a story to say no delicately, change the subject to avoid saying no, or return to a previous point to signal disagreement.

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. [emphasis mine]

People here say what they mean and value telling the truth over hurting someone’s feelings.

Nonverbal communication is also important. This includes gestures, eye contact, conversational style, facial expressions, and personal space. Each of these can mean completely different things in other cultures and between different people within that culture.⁷ Again, these should all be interpreted from the other culture’s perspective.

Culture in the Workplace

Culture also shows up heavily in the workplace. Specifically, it manifests as feelings towards power distance, uncertainty, and status. Power distance refers to how people of different levels of power and status treat one another.

High Power Distance— People in these cultures accept that inequalities in power and status are natural or existential. In the same way they accept that some people are smarter than others, people accept that some will have more power and influence than others. Those with power tend to emphasize it, to hold it close and not delegate or share it, and to distinguish themselves as much as possible from those who do not have power. They are, however, expected to accept the responsibilities that go with power, to look after those beneath them. Subordinates are not expected to take initiative and are closely supervised.

In high power distance cultures, people are less likely to question the boss, workers prefer precise instructions from superiors, and the chain of command is seen as sacred.

Low Power Distance— People in these cultures see inequalities in power and status as largely artificial; it is not natural, though it may be convenient, that some people have power over others. Those with power, therefore, tend to deemphasize it, to minimize the differences between themselves and subordinates, and to delegate and share power to the extent possible. Subordinates are rewarded for taking initiative and do not like close supervision.

In low power distance cultures, students question teachers, the chain of command is simply for convenience, and interactions between bosses and subordinates are more informal.

How people react to and how much they avoid uncertainty is also cultural and shows up in the workplace. Normal responses to uncertainty are laws, procedures, regulations, technology, and religion.

High Uncertainty Avoidance— Cultures characterized by high uncertainty avoidance feel especially anxious about the uncertainty in life and try to limit and control it as much as possible. They have more laws, regulations, policies, and procedures and a greater emphasis on obeying them. They also have a strong tendency toward conformity, hence predictability. People take comfort in structure, systems, and expertise—anything that can blunt or even neutralize the impact of the unexpected. The unknown is frightening.

In high uncertainty avoidance cultures, the chain of command should never be bypassed, conflict should be eliminated, people accept authority readily, and people rarely change jobs.

Low Uncertainty Avoidance— People in these cultures do not feel quite so threatened nor anxious about uncertainty, and therefore do not have such a strong need to limit or control it. They seek to legislate fewer areas of human interaction and tolerate differences better. They feel boxed in by too much structure or too many systems. They are curious rather than frightened by the unknown and are not uncomfortable leaving things to chance. Life is interesting but not especially daunting.

In low uncertainty avoidance cultures, risks are seen as opportunities, people change jobs more often, and authority is seen as limiting.

Lastly is where people get status (in the workplace and in society) from. It is somewhat related to power distance and individualism/collectivism. The two poles here are achieved and ascribed status, “doing” and “being.”

Achieved Status— In these doing cultures, people are looked up to and respected because of their personal and especially their professional accomplishments. You get ahead into positions of power and influence by virtue of your achievements and performance. Your status is earned and not merely a function of birth, age, or seniority. You are hired based on your record of success, not on the basis of family background, connections, or the school you attended. People aren’t particularly impressed with titles. Education is important, but not the mere fact of it; you have to have done something with your knowledge. Status is not automatic and can be forfeited if you stop achieving.

Ascribed Status— In these being cultures, a certain amount of status is built into the person; it is automatic and therefore difficult to lose. You are looked up to because of the family and social class you are born into, because of your affiliations and membership in certain important groups, and, later, because of your age and seniority. The school you went to and the amount of education you received also confer status, whether or not you did well in school or have done anything with your education. Titles are important and should always be used. You are pressured to justify the power, respect and deference that you automatically enjoy. While you cannot lose your status completely, you can lose respect by not realizing your potential.

Adjusting to a New Culture

On occasion, the behavior expected of you by the local culture may conflict with your own personal values and beliefs. Do you adopt the behavior and think less of yourself, or do you resist it and risk being considered insensitive?

When adapting to a new culture, we go through four levels of cultural awareness.

1. Unconscious Incompetence. Blissful ignorance. You are unaware of cultural differences and you probably don’t even know that you are making cultural mistakes. You are likely misinterpreting a lot of behavior and you don’t know it.
2. Conscious Incompetence. You now realize that cultural differences exist but you don’t really understand what those differences are and how significant they are.
3. Conscious Competence. You understand some cultural differences and try to adjust your own behavior accordingly. It still takes a conscious effort to behave in culturally appropriate ways but you are much more aware of your behavior.
4. Unconscious Competence. You no longer have to think about what you’re doing in order to do the right thing. Culturally appropriate behavior is natural now.

Similarly, as our awareness of a culture develops so do our attitudes towards cultural differences. We move in phases from ethnocentrism (seeing your own culture as central to reality) to ethnorelativism (seeing your culture in the context of other cultures) as described by Milton Bennett’s Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity.

The stages for ethnocentrism are denial, defense, and minimization. After that, ethnorelativism includes acceptance, adaptation, and integration:

1. Denial. Don’t really believe in cultural differences. People here tend to impose their own value system on others, knowing that they are “right” and that the other culture is “confused.”
2. Defense. People in defense start to realize that their value system might not actually be absolute and they aren’t happy about it. They accept that there are cultural differences but are threatened by it. Other cultures are seen as inferior to theirs.
3. Minimization. People in this stage are still threatened by differences (thus try to minimize them) but they don’t think other people are inferior or misguided. Instead, they don’t see cultural differences as significant or deep. They insist that we may be different on the outside but deep down we all share many of the same values and beliefs. Instead of denying or demonizing difference, they try to trivialize it.
4. Acceptance. Differences are accepted as deep and legitimate. They accept that there are other value systems and norms that are just as valid as their own. Some of these values might still be difficult to accept but they are no longer threatened by them. They are generally neutral about differences.
5. Adaptation. People here are positive about cultural differences and start to adopt the perspective of another culture. They are relaxed and authentic when interacting with the other culture. They become bicultural or multicultural and adjust their behavior to suit the people they are with.
6. Integration. People begin to incorporate values, beliefs, and perspectives of other cultures into their own identity.

Footnotes

Created: 2024-03-08

Last modified: 2024-10-01