Cross-Cultural Communication Barriers and Theories Explained

Introduction

With increased competition being witnessed in many industries, multinational companies are establishing operations in new foreign markets as a way of increasing their profitability and remaining competitive. Many countries have liberalized their markets, and advances in technology have made it easier for companies to open new branches abroad. However, this also brings challenges, particularly relating to cross-cultural communication. Effective cross-cultural communication is so important to organizations that some scholars, such as Levitt (1983), argue it can determine the success or failure of a foreign business in a local market. It is against this backdrop that this paper examines the factors that impact cross-cultural communication in the workplace.

The paper aims to answer the following four questions: What is communication? What does it look like? What is the purpose of communication within organizations? And what factors can negatively impact effective communication within cross-cultural organizations? In answering these questions, the paper applies three cross-cultural models — Hofstede's model, Hall's Context theory, and Schwartz's Value Inventory Theory — for a better theoretical understanding of the subject matter.

Barriers to Cross-Cultural Communication

Globalization has allowed companies to invest in foreign countries in pursuit of increasing their market share. This has increased workplace diversity and the integration of cross-cultural teams, making it more critical for business managers to understand cross-cultural communication (Gudykunst & Kim, 2002). To effectively develop skills in cross-cultural communication, business managers must gain practical knowledge of the factors that negatively impact it (Harris, Moran, & Moran, 2004). As Lee and Carter (2005) point out, some of these factors include cultural identity, ethnic identity, gender role identity, individual personality, social class identity, age identity, and role identity. Each of these factors is discussed in the sections below.

In many cases, questions arise regarding whose cultural norms and practices should be given priority in international business. According to Sprinks and Wells (1994), based on the "you attitude" concept, effective communication must be approached from the perspective of the receivers of the message, not the senders. Sprinks and Wells (1994, p. 302) established that organizations with comparatively high external direction require managers with adequate inter- and intra-individual skills and an organizational communication plan, though with a less flexible type and form of communication compared to organizations with a comparatively high internal direction. When communicating with a particular culture, the type and form of communication must be permanently tailored to the cultural norms and practices of local partners.

Likewise, a risk-taking organizational culture is likely to create greater tolerance of ambiguity compared to a safety-conscious organizational culture. These relationships are evidenced by a positive correlation between safety awareness and language barrier hardship.

Studies in social psychology indicate that personality attributes highly influence the effectiveness and outcomes of communication (Padgett & Wolosin, 1980). Individual personality has a considerable impact on both the content and form of relations with other parties. For instance, extroverts are expected to prefer an interaction-centered type of communication, involving the formation of personal relationships with their counterparts. On the other hand, introverts are expected to be territorially and internally centered, a finding supported by the correlations in existing studies. Research has also established that managers with good communication skills tend to be more effective communicators overall.

Accordingly, extrovert managers appear to be more effective in navigating both communication and the cultural practices of their workplace environment. Padgett and Wolosin (1980) further established that sensing types demonstrate preferences for facts and details, whereas intuitive types prefer to be innovative and focus on the big picture. Rajagopal and Rajagopal (2006) note that this distinction matters: the sensing individual would need to discover cultural differences as they arise in order to improve their communication.

Individuals who are thinkers make decisions in a logical and objective manner, whereas feelers apply emotional appeals such as reliability and responsibility. Individuals who are thinkers and decide that external communication is critical will logically move toward fully understanding the cultural attributes involved and enhancing their communication skills accordingly.

Misinterpretation is a primary barrier to effective communication (Lee & Carter, 2005). Communication is achieved when interlocutors reach mutual interpretations of their intentions. In cross-cultural communication, achieving total understanding is nearly impossible, making it inherently more challenging. Rajagopal and Rajagopal (2006) explain that the presence of cultural difference is in itself a barrier to cross-cultural communication. When there is a large difference between cultures, it creates cross-cultural variability, leading to high levels of uncertainty and anxiety, which ultimately results in misinterpretation within the cross-cultural communication environment.

Barriers to cross-cultural communication also encompass cultural mistranslation (Lee & Carter, 2005). This is widespread in second-language and foreign-language environments. Scholars disagree on how mistranslation should be characterized. While some have described it in derogatory terms such as "interference" or "sub-standard usage," others perceive mistranslation as innovation that illustrates cultural change. The reality, however, is that mistranslation in cross-cultural communication weakens understanding. Expressions such as "I am going to the main room" — used in some contexts to mean "I am going to the latrine" — are cultural statements that can easily result in misunderstanding.

Cultural norms are defined rules that determine acceptable and proper conduct (Sprinks & Wells, 1994). They comprise the norms that govern social situations and conversational habits such as greetings, expressing emotions, and making requests. In cross-cultural communication, individuals may be tempted to transfer their own cultural values to environments where they are not appropriate (Lee & Carter, 2005). Similarly, roles are also sources of cultural differences. As explained by Sprinks and Wells (1994), roles are sets of cultural norms appropriate to certain groups of individuals within a society. In different cultures, varied roles are assigned to different genders and age groups. In some Asian and African cultures, for example, women are not expected to answer back to men, particularly their husbands. Violating such role expectations can create serious difficulties in intercultural communication.

Anxiety Uncertainty Management Theory

The initial focus on cross-cultural communication centered on the practicability of effective communication, as observed in Hall's early experimental concepts. Spitzberg (2000) notes that it was in the 1970s that scholars began to develop theories on cross-cultural communication, and in the 1980s that systematic theories started to appear.

William Gudykunst's Anxiety Uncertainty Management (AUM) theory was developed over almost 20 years. Initially, Gudykunst formulated a concept of intergroup communication that incorporated uncertainty reduction theory together with social identity theory. He subsequently incorporated studies on anxiety reduction to elucidate intercultural adaptation, with the aim of creating effective interpersonal and intergroup communication. Gudykunst was influenced by the work of several scholars, including George Simmel and his concept of the social type. Drawing on this concept, Gudykunst referred to a "stranger" as a person who is not known by his current group and who comes from a foreign cultural background.

AUM theory proposes that when individuals interact with strangers, they will normally experience feelings of uncertainty and anxiety. In a cross-cultural situation, this uncertainty and anxiety stems from cultural differences as well as a lack of understanding of cultural norms. Gudykunst (2005) explains that uncertainty is a cognitive aspect of communication.

Predictive uncertainty refers to individuals' inability to forecast a stranger's feelings, beliefs, norms, and attitudes. Explanatory uncertainty refers to individuals' inability to explain a stranger's feelings, beliefs, norms, and attitudes (Gudykunst & Kim, 2002). According to Gudykunst (2005), people have minimum and maximum thresholds for anxiety. The maximum level is the highest degree of anxiety an individual can experience and still feel comfortable enough to interact with a stranger. When anxiety exceeds the maximum level, the individual will stop interacting. Conversely, the minimum level is the lowest degree of anxiety at which an individual remains interested in interacting with a stranger. If anxiety falls below the minimum, the individual is no longer engaged in the interaction. Thus, when anxiety is either very high or very low, effective communication becomes impossible.

AUM theory contains 47 axioms. The fundamental axiom — Axiom 39 — states that:

"An increase in our ability to manage our anxiety about interacting with strangers and an increase in the accuracy of our predictions and explanations regarding their behaviour will produce an increase in the effectiveness of our communication." (Gudykunst, 2005, p. 218)

This axiom implies that effective communication requires people to properly manage both uncertainty and anxiety. However, managing these feelings alone cannot guarantee effective communication; it merely creates the conditions for people to mindfully attempt to understand strangers and how those strangers interpret incoming messages. In doing so, people can respond in ways that produce effective communication. Proper control of uncertainty and anxiety therefore provides an avenue for effective communication, though the outcome ultimately depends on a person's conduct in the situation (Gudykunst, 2005).

Self-concept refers to a person's personal views of themselves, comprising both personal identity and social identity. Self-esteem is the positive or negative feeling a person has about himself or herself. According to Gudykunst (2005), personal identities are the primary generative basis for interpersonal behaviour, whereas social identities are the primary generative basis for intergroup behaviour. Therefore, when a person perceives a stranger to be different from their own group, the person may not treat that stranger on the basis of group membership; instead, communication is grounded in personal identity. The person will not treat the stranger through stereotypes and will interact on a personal level. Furthermore, Gudykunst and Kim (2002) note that positive self-esteem helps prevent biases.

Axioms 1–4 stipulate that to reduce anxiety, people should increase the extent to which positive social identities guide their interactions. An increase in self-esteem will correspondingly result in a reduction in anxiety levels.

Gudykunst and Kim (2002) note that these axioms demonstrate the significance of having positive social identities. A sense of superiority over other groups can lead to ethnocentrism. For instance, in circumstances where a missionary has low self-esteem, he or she may withdraw from interactions in a cross-cultural environment. Low self-esteem can also result in misunderstanding others, personalizing issues, and other communication difficulties. This is particularly relevant for missionaries coming from minority societies in multiethnic countries — for example, African or Asian missionaries working in Western countries. Where an attitude of inferiority or discrimination exists, such a feeling will negatively impact the outcome of cross-cultural communication.

Axioms 10–14 and 18–22 relate to responses to strangers. To reduce uncertainty and anxiety in cross-cultural communication, an individual should develop the ability to understand complex information about strangers, flexibility of thought, tolerance of uncertainty, and empathy.

Capacity to understand complex information about strangers: The more an individual is able to process complex information, the more readily he or she can generate alternative explanations for a stranger's behaviour. Cognitively complex individuals are therefore better able to understand strangers compared to cognitively simple individuals.

Flexibility of attitude: Rigid and conflict-prone attitudes tend to produce ethnocentrism, prejudice, and bias. Gudykunst and Kim (2002) note that ethnocentrism is the attitude of treating one's own group as the central reference point for everything, against which all other groups are measured. While some degree of ethnocentrism is unavoidable, excessively strong ethnocentrism leads to misunderstanding and stereotyping. Stereotyping leads to social categorization — the process by which individuals order their social environment by grouping people into categories that make sense to them. The more familiar individuals are with outside groups, the more nuanced their perception of those groups, and the less likely they are to treat outside-group members negatively. In addition, when people categorize strangers, they generate expectations about strangers' behaviour. Negative expectations produce uncertainty and anxiety, while positive expectations assist people in managing both. As Gudykunst and Kim (2002) state, while social categorization cannot be entirely prevented, being mindful and maintaining a proper attitude can help one avoid falling into stereotyping.

To counteract stereotyping, an individual should be aware of the impact of social grouping (Berger & Calabrese, 1975). With this awareness, a person can apply de-categorization, wide categorization, and re-categorization to enhance cross-cultural communication. For instance, if all Americans are categorized as individualistic, a person can broaden the definition of individualism to encompass elements of collectivism. Through re-categorization, when interacting with an American, a person might instead view that individual as young or old, male or female, or through some other relevant dimension.

Tolerance of ambiguity: As explained by Gudykunst and Kim (2002), tolerance refers to the ability to function successfully in situations where full information is unavailable. The greater a person's tolerance for ambiguity, the less anxiety he or she will experience. In addition, tolerance for ambiguity affects the kind of information people seek about strangers. Those with low tolerance tend to base their judgments on first impressions and seek information that confirms their existing stereotypes. Those with high tolerance are more open to new ideas and more able to judge strangers objectively.

Empathy: Cognitive empathy involves taking the perspective of a stranger and viewing the world from that stranger's point of view. At the emotional level, the empathic individual experiences the feelings of the other person. Communicatively, an empathic person demonstrates understanding and kindness through both verbal and non-verbal communication. High levels of empathy reduce uncertainty and anxiety in cross-cultural interactions.

Conclusion

This paper has centered on two main things: the factors that impact cross-cultural communication in the workplace, and a review of different studies on cultural value dimensions. Regarding the factors that impact cross-cultural workplace communication, four main barriers were identified. First, organizational culture raises questions about whose cultural norms and practices should take priority in international business. Second, personal characteristics — particularly individual personality — have a considerable impact on both the content and form of relations with other parties. Third, misinterpretation is a primary barrier to effective communication (Lee & Carter, 2005). Fourth, mistranslation — widespread in second-language and foreign-language environments — weakens cross-cultural understanding. Cultural norms and roles, which define acceptable conduct within a society and govern social situations, also hinder effective cross-cultural communication.

Regarding the theoretical review, the paper examined four frameworks. First, Gudykunst's Anxiety Uncertainty Management theory proposes that when individuals interact with strangers, they normally experience feelings of uncertainty and anxiety; in a cross-cultural situation, these feelings arise from cultural differences and a lack of familiarity with cultural norms. Second, Hall's High/Low Context theory asserts that information transmission is shaped by how much meaning is embedded in the context versus the message itself. Third, Hofstede's model identified five basic dimensions of national culture — power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism/collectivism, masculinity/femininity, and long-term orientation — that shape how people in different societies communicate and relate to one another. Fourth, Schwartz's Value Inventory Theory established that a value type is a group of values that can be theoretically clustered into a single logical description, and that these types can be analyzed at both the individual and cultural levels.

From this extensive review, it can be concluded that there are numerous barriers to cross-cultural communication. However, the body of scholarship examined here can be applied by organizations in addressing these barriers and in formulating communication strategies that promote effective cross-cultural interaction.