Transcript Berry: available strategies…

Multiculturalism in today’s environment: will it
ever be the same?
Roger Matthew Bell,
Department of HR management,
ESADE Business School,
Av Pedralbes 60-62,
08034, Barcelona
[email protected]
Berry: available strategies…
ISSUE 1
MAINTENANCE OF HERITAGE,
CULTURE AND IDENTITY
+ +
-
+
-
ISSUE 2
INTEGRATION
ASSIMILATION
MULTICULTURALISM
MELTING
POT
SEPARATION
MARGINALIZATION
SEGREGATION
EXCLUSION
RELATIONSHIPS
SOUGHT
AMONG
GROUPS
STRATEGIES OF
ETHNOCULTURAL
GROUPS
STRATEGIES OF
LARGER SOCIETY
Source: Berry (1997), in: Handbook of Intercultural Training
How can we improve our intercultural
skills? Gudykunst (1998)
• Minimize anxiety (from no interest to no cognitive capability i.e.
paralysis!) Knowledge reduces uncertainty
• Watch different perspectives: perception explains behaviour
• Their interests: watch for differences: seek similarities: interpret
what are their interests
• Mindfulness enables open-ness, tolerance, awareness of own
perspectives. Intercultural communication is inter-active
• Categories: we need finer distinctions: over-simplification is root
of false stereotyping
Integration
Adaptation
Acceptance
Minimization
Defence
Denial
Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity
(DMIS) Milton Bennett (1986, 1993). How is it influenced by
ideological indoctrination in other cultures?
Individual rights v social constraints
• “… my religion demands that I wear this (the niqab) …
I feel much more comfortable… it’s a question of
modesty as well as religion…”
• Look at nuns: nobody tells them what they can wear
….
• In these day when security matters so much …. It’s all
very well to have your photograph on forms but what’s
the use if you can’t glance at the face to check?
• It’s weird not knowing who you’re passing in the street
especially late at night when they might jump you …
How we learn about cultures, macro
and organizational
Emics: symbols, Comparing on
meanings
etic dimensions
Political, ethnic,
historical realities
Experiential learning
at the interface
Multi-dimensional
picture
Interpretative problem: distinguish cultural, situational,
personal business negotiating issues or others ….
Stereotypes overlook distributions. Confirmed by extreme
cases; not necessarily disconfirmed by counter-stereotypical
behaviour (Rudman & Fairchild 2004)
Culture B
Culture A
EXTREMES e.g.
Indirect, rhetorical
Common
area
EXTREMES e.g.
Direct, low context
How much do we see? Behind the “veil of the
visible”
Cultural Paradigm: macro
(systemic), organizational,
sub-unit
Values, basic assumptions,
beliefs, symbolic meanings,
location on etic dimensions
Functional
Communication
conventions, norms
Relational
Fundamental attribution error
• When dealing with out-groups we tend to notice
character, personality traits, abilities or cultural
motives not external situational factors.
• We focus on simplified affiliation of the person more
than situation, about which we may know very little.
• Western culture exacerbates this error, emphasizing
individual freedom and autonomy;
• Of ourselves and our in-groups, however, we tend to
make situational attributions…
Advice from David Pinto
(Pinto 2000)
• Be aware of your own norms, values and the
behavioural codes influencing your ways of thinking,
acting and communicating
• Get to know the norms, values and behavioural codes
of the other party, distinguishing opinion and
stereotypes from facts
• Decide how far to accommodate to the other party.
Make this clear in a timely fashion consistent with the
communication codes of the other party.
We expect others to behave
like us, but they don’t.
Storti’s vision
(2001)
We react with anger, worry,
etc. to cultural incidents)
We become aware our own
behavior (expecting sameness)
causes incidents
We are thus motivated to learn
about the local culture
And begin to expect the local people
to behave like themselves
And there are fewer
cultural incidents
Making sense: be aware of what you fear:
anxiety, negative expectations
• Self concept: identity threat,
• Personal consequences: be ripped off, dominated,
strangers’ rejection, ridicule, stereotyping
• In-group disapproval
• Heightened by feeling no control; the more
anxious, less cognitive capacity, desire control in
spite of initial desire to be understanding
(Gudykunst 1998)
• Violence and physical menace?
Effective communication requires that we
support (others’) self concepts, including their
preferred ethnic identities”
(Gudykunst 1998 P 84)
Empathy requires that we be aware of the
impression that we give to others
Extreme position: “unconditional
constructiveness” (Gudykunst 1998);
• Rationality: avoid emotional traps
• Understanding and communication .. even if they don’t
listen
• Reliability: even if they seek to deceive
• Non-coercive mode even if they try to coerce us
• Acceptance even if they don’t accept us
• But “apocalyptic meaning flows into the vacuum of lost
confidence (A Karatnycky, director of Freedom House)
Managing inter-group conflict : avoid
defensive reactions
• Mutual problem orientation: win-win
• Describe not evaluate
• Adapt communication style
• Co-operative not competitive mode
• View them as equals, respect culture
• Clarify own assumptions: be mindful
• And if we don’t ….?
Predictors of XC success: Triandis 1994
• Sensitivity, tolerance (explain before value judgments)
• Cultural flexibility (substitute suitable behaviours)
• Social orientation (establish new XC relations)
• Willingness to communicate (e.g in host language)
• Risk taking (low personal security needs)
• Skills in conflict resolution (collaborative style)
• Patience and humour (ability to suspend judgment)
• Commitment and interest in cultures
Cross-cultural interactions
and attitudes
Knowledge
of Culture
Perceived
History of Conflict
Perceived
trustworthiness
Likely satisfaction:
repeat encounters
Inter-group
attitude
Perceived
Cultural Distance
Opportunity
For Contact
Perceived need
contact
Adapted from Triandis (1992)
ITT fundamentals lead to unfavourable
attitudes towards out-groups
• Real or imagined threats (resources,
employment)
• Symbolic threats (values, norms and beliefs
that threaten worldview, identity, self-image)
• Inter-group anxiety (fear embarrassment,
ridicule, exploitation, violence)
• Negative stereotyping
Integrated Threat Theory : a causal model
(Stephan, Stephan & Gudykunst 1999, Landis 2004 P200)
Real threats,
History of Intergroup
conflict
Status inequalities
Strong in-group
identification
Lack of Knowledge
Past contacts negative
Symbolic threats
Inter-group
anxiety
Negative
stereotyping
Prejudice
Behaviour:
Discrimination,
Delinquency,
Denigration
Defensiveness
Insularity etc
Approaches to culture contact: ABC +
ITT (Ward C in Landis et al 2004)
Affect, stress,
coping with cultural
adaptation (Berry)
Behavioural learning,
skills, sociocultural
adaptation (Argyle)
Intergroup outcomes:
Psychological, sociocultural,
Cognitive (perceptions)
Cognitive,
Social identity;
Change/maintain
(Tajfel)
ITT: Real, symbolic
threats, intergroup anxiety,
negative stereotypes
• But does this deal with power issues?
• It has to be argued on different levels: individual,
group, national, regional, global
• Groups involved in conflict and religious
fundamentalism (of all kinds)
• Solutions lie in the long run in dealing with the
economic issues that surround the globalizing
demonstration effect, the digital divide, the haves and
have nots
• Fundamentalism is a reaction to economic
demonstration effects, internet, material
things, beautiful people
• Le discours de la victimization (Arkoun)
• And humiliation: “it has always been my
view that terrorism is not spawned by
poverty of money: it is spawned by poverry
of dignity” Thomas Friedman
The problem of big numbers
• Huntington’s Hispanic immigrant wave in US
• Hayek: there is a necessary reduction of the range
of duties we owe to others
• Polanyi’s great transformation when face to face
market turns into commodity impersonal market
place “ a solvent of traditional moralities”.
• De-humanization is always the issue
A universalistic view?
• A nation-state is not composed of a single homogeneous
ethnic group (a community), but of a variety of
individuals willing to live together (Ernest Renan)
• This requires common adherence to the laws, values
and conventions.
• Being a citizen of a country is like joining a club. "If
you want to join, follow the rules. If you do not accept
them, you cannot be a member. If you want to play by
other rules, then go elsewhere (Elie Barnavi).
• This can no longer be true, implying the supremacy of
dominant culture: a culture into which “they” fit or
don’t fit.
A now untenable view
• David Goodhart: “acts of sharing are more
smoothly and generously negotiated if we
can take for granted a limited set of
common values and assumptions … but as
Britain becomes more diverse that common
culture is being eroded … we cannot see
reasons for sharing where we believe we
have little in common, starting with the
right to be in the same place”
Strategic options depend on circumstances
(role, intention, power)
Our
Way
Dominance
Synergy
Compromise
Avoidance,
Denial
Accommodation
Their Way
Strategic options (2)
Our
Way
Balance of
power ours:
Dominance
(what power?)
Lose- lose: no
adapting, denial
Joint satisfaction;
learning, win win synergies
Balance of
power theirs:
accommodation
Their Way
Image of Western
military presence