Strategies for Success in Intercultural Interactions, Lesson Two. In this lesson, our objective is to implement strategies during the process of interaction in conflict. This lesson is quite a deep and large lesson. This lesson will review many key concepts. You may come back and refer to this lesson, before you enter into any major future interaction. First of all, get yourself in the right mindset. When entering an intercultural interaction it is helpful to first establish in your mind the outcome you would like to achieve. It is very important to not lose yourself emotionally or tactically in the conversations that you have as the energy and the conflict rises. I find it very helpful to retain a vision of where I'm trying to achieve. And in fact, so much so, I write it down on a piece of paper in front of me when entering into deep and extended dialogue. Depending on the nature of the outcome, you may or may not want to disclose that outcome initially. Although in my experience, I have to have faith in myself and those I'm interacting with that our shared outcome is worth sharing and that everyone would be energized by it. If there is limited trust or understanding at the outset of a long dialog, at least sharing the desired outcome, and referencing to it consistently, would show you as a reliable person. And trustworthy, as far as your forthrightness, and consistency. This is in spite of what could be the cultural biases, that would exist in high context cultures. With this outcome in mind, then consider your own cultural biases and the culture and bias of the other party you're working with. Try to visualize how that person would end up desiring your outcome through their personal interests, their culture, and their cultural bias. There are a risk of mismatches in your style and possibly deep mismatches in world view of your cultures. But if you're aware of those, you have a chance on finding a mutually agreeable solution. Then, implement a communication strategy that allows all parties to get the shared outcome that they desire given the dimensions that you have now studied that will arise in intercultural communication. No matter the people, the context, and the outcome of the interactions that you embark upon, there are really only three things that are happening in the interaction. Either the parties you're working with adapt, you adapt, or both parties are in status quo. I think we can all agree the goal is for all parties to adapt to the point of effective and productive dialogue. However, as you are working through the interaction keep in mind there are only three ways that this interaction go and you're job is to create the environment that all parties feel safe to adapt to get to a productive outcome. There are conflict models, and there are three of them in particular which we'll review here. That are good to understand in your self and the other parties in your interaction. The three approaches people use in resolving conflict are dispositional approaches, situational approaches, and systems approaches. Let's start with the dispositional approach. In the dispositional model, it focuses on the fact that people have dominant styles which dictate behavior in handling conflicts. The dominant style depends on ones culture and ones particular personality traits, otherwise known as a disposition. For example, an extrovert, no matter which culture, will use more dominant styles than an introvert. A situational approach is used when one takes into account the conflict topic, and the situation, in shaping what style they will use. Factors in determining a situation Include the topic, the content of the conversation, time pressures and the goals, and really all these factors determine is this person gonna engage or avoid the conflict? This particular style, of course, ignores someone's disposition and really relies on the fact that someone adjusts to the particular situation at hand. Finally, we have a systems approach. A systems approach combines both the disposition and situational style. A systems approach respects that an individual has tendencies in which style they will use, but they are able to apply some situational styles as adjusting to the conflict and topic at hand. This approach takes into account that most people have a predominant style, however they can be educated enough and present enough to understand the context that they're in, and can apply other styles as a result to get to their desired outcome. In summary keep all of these three approaches in mind about yourself, and about the other parties you are in interaction with, to better understand the styles being used. Now let's focus on some particular things you could do personally. The following are five skills that can be used in inner cultural conflict and communication. As a successful intercultural ambassador, you must be self aware, but also be in the moment when interacting. You should engage in cultural frame switching which is known as seeing the other person's point of view through their cultural lens. You should connect their value patterns to how they're making decisions. You should identify particular identity and situational issues. And really focus on listening and look for words and non-verbal cues. At the foundation we have to be aware and account for the impact of cultural bias within ourselves and the other party entering into interaction. Ultimately mindfulness plays the role of face-saving. Because each human being looks for and can deserve the respect that they expect and the feeling of being accepted that they hope for. Cognitive flexibility refers to the concept of being able to reshape the goal that you intend to achieve. Based on what you learn. If you are willing to reframe the context of the conflict, you have the chance to reduce friction. For example, you could change a compliant, oriented communication to a request such as, I'd like you to do this, versus, may I ask you to do this? You can also change conflict words to alignment words, such as, I need you to get this done because, versus let's try to achieve this together. And finally, you can help parties understand the big picture cognitively. Some tools you can use are to use neutrally toned words, words that won't incite conflict. You can restate the goal in common words so parties are sharing in the outcome. And you can move from blaming statements to mutually focused problem solving statements. The third tool that you can use practically is developing a tolerance for ambiguity. A particular trick I use is borrowed from another part of leadership. I call it a parking lot. The parking lot is not meant to defer any items in this case. The ambiguity parking lot, as we'll call it, is a list of items you can jot down during a conversation. And you can identity them by your lack of comfort, or the other party's lack of comfort with a particular item. Go ahead and write those down, and mutually agree that both parties are uncomfortable with those topics, and can solve towards those problems in subsequent conversations. Identifying ambiguity is a question of self-reflection and comfort in exposing that you are uncomfortable with that particular item, and want more clarity, or want more mutual discussion around the item. Ultimately, this takes some self-control to identify and communicate. Then we have behavioral flexibility, being aware to change your style to match the party you're interacting with. You can exhibit behavioral flexibility through adjusting your body language, your tone of your language, and the pace of you language. Ultimately, behavioral flexibility is to create a feeling of trust in the other party. Fifth and finally, using the tool of cross-cultural empathy is very powerful in individual interactions. You ultimately can shift your style to match the context of both parties, the physical location of both parties, the culture within which both parties are interacting. One of the tools you can use are repeating what you hear, the actual content, and also the way in which you're receiving it. So the other party may clarify. Depending on the person's ability to understand the experience of the others from their cultural perspective is ultimately cross-culture empathy. Some other quick hints for this area of cross-cultural empathy are checking yourself for bias, suspending stereotypes, and asking questions about the other person's content and intent. Frankly, don't assume you understand. Giving the other party a chance to explain only makes them feel helpful in the conversation. We can use cultural models that we have already reviewed in prior lessons to better understand intercultural communication. We can do so by combining a couple of the cultural dimensions we've learned. Let's look at this particular graph, combining the two dimensions of individualism to collectivism, vs small power distance to large power distance. In doing so, we can review four different conflict approaches that you or other parties would use in an interaction. On the top-right corner, we have a status-achievement conflict approach. This approach combines individualistic cultures and large power distance cultures. In a status achievement approach, the hierarchy of the boss and individual is stated and accepted. Personal freedom is a particular value that these cultures enjoy. In these areas of personal freedom, the individuals want data and rules by which to work. There's also an expectation of earned inequality. In other words, a type of meritocracy, that you earn your role through achievement. Everyone in this model aspires to be the boss by winning. An expectation of this particular status achievement conflict arena is that the staff expect the boss to win, even though they may be able to give their input and would be comfortable doing so. In the bottom-right corner, we have a combination of a culture of collectivism and large power distance. In this quadrant, we have a likely approach of benevolent conflict. In this type of conflict, the boss is considered a father figure, a boss who takes care of the staff. This sort of environment has the characteristics of, the boss has an obligation to others. Countries in South America, Asia, and Africa use this style. Most countries use this particular style. In the left corner on the bottom, we have a combination of cultural attributes of collectivism and a small power distance. This is typically called the communal conflict quadrant. It's very rare. In fact, there may be no countries that actively use this style, other than possibly Costa Rica. In such a communal style, different participants or employees would switch becoming the leader, each one taking on that role, and again, taking care of everyone, not just themselves. Finally, in the top-left corner, we have the combination of cultural attributes of individualism and small power distance. In the impartial conflict quadrant, which is practiced primarily in Northern Europe Personal freedom is expected, as well as fair treatment. A manager is expected to give the objective and the employees are expected to allow to give feedback. Another helpful combining of dimensions is conflict style. Two dimensions on how you value yourself and others, from low to high, in a two-dimensional view. Determine a style in which a person will approach a conversation. There is the concern from self, which goes top to bottom, from high to low. And then concern from others, which goes from low to high, from left to right. In a dominating style, in which you have high concern for self and low concern for others, one would tend to find an aggressive, defensive and controlling individual. In the avoiding style, which is low concern for self and low concern for others, someone would be found dodging a topic, like glossing over a topic or not admitting it exists. In an accommodating style, where one has concern for others that's high but low concerns for self, the people in this quadrant would tend to smooth over differences, or frankly give in. In a compromising style, which is quite a balance between concern for self and concern for others, is it, one would experience someone to provide a give and take in how to solve conflict. And finally, in a collaborating style where there's high concern for self and high concern for others, it reflects a commitment to the outcomes of both parties and a concern for both parties' styles. A lot of clarifying questions are used in this particular style. In an individualistic culture, the avoiding and accommodating styles can be seen as weak, whereas in a collectivist culture, those two approaches can be seen as valuable, as they are face saving. We have covered quite a bit of intercultural communication and conflict substance in this lesson already. Let's come to closure with reviewing some personal basics. When entering into an intercultural communication interaction and possible conflict, be mindful of the language you use. Not only your own language, if you're using yours, remember how comfortable you are in your own language and how the other parties may not be. Take a lot of time to understand the critical words you will use, and makes sure there's an understanding of those words. Keep track of the meaning delivered by the person, rather than their words or accent. What this really means is, try to learn what the person is really trying to communicate and what they really like to achieve. It is far too easy to misinterpret someone's words. And lose sight of their true meaning. This takes quite a bit of self control. Practice patience and shake up the conversation by using different tones and paces, and possibly even simpler word choices. Keep in mind we're not only speaking in different languages, we're speaking in different cultures. Also be careful about your tone of voice. That doesn't mean either a strong or weak voice. It's really a question of which tone of voice work in the cultural context you're working. That is the most important thing to keep in mind. A quick tip that I use outside of just speaking is to use gestures, pictures, graphs, written summaries, really shaking up the conversation so that everyone doesn't get focused in on simply one person's words. Really try to add context to the communication through various media and means. That will add to the colorfulness of the conversation. Clearly when adding these other dimensions to the conversation, you also have to be mindful of the other party's cultural context. Something you can do prior to the interaction is really getting some amount of understanding on the basic culture of those you're dealing with. This is widely available on the Internet now and through reading, so there really is all the opportunity in the world to learn about someone else's culture and educate them on your own. Once you have a mastery of someone else's culture, it gives you so much more flexibility on the pace and style of your communication. It's also a great advantage versus not understanding because you will most likely be able to move towards your shared outcome much faster, with very much fewer barriers in your way. And finally, really be aware if the culture you're interacting with is a low or high context communication culture. As a reminder, low context communication cultures depend on the speaker to convey the meaning, and to be very succinct and clear in that meeting. In high context cultures, the listener is more responsible for understanding what is meant by the softer words and more general context conveyed in the speaker's communication. Thank you for participating in this lesson. We hope at the end of this, you will be able to explain the dimensions of intercultural interactions that add to conflict. You'll be able to analyze the dynamics of intercultural interactions. And as such, plan strategies for success in your intercultural interactions.
