Cultural Values

Cultural Values

tendencies; frankness, openness, and humility are valued highly, if not

always observed. Quotations from interviews with student subjects

(sojourners and returnees) may serve to indicate the Japanese perspective

on their own and the American patterns of interpersonal behavior.

Q.: What did you like about America that you didn't about Japan?

A.: Well, it's hard to give concrete examples, but mainly I was

satisfied with what you might call the smartness of life— the modernness of

things. And also the simplicity and frankness of life. You don't have to

worry about gimu-giri-on [obligations] over there ... In the United States

you have to visit relatives too, but such visits are more personal, more

real— more meaningful. Here in Japan they are for the sake of girt and

righteousness and all that stuff.

Q.: Could you define the term "Americanized" as it is used by

Japanese students?

A.: Well, to be Americanized means to be indifferent to social

position-indifferent to social formality — such as in formal greetings. It

concerns points about how one acts socially.

This is about human relations — it didn't surprise me but it did

impress me very much to find that relations with others are always on an

equal plane in the U.S. In Japan I automatically used polite language with

seniors so that this just seemed natural— and if I used polite words in

Japan I didn't necessarily feel that this was feudalistic— though some do.

At first in the U.S. when young

people, like high school students, talked to me as an equal, I felt

conflicted, or in the dormitory it surprised me to see a boy of 20 talk to

a man of 45 as an equal.

In Japan, my father and some of my superiors often told me that my

attitude toward superiors and seniors was too rude. Here, though, my

attitude doesn't seem rude— at least it doesn't appear as rude as I was

afraid it would. It is easier to get along with people in America, because

for one thing, Americans are not so class conscious and not so sensitive

about things like status. In Japan, my conduct to superiors seemed rude,

but the same behavior isn’t rude here. For instance here it is all right

simply to say "hello" to teachers, while in Japan I would be expected to

say “ohayo gozaimasu" [polite form of "good morning"] with a deep bow. In

Japan I did things like this only when I really respected somebody.

A main problem with me is the problem of enryo, or what you call

modesty. Even in life in America you have to be modest, but in a different

way from the so-called Japanese enryo. But the trouble is that I don't know

when and where we have to show enryo in American life. You never can be

sure.

The good thing about associating with Americans is that you can be

friendly in a light manner. Not so in Japan. Japanese are nosey in other

peoples' business—they rumor, gossip. It gives you a crowded feeling, after

you get back. Of course in Japan friendships are usually deep— it is good

to have a real friend to lean on— you know where you stand with your

friends; it is the opposite of light associations.

I have few American friends— those I have are usually Americans who

have been to Japan. I think the reason is that my character is somewhat

backward.

I don't try to speak first, but let the other fellow open up. Those

who have been to Japan know about this and speak first, and that makes it

easier to start an association.

From the information on contrasting cultural norm and cue systems

supplied thus far, it is possible to predict in a general way that

I when a Japanese interacts with an American, certain blockages to

communication and to the correct assessment of status behavior may occur.

Japanese are likely to confront Americans with unstated assumptions

concerning status differences, while the American may be inclined to accept

the Japanese at face value—that is, as a person, not a status. In the

resulting confusion it may be anticipated that the Japanese will retreat

into what he calls enryo, since this form of behavior involving attenuated

communication is appropriate toward persons of unclear or superior status.

THE NATIONAL STATUS IMAGE

For reasons usually found in the cultural background of the peoples

concerned, and in the historical relations of nations, there is a tendency

on the part of some to view other nations and peoples much as one would

view persons in a hierarchically oriented social group. Modernization,

which brings an increased need for knowledge of other peoples, has brought

as well a strong sense of competition—a desire to know where one stands, or

where one's nation stands relative to other nations in technological and

other areas of development. This desire to know one's position and the

tendency to view other nations hierarchically are probably found to some

degree in all modern societies, but may be exaggerated among those nations

that are in the middle ranks in the competitive race for modernization—and

particularly in those societies which have incorporated into their own

culture a strong hierarchical conception of status.

Thus, in societies with hierarchical patterns, there will occur

certain established techniques which are defined as appropriate for

governing behavior toward the nationals of countries judged either to be

higher or lower than that of the actor. On the other hand, for societies

with egalitarian ideals of social relations, while there may be a tendency

in the national popular ideology to view other nations hierarchically in

terms of power and progress, there will be no ready behavioral pattern to

follow toward individual members of these other societies. Ideally,

regardless of national origin, individuals will be considered as "human

beings," theoretically equal. Such theoretical equality is often violated

in practice, of course, but the violations are based not on systematic

hierarchical conceptions, but on transitory and situationally determined

attitudes.

The Japanese tendency to locate other nations on a hierarchical scale

is well known, and is observable even at the level of formal diplomatic

interchange. With respect to the Japanese attitude toward the United

States, the tendency toward a superordinate status percept is very strong

—although qualified and even reversed in certain contexts (American arts

and literature have been viewed as of questionable merit, for example) and

in certain historical periods. The historical basis for this generally high-

status percept may be found in America's historic role in the opening of

Japan; in the use of America as a model for much of Japan's modernization;

and in the participation and guidance of the United States in reform and

reconstruction during the Occupation. America, though not always a country

for which the Japanese feel great affection, has come to be a symbol of

many of Japan's aspirations, as well as a "tutor" whom the "pupil" must

eventually excel (or even conquer). Therefore, whatever the specific

affectual response, we have found that the Japanese student subjects often

perceived America as deserving of respect or at least respect-avoidance

(enryo), and were further inclined to project this image onto the American

individual. Evidence of these views available in our research data is

sampled at the end of this section, in the form of quotations from

interviews.

Within tolerable limits of generally, America may be specified as a

society in which egalitarian interpersonal relationships are the ideal

pattern and, in tendency at least, the predominant pattern of behavior. But

in the United States, especially as the country emerges from political

isolation, there also has appeared a tendency to rate other nations in a

rough hierarchical order. Thus, some European nations in the spheres of

art, literature, and the manufacture of sports cars would be acclaimed by

many Americans as superior, and Americans are increasingly concerned about

their technological position vis-a-vis Russia. However, this tendency to

rate other nations hierarchically does not automatically translate itself

into code of behavior for Americans to follow toward the people of other

countries, as is the case for many Japanese. It may leave the social

situation a little confused for the Americans, but in the background of

thinking for many individual Americans is the notion that in social

relations people should be treated initially as equals.

A CULTURAL MODEL OF INTERACTION

When a person from a national society with hierarchical tendencies

encounters a person from a society with egalitarian tendencies, and

moreover when the country of the latter is generally "high" in the

estimation of the former, the idealized paradigm as shown in Figure 1 would

be approximated. In this diagram, X, the person from a country with

egalitarian views, behaves toward Y, the person from a hierarchically

oriented country, as if he occupied the same "level"; that is, in

equalitarian terms.

Figure 1.

But Y perceives X in a high-status position X1, "above" X's image of

his own status in the relationship. Since from Y's point of view X does not

behave as he "ought" to—he behaves as an equal rather than as a superior—Y

may be expected to feel confusion and disorientation. The confusion can be

resolved readily only by Y's assuming an equal status with X, or by X's

assuming the position X1 assigned to him by Y; i.e., either by closing or

by validating the "arc of status-cue confusion" shown by the arrow.

The reader will note that in effect we have already substituted

"average American" for X, and "average Japanese" for Y. We have found that

the diagram has been meaningful as an ideal model for the analysis of

interaction patterns between Japanese and Americans. In many cases the

conditions denoted by the diagram were actually found: Americans do behave

toward Japanese as equals, while the Japanese perceive the Americans as,

and in some cases expect them to behave like, superiors. In this ideal

situation since the Japanese is generally not able to respond as an equal,

and since withdrawal and distant respect are proper behavior both for

interaction with superiors and for interaction in situations where status

is ambiguous, he simply retires into enryo and communication is impaired.

This model does much to explain what many educators and foreign student

counsellors have come to feel as "typical" behavior of the shy, embarrassed

Japanese student on the American campus.

A revealing interchange on the matter of status imagery by some twelve

Japanese sojourner students was recorded during a two-hour group discussion

planned by the project but not attended by Americans. A translation of part

of this interchange follows.

M: As I see it, Japanese think of Americans as nobility. So, it is

hard to accept invitations because of the status difference.

K: I don't agree fully. Americans are not nobility to us, but they do

have a higher social status, so that it is hard to accept invitations. But

there is a "category" of persons who are known and placed as "foreign

students," and we can take advantage of this general foreign student status

and go to American homes and places.

N: During foreign student orientation we came and went as we desired

as "foreign students." But here, as an individual person, I have felt it

necessary to return invitations which are extended to me, and this I find

very difficult since I have no income and must return the invitation in a

manner suited to the status of the person.

M: Only if the invitation is from Americans who we can accept as

status equals to us should it be returned. . . . American table manners are

difficult to learn, and it is a problem similar to that encountered by

anyone who attempts to enter a higher social class in Japan. . . . Japanese

just can't stand on an equal footing with Americans. ... I wouldn't want an

American janitor to see my house in Japan. It is so miserable.

N: Why? That seems extreme.

M: Because I have social aspirations. I am a "climber." A Japanese

house in Tokyo is too dirty to invite an American to—for example, could I

invite him to use my poor bathroom? (General laughter)

At a later point in the discussion, the following emerged:

Mrs. N: I have watched American movies in Japan and in the United

States I have seen American men—and they all look like Robert Taylor. No

Japanese men look like Robert Taylor.

M: Again I say it is not a matter of beauty, but one of status.

Mrs. N: No, it is not status—not calculation of economic worth or

anything —but of beauty. Americans are more beautiful—they look nicer than

Japanese.

U: It is the same in other things. Americans look nice, for example,

during an oral examination in college. They look more attractive. Japanese

look down, crushed, ugly.

At a still later point, one of the discussants embarked on a long

monologue on the ramifications of the status problem. Part of this

monologue runs as follows:

A high-status Japanese man going out with American girls knows

something of what he must do—for example, he must be polite—but he does not

know the language so he can be no competition to American men, who will be

superior. In an emergency, for example, the Japanese male regresses to

Japanese behavior. Great Japanese professors are embarrassed for the first

few months in the United States because they can't even beat American

college juniors in sociable behavior or expression of ideas. They don't

know the language, they feel inferior. These people, forgetting that they

were unable "to defeat America, become highly antagonistic to the United

States. . . .They reason that Japan must be superior, not inferior to the

United States, because they are unable to master it. While in America, of

course, they may write home about their wonderful times and experiences —

to hide their real feelings. Actually while they are in the U.S. they feel

as though they were nothing.

Some quotations from two different interviews with another subject:

Before I came to the States, I expected that whatever I would do in

the U.S. would be observed by Americans and would become their source of

knowledge of Japan and the Japanese. So I thought I had to be careful. In

the dormitory, there is a Nisei boy from whom I ask advice about my manners

and clothing! I asked him to tell me any time when my body smells or my

clothing is dirty. I, as a Japanese, want to look nice to Americans.

In general, I think I do less talking than the others in my courses.

I'm always afraid that if I raise questions along the lines of Japanese

thinking about the subject—or simply from my own way of looking at

something—it might raise some question on the part of .the others. When

talking to a professor I can talk quite freely, but not in class. I am self-

conscious.

These specimen quotations help to show that quite frequently the

perspective of many Japanese students toward America has some of the

qualities of the triangular model of interaction. Regardless of how our

Japanese subjects may have behaved, or learned to behave, they harbored, as

a picture in the back of their minds, an image of the Americans as people a

notch or two "above" Japan and the Japanese. Thus even while a Japanese may

"look down" on what he calls "American materialism," he may "in the back of

his mind" continue to "look up" to the United States and its people as a

whole, as a "generalized other." Our cultural model of interaction is thus

felt to be a very fundamental and highly generalized component of imagery,

as well as a very generalized way of describing the behavior of Japanese

and Americans in certain typical interactive situations.

Quite obviously the model, taken by itself, would be a very poor

instrument of prediction of the actual behavior of a particular Japanese

with Americans. It is apparent that there would have to be a considerable

knowledge of situational variability, amount of social learning, and many

other factors before all the major variants of Japanese social behavior in

America with respect to status could be understood. While there is no need

to seek complete predictability of individual behavior, some attempt may be

made to show how the social behavior of the Japanese subjects of research

did vary in actual social situations in America, and to see if these

variants followed a consistent pattern.

Here is a list of values that some visitors from other cultures have

noticed are common to many Americans:

Informality (being casual and down-to-earth) Self-reliance (not

looking to others to solve your problems) Efficiency (getting things done

quickly and on time) Social equality (treating everyone the same)

Assertiveness (saying what's on your mind) Optimism (believing that the

best will always happen)

SEVEN STATEMENTS ABOUT AMERICANS

Here is a list of comments a non-American might make about an

Americans:

1. Americans are always in such a hurry to get things done!

2. Americans insist on treating everyone the same.

3. Americans always have to say what they're thinking!

4. Americans always want to change things.

5. Americans don't show very much respect for their elders.

6. Americans always think things are going to get better. They are

so optimistic!

7. Americans are so impatient!

Reasons some cultural anthropologists have offered to explain why

Americans may appear the way they do to people from other cultures.

1. Americans are always in such a hurry to get things done!

Americans often seem this way because of their tendency to use

achievements and accomplishments as a measure of a person's worth. They're

in a hurry to get things done because it's only then that they feel they

have proven their worth to other people. The more Americans accomplish, the

more they feel they are respected.

2. Americans insist on treating everyone the same.

Americans do this because of our cultural roots as a free nation

(e.g., "All men are created equal"). Americans have a deep cultural

instinct toward social equality and not having a class system. Ibis is a

reaction to the European class system as well as the feudal system that

existed in Europe. In cultures where inequality between social classes is

more accepted, American insistence on egalitarianism, or social equality,

may be annoying.

3. Americans always have to say what they're thinking!

Americans believe that being direct is the most efficient way to

communicate. It's important to "tell it like it is" and "speak your mind" —

to say what you mean and mean what you say. Being direct is often valued

over "beating around the bush." Americans value "assertiveness" and being

open and direct about one's droughts and feelings. Not all cultures have

this same value. In some cultures, the "normal" way to disagree or to say

no is to say nothing or be very indirect.

4. Americans always want to change things.

Americans mink things can always be better, and that progress is

inevitable. The United States is just a little more than 200 years old, and

American culture tends to be an optimistic one. Older cultures are more

skeptical because they have been around longer, have experienced more, and

have been in situations in which progress was not always made. In American

businesses, being open to change is a strong value, because things really

do change quickly, and it is necessary to adapt. Many Americans believe it

is "good" to initiate change and "bad" to resist it.

5. Americans don't show very much respect for their elders.

Americans believe people must earn by their actions whatever regard or

respect they are given. Merely attaining a certain age or holding a certain

position does not in itself signify achievement.

6. Americans always think things are going to get better. They are so

optimistic!

America, because of its resources and successes, has always had a

culture of optimism. Americans believe that they are in control of their

own destinies, rather than being victims of fate. Many Americans tend to

believe that "the American dream" can be achieved by anyone who is willing

to work hard enough. Many Americans believe mat the only obstacle to things

getting better is "not trying hard enough." Americans also believe that a

personal lack of determination or effort can be "fixed." Other cultures may

believe more in fate ("what will be will be"). When something bad happens,

some members of these cultures believe it was fated to happen, must be

accepted, and cannot be changed.

7. Americans are so impatient!

Americans believe that if things take a long time to do, they won't be

able to do enough of them. Many Americans believe that more and faster is

better. They do not like to stand in line and wait, and they originated

"fast food." Americans believe that "getting things done" (and doing them

quickly) may be more important than other things. Many other cultures

believe that slower is better and that building and maintaining

relationships takes priority over "getting things done" at the expense of

relationships.

Americans are. . . (students of different countres)

What response would you give to these students? Do you consider their

observations biased? naive? limited? unfair? interesting? useless?

Student No.1-from Saudi Arabia: "I have learned three important things

about Americans since I came to the United States. First, I have learned

that all Americans are lively; they move and speak quickly, because time is

very important to them. Second, Americans are the same as the machine, they

do their work worthily but without any thinking, they just use the

instructions even if it is not completely right. Finally, they do not know

anything except their job, they do not know what is happened in their

country."

Student No.2-from Venezuela: "I have observed that Americans are

polite, pragmatic, and organized. Wherever you are in the United States you

can hear words of friendship and cordiality like, "May I help you?",

"Excuse me", "Have a nice day.", "Thank you", and many others. Another

characteristic is their pragmatism. Along years, Americans have worked a

lot in order to create many devices which have made their life more

comfortable. These devices not only save time but they also make things

easier. Last, but never least, Americans are very organized. Perhaps, for

the same fact that they are very pragmatic people, they have developed

different ways of organization that assure them better services. "

Student No.3-from Japan: "I have been learning about Americans since I

came here last September. First, Americans don't care what other people do

or what happened. For example, when I come out of my room my roommate never

ask me where you are going or where I went. Second, Americans are friendly

and open-minded. When I went to my roommate's home, I was welcomed by her

family. Her mother said to me immediately: "Help yourself to everything in

my home," and I was surprised to hear it. I thought that the words

indicated friendliness. In Japan we never open refrigerators or use my

friend's things without permissions, because to serve is a virtue in my

country. Third, Americans like cards, sometimes I can find cards are

delivered to my American friends without special reasons. As far as I look

at Americans, they seem not to care what other people do as a whole, while

they think it's important to keep relation-ships between them and their

friends and them and their parents."

AMERICANS AND MONEY

MARY'S FEELING BLUE

Mary Rathbun, 57, spent a restless night in the San Francisco jail

thinking about the "magical cookies" that she baked to add to her fixed

income. "The police wouldn't let me have one before I went to jail," she

said. "I might have slept better if they had." Mary started her home baking

business six months ago after a back injury forced her to quit her job as a

grave-yard shift waitress. "I was a waitress for 43 years. I was good at

it."

Mary's dozen magical brownies, which were baked with a lot of

marijuana, were taken Wednesday night from her apartment, along with 20

pounds of pot and large amounts of sugar, margarine and flour. Mary, who

has no previous criminal record, admitted doing a great business out of her

home selling her "health food cookies." She said that she wouldn't give

away her special recipe.

Mary advertised her "original recipe brownies" for $20 a dozen. Her

lack of carefulness, especially taking orders over the phone from anyone

amazed and amused the police officers who arrested her. "Life is a gamble.

I played by the rules for 57 years. Then I gambled and lost."

True, Americans enjoy money and the things it can buy. But in defense

of the so-called materialistic American, one expert in American culture

points out, ". . . however eager we are to make money, we are just as eager

to give it away. Any world disaster finds Americans writing checks to

relieve distress. Since the war we have seen the spectacle of the United

States sending billions and billions of dollars' worth of goods to

countries less fortunate than we. Write some of it off, if you will, to a

desire to buy political sympathy; there is still an overplus of goodwill

strictly and uniquely American. Generosity and materialism run side by

side."

The average American is also accused of being "rough around the edges"

-that is, of lacking sophistication in manners and understanding of things

cultural. He tries hard to polish those edges through education and travel.

But no matter how much he learns and sees, his interests are less with the

past than with the present and future, less with the decorative than with

the functional. He may be bored by medieval art but fascinated by modern

engineering. Foreigners will find him always ready to compare cultures,

though he may conclude that American methods are more efficient and

therefore better. In expressing his views, he may be blunt to the point of

rudeness. He admires efficiency and financial success. Eager to get as much

as possible for his time and money, he is sometimes impatient, tense, and

demanding. Often, he is in a hurry and unable to relax. His intensely

competitive outlook is probably his greatest fault. But one must give him

credit for his virtues: he is friendly, spontaneous, adaptable, efficient,

energetic, and kindhearted. All things considered, he is a likable guy.

Whose American Dream?

"All men are created equal," says the Declaration of Independence.

This statement does not mean that all human beings are equal

in ability or ambition. It means, instead, that all people should be

treated equally before the law and given equal privileges and

opportunities, insofar as government can control these. In practice, this

ideal often does not work perfectly. There have always been those who would

deny the rights of others for their own self-interest. There are times when

the American people need to be reminded that any denial of basic rights is

a weakening of the total system. However, equal treatment and equal

opportunity for all are ideals toward which American society is moving ever

closer.

The American belief in equality of opportunity is illustrated by the

Horatio Alger myth. Horatio Alger was a nineteenth-century American

novelist who wrote stories about poor boys who became successful. His books

told about the little newsboy or bootblack who, because he was hardworking,

honest, and lucky, grew up to become rich and respected. These popular

"rags-to-riches" stories exemplified the American Dream-the belief that any

individual, no matter how poor, can achieve wealth and fame through

diligence and virtue.

The "American Dream"

In the United States there is a belief that people are rewarded for

working, producing, and achieving. Many people believe that there is

equality of opportunity that allows anyone to become successful. This

belief is illustrated by stories written by a nineteenth-century American

novelist, Horatio Alger, who wrote about the" American Dream." In his

stories he described poor people who became rich because of their hard

work, honesty, and luck. The stories reinforced the idea that all

individuals, no matter how poor, were capable of becoming wealthy as long

as they were diligent and virtuous. For many Americans, however, Horatio

Alger's "rags-to-riches" stories do not represent the reality of

opportunity. Many poor immigrants who came to the United States in the

nineteenth and twentieth centuries were able to rise on the social and

economic scales. Today, however, the poor generally do not rise to the

middle and upper classes. The" American Dream" is now described as a myth;

it is still difficult for several million Americans to "get ahead."

Which Kind of University?

These excerpts provide two versions of life on North American

University campuses. Which version would be most helpful to foreign

students in general? Should a choice be made?

A college community is an interesting and lively place. Students

become involved in many different activities-extracurricular, religious,

social and athletic. Among the extracurricular activities are college

newspapers' musical organizations, dramatic clubs, and political groups.

Some of these have faculty advisers. Many religious groups have their own

meeting places where services and social activities can be held. Student

groups run parties of all types-from formal dances to picnics. Most

colleges have a student union where students can get together for lunch,

study sessions, club meetings, and socializing.

At many schools, campus life revolves around fraternities (social and,

in some cases, residential clubs for men) and sororities (similar clubs for

women). These organizations exist on more than 500 campuses. The best known

are national groups with many chapters at schools throughout the country.

Their names are Greek letters such as Alpha Delta Phi. These groups have

been much criticized for being cruel and prejudiced because membership is

limited and selective. A student must be invited to join. There is often

great competition among freshmen and sophomores who want to join. Those who

seek membership must go through rush (a period when prospective members

visit different houses to meet and be evaluated by current members). The

whole experience can be very painful if a student goes through rush and

then is not asked to pledge (become a trial member of) any of the houses he

or she has visited. Sororities and fraternities also tend to limit

membership to one particular racial and religious group, thereby depriving

its members of the wonderful opportunity that college offers for broadening

social contacts. However, these groups do help students find friends of

similar backgrounds; thus, they help combat loneliness for those away from

home.

Student life at American universities is chaotic during the first week

of each quarter or semester. Registering for classes, becoming familiar

with the buildings on campus, buying books, adding and dropping classes,

and paying fees are confusing for everyone. During this busy period there

is little time for students to anticipate what they will later encounter in

the classroom.

International students, accustomed to their countries' educational

expectations, must adapt to new classroom norms in a foreign college or

university. Whereas in one country prayer may be acceptable in a classroom,

in another it may be forbidden. In some classrooms around the world

students must humbly obey their teacher's commands and remain absolutely

silent during a class period. In others, students may talk, eat, and smoke

during lectures as well as criticize a teacher's methods or contradict his

or her statements. It is not always easy to understand a new educational

system.

Diversity in Education

There is considerable variety in university classrooms in the United

States. Because of diverse teaching methods and non-standardized curricula,

no two courses are identical. Undergraduate courses are considerably

different from graduate courses. The classroom atmosphere in expensive,

private universities may differ from that in community colleges which are

free and open to everyone. State-funded universities have different

requirements and expectations than do parochial colleges. Nevertheless,

there are shared features in American college and university classrooms

despite the diversity of educational institutions of higher learning.

The differences between cultures are leaded to misunderstandings in

many points.

3. FACTORS INFLUENSING VALUES

INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION: A GUIDE TO MEN OF ACTION

Anyone who has traveled abroad or dealt at all extensively with non-

Americans learns that punctuality is variously interpreted. It is one thing

to recognize this with the mind; to adjust to a different kind of

appointment time is quite another.

In Latin America, you should expect to spend hours waiting in outer

offices. If you bring your American interpretation of what constitutes

punctuality to a Latin-American office, you will fray your temper and

elevate your blood pressure. For a forty-five-minute wait is not unusual

-no more unusual than a five minute wait would be in the United States. No

insult is intended, no arbitrary pecking order is being established. If, in

the United States, you would not be outraged by a five-minute wait, you

should not be outraged by the Latin-American's forty-five-minute delay in

seeing you. The time pie is differently cut, that's all.

Further, the Latin American doesn't usually schedule individual

appointments to the exclusion of other appointments. The informal Clock of

his upbringing ticks more slowly and he rather enjoys seeing several people

on different matters at the same time. The three-ring circus atmosphere

which results, if interpreted in the American's scale of time and

propriety, seems to signal him to go away, to tell him that h~ is not being

properly treated, to indicate that his dignity is under attack. Not so. The

clock on the wall may look the same but it tells a different sort of time.

The cultural error may be compounded by' a further miscalculation. In

the United States, a consistently tardy man is likely to be considered

undependable, and by our cultural clock this is a reasonable conclusion.

For you to judge a Latin American by your scale of time values is to risk a

major error.

Suppose you have waited forty-five minutes and there is a man in his

office, by some miracle alone in the room with you. Do you now get down to

business and stop "wasting time"?

If you are not forewarned by experience or a friendly advisor, you may

try to do this. And it would usually be a mistake. For, in the American

culture, discussion is a means to an end: the deal. You try to make your

point quickly, efficiently, neatly. If your purpose is to arrange some

major affairs, your instinct is probably to settle the major issues first,

leave the details for later, possibly for the technical people to work out.

For the Latin American, the discussion is a part of the spice of life.

Just as he tends not to be overly concerned about reserving you your

specific segment of time, he tends not as rigidly to separate business from

non-business. He runs it all together and wants to make something of a

social event out of what you, in your .culture, regard as strictly

business.

The Latin American is not alone in this. The Greek businessman, partly

for the same and partly for different reasons, does not lean toward the

"hit-and-run" school of business behavior, either. The Greek businessman

adds to the social element, however, a feeling about what length of

discussion time constitutes go09 faith. In America, we show good faith by

ignoring the details. "Let's agree on the main points. The details will

take care of themselves."

Not so the Greek. He signifies good will and good faith by what may

seem to you an interminable discussion which includes every conceivable

detail. Otherwise, you see, he cannot help but feel that the other man

might be trying to pull the wool over his eyes. Our habit, in what we feel

to be our relaxed and friendly way, of postponing details until later

smacks the Greek between the eyes as a maneuver to flank him. Even if you

can somehow convince him that this is not the case, the meeting must still

go on a certain indefinite-but, by our standards, long-time or he will feel

disquieted.

The American desire to get down to business and on with other things

works to our disadvantage in other parts of the world, too; and not only in

business. The head of a large, successful Japanese firm commented: "You

Americans have a terrible weakness. We Japanese know about it and exploit

it every chance we get. You are impatient. We have learned that if we just

make you wait long enough, you'll agree to anything."

Whether this is literally true or not, the Japanese executive

singled out a trait of American culture which most of us share and which,

one may assume from the newspapers, the Russians have not overlooked,

either.

By acquaintance time we mean how long you must know a man be fore

you are willing to do business with him.

In the United States, if we know that a salesman represents a well

known, reputable company, and if we need his product, he may walk away from

the first meeting with an order in his pocket. A few minutes conversation

to decide matters of price, delivery, payment, model of product-nothing

more is involved. In Central America, local custom does not permit a

salesman to land in town, call on the customer and walk away with an order,

no matter how badly your prospect wants and needs your product. It is

traditional there that you must see your man at least three times before

you can discuss the nature of your business.

Does this mean that the South American businessman does not recognize

the merits of one product over another? Of course it doesn't. It is just

that the weight of tradition presses him to do business within a circle of

friends. If a product he needs is not available within his circle, he does

not go outside it so much as he enlarges the circle itself to include a new

friend who can supply the want. Apart from his cultural need to "feel

right" about a new relationship, there is the logic of his business system.

One of the realities of his life is that it is dangerous to enter into

business with someone over whom you have no more than formal, legal

"control." In the past decades, his legal system has not always been as

firm as ours and he has learned through experience that he needs the

sanctions implicit in the informal system of friendship.

Visiting time involves the question of who sets the time for a visit.

George Coelho, a social psychologist from India, gives an illustrative

case. A U.S. businessman received this invitation from an Indian

businessman: "Won't you and your family come and see us? Come any time."

Several weeks later, the Indian repeated the invitation in the same words.

Each time the American replied that he would certainly like to drop in-but

he never did. The reason is obvious in terms of our culture. Here "come any

time" is just an expression of friendliness. You are not really expected to

show up unless your host proposes a specific time. In India, on the

contrary, the words are meant literally-that the host is putting himself at

the disposal of his guest and really expects him to come. It is the essence

of politeness to leave it to the guest to set a time at his convenience. If

the guest never comes, the Indian naturally assumes that he does not want

to come. Such a misunderstanding can lead to a serious rift between men who

are trying to do business with each other.

Time schedules present Americans with another problem in many parts of

the world. Without schedules, deadlines, priorities, and timetables, we

tend to feel that our country could not run at all. Not only are they

essential to getting work done, but they also play an important role in the

informal communication process. Deadlines indicate priorities and

priorities signal the relative importance of people and the processes they

control. These are all so much a part of our lives that a day hardly passes

without some reference to them. "I have to be there by 6: 30." "If I don't

have these plans out by 5:00 they'll be useless." "I told J. B. I'd be

finished by noon tomorrow and now he tells me to drop everything and get

hot on the McDermott account. What do I do now?"

In our system, there are severe penalties for not completing work on

time and important rewards for holding to schedules. One's integrity and

reputation are at stake.

You can imagine the fundamental conflicts that arise when we attempt

to do business with people who are just as strongly oriented away from time

schedules as we are toward them.

The Middle Eastern peoples are a case in point. Not only is our idea

of time schedules no part of Arab life but the mere mention of a dead line

to an' Arab is like waving a red flag in front of a bull. In his culture,

your emphasis on a deadline has the emotional effect on him that his

backing you into a corner and threatening you with a club would have on

you.

One effect of this conflict of unconscious habit patterns is that

hundreds of American-owned radio sets are lying on the shelves of Arab

radio repair shops, untouched. The Americans made the serious cross-

cultural error of asking to have the repair completed by a certain time.

How do you cope with this? How does the Arab get another Arab to do

anything? Every culture has its own ways of bringing pressure to get

results. The usual Arab way is one which Americans avoid as "bad manners."

It is needling.

An Arab businessman whose car broke down explained it this way:

First, I go to the garage and tell the mechanic what is wrong with my

car. I wouldn't want to give him the idea that I didn't know. After that, I

leave the car and walk around the block. When I come back to the garage, I

ask him if he has started to work yet. On my way home from lunch I stop in

and ask him how things are going. When I go back to the office I stop by

again. In the evening, I return and peer over his shoulder for a while. If

I didn't keep this up, he'd be off working on someone else's car.

If you haven't been needled by an Arab, you just haven't been needled.

A PLACE FOR EVERYTHING

We say that there is a time and place for everything, but compared to

Страницы: 1, 2, 3