Intercultural Communication

Submitted by Ashna Chaudhry (z3430466)

Hofstedes research (1984), though severely limited due to non-random sampling, is significant in its description of the four dimensions of national cultures. A dimension which was significant from the point of view of culture comparison was individualism-collectivism , which emphasizes that certain cultures might value autonomy and individualistic nature, while others give importance to group over the individual and collective mindset. Halls approach to cultural difference was to divide all cultures into high-context (where communication is significantly affected by cultural context) or low-context categories (where communication is minimally affected by cultural context). My culture of origin is that of India, one that gives little importance to individualism or personal space. In the context of a workplace, a person is expected to work much beyond the contractual working hours. Comparatively, Australian culture is the opposite. Whether in a social context, professional, or familial, a person doesnt have to justify, nor fight for personal time. Work hours are fixed; people are not expected to compromise on their personal lives. If people from these two cultures were to work together, a potential problem I see arising is that of managing expectations in terms of work hours. Where Indian people wouldnt feel the need for personal time at the end of the day and would prefer to work beyond designated hours, Australians would expect that personal time. Unless both parties explicitly state their expectations, severe communication problems could develop, including development of communication barriers. The Indians attitude may be perceived as imposing and that of the Australians may be perceived as laidback and complacent. Not communicating expectations in a multicultural environment can be majorly detrimental to the overall objective.