The barriers to intercultural communication and the solving approaches

The barriers to intercultural communication and the solving approaches Although intercultural communication is highly thought of, the barriers in the intercultural communication area still exist owing to three aspects cultural identity, national cultural dimensions and individual intercultural competence. To analyse the reasons for these barriers and approach these issues are essential. Intercultural communication is defined as a form of communication that aims to share information across different cultures and social groups. However, the definition of cross-cultural business communication is more specific, it emphasizes the need to meet with overseas clients, cope with an ethnically different workforce, negotiate contracts in another language or take a job at an organization with a radically different corporate culture (Daphne A. Jameson,2007). Nowadays, more and more people and firms pay great attention to the intercultural business owing to globalization. Though international business has developed and with it efforts to understand intercultural communication, people continue encountering barriers when they develop cross-cultural communication. The receivers cannot understand the exact meaning of the speakers, people have less access to knowledge about others complex cultural makeup than about their own, people dont know the borderline between the vulnerability spectrum and the security spectrum (Ting-Toomey, 2005 p.230). That consequence derives from two aspects the macroscopic aspect and the microcosmic aspect. The macroscopic aspect involves the identity of culture and the dimensions of other national culture. The microcosmic aspect aims to emphasize the significance of individual intercultural competence. In the past, people always highlighted the importance of researching and understanding about other cultures in cross-cultural communication. In deed, knowing other cultures is a useful approach. But we cannot underestimate the importance of analysis of individual cultures. After shifting the focus on to individual culture, the cultural identity should be reconceptualized. As we know, if we conceptualize something, we form an idea of it in our mind. Thus, reconceptualizing something means we change or expand the original idea. Reconceptualizing the cultural identity is essential. Normally, culture is usually identified as nationality. However, nowadays we should expand the concept of cultural identity to involve impacts, knowledge, beliefs, values, attitudes, traditions and ways of life (Daphne A. Jameson, 2007, p.200). The attributes of cultural identity are various. However, in the context of business, the most significant attribute is cultural identity can be negotiated through communication. Except what I have mentioned above, people are supposed to focus more on the dimensions of other national cultures. The dimensions of national cultures are always classified to five levels (a) power distance, (b) collectivism versus individualism, (c) feminity versus masculinity, (d) uncertainty avoidance and (e) long-term versus short-term orientation (Hofstede, 1980, 1991). Different dimensions lead to different cultures. The people living in a high power distance national culture will face difficulties when they cooperate with other people who living in a low power distance national culture. High context cultures use informal implicit ways of communication, while low context cultures need to make clear in written text. For instance, writing styles of Korean and U.S business managers were compared using letters of complaint (Park, Dillon Mitchell, 1998). For the comparison, letters for both cultural groups were written in English, although English was the second language for the Korean group. The Koreans were found to use a less direct organizational pattern in their letters and tended to delay placement of the main point. The U.S group, in contrast, employed a direct organizational style and stated very early in the letter the main point of the complaint. In the microcosmic view, the individual intercultural competence is also a main factor to the success of intercultural communication. The intercultural abilities are often evidenced through behavior, manifestations or traits including respect, empathy, flexibility, patience, interest, curiosity, openness, motivation, a sense of humor, tolerance for ambiguity and a willingness to suspend judgment among others (Alvino E. Fantini, 1994, p.28). And in the construct of ICC, there are also five dimensions. These are awareness, attitude, skills, knowledge and proficiency in the host tongue (p.28). To be specific, first and foremost, people should realize communication styles and problem-solving strategies for a cultural identify potential for misunderstanding and compare the expectations of self and others (Bolten, 1999). Secondly, people should be aware of how judgment of value and reality are made by the self and others, become sensitive to different ways of speaking and listening. People ought to develop a readiness for making encounters and dialogues as well (Steier, 1999). Then, there are many kinds of skills people should grasp, such as superior language skills research skills analytic interpretive and rhetorical skills language-learning and cross-cultural skills (Weiss, 1999). Furthermore, avoid using idioms, jargon, long and over complex sentences and use the active voice and do not refer to people by nationality (Bosley, 1999). Finally, stress collaboration and use cross-functional teams and experiment with different cultural workforces (Berhardt, 1999). In conclusion, the barriers in intercultural communication should not be overlooked and the problem-solving plan should cope with these barriers both in macroscopic views and microcosmic views in parallel. REFERENCE Alvino E. Fantini. (1994). A central concern developing intercultural competence. In Report by the Intercultural Communicative Competence Task Force, World Learning, VT, USA. Bernhardt, S. A. (1999). Using technology to support global drug-development teams. In C. R. Lovitt D. Goswami (Eds.), Exploring the rhetoric of international professional communication An agenda for teachers and researchers (pp.139-156). New York Baywood. Bolten, J. (1999). Intercultural business communication an interactive approach. In C. R. Lovitt D. Goswami (Eds.), Exploring the rhetoric of international professional communication An agenda for teachers and researches (pp. 253-276). New York Baywood. Bosley, D. S. (1999). Visual elements in cross-cultural technical communication Recognition and comprehension as a function of cultural conventions. In C. R. Lovitt D. Goswami (Eds.), Exploring the rhetoric of international professional communication An agenda for teachers and researchers (pp. 253-276). New York Baywood. Daphne A. (2007) Jameson Reconseoturalizing cultural identity and its role in intercultural business communication. In Journal of Business Communication, Volume 44, Number 3, July 2007 199-235. Hofstede, G. (1980). Cultures consequences international differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills Sage. Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations The software of the mind. New York McGraw Hill. Park, M. Y., Dillon, W. T., Mitchell, K. L., (1998). Korean business letters Strategies for effective complaints in cross-cultural communication. The Journal of Business Communication, 35, 328-345. Steier, F. (1999). A relational framework for professional communication in international organizations. In C. R. Lovitt D. Goswami (Eds.), Exploring the rhetoric of international professional communication An agenda for teachers and researchers (pp. 157-170). New York Baywood. Ting-Toomey, S. (2005). Identity negotiation theory Crossing cultural boundaries. In W. B. Gudykunst (Ed.), Theorizing about intercultural communication (pp. 211-233). Thousand Oaks, CA Sage. Weiss, T. (1999). The implication of translation for professional communication. In C. R. Lovitt D. Goswami (Eds.), Exploring the rhetoric of international professional communication An agenda for teachers and researchers (pp. 277-292). New York Baywood. Yang Ning Fang-Monica student NO.1422283 PAGE PAGE MERGEFORMAT 8 Y, 6Q