Case Study - Cultural Communication in Leadership

Loading...

From the course by University of California, Irvine

Intercultural Communication and Conflict Resolution

192 ratings

University of California, Irvine

Intercultural Communication and Conflict Resolution

192 ratings

Course 3 of 4 in the Specialization Conflict Management

Intercultural Communication and Conflict Resolution is a growing area of importance considering the pace and volume of global transactions. The ease of global communication using technology, the abundance of cheaper transportation costs, and the frequency of businesses using cross-border talent is fostering millions of interactions a day between people of different cultures. Examine how the process of communication can be further complicated during interactions between people of different cultures. The topics of stereotypes, generalizations, communication styles, communication strategies, and communication orientations will be explored. Upon completing this course, you will be able to: 1. Explain the dimensions of intercultural interactions that add to conflict 2. Analyze the dynamics of intercultural interactions 3. Plan strategies for success in intercultural interactions

From the lesson

Dimensions of Intercultural Interactions and Conflict

In this module we will begin by examining the importance of understanding cultural differences. We will then define culture and distinguish between inter- and intra- cultural interactions.

Dimensions of Intercultural Interactions and Conflict - Lesson 113:39

Dimensions of Intercultural Interactions and Conflict - Lesson 211:26

Case Study - Outsourcing Team Conflict8:24

Case Study - Cultural Customs4:56

Case Study - Cultural Communication in Leadership3:51

Interview with Julie Espy7:00

Meet the Instructors

Najla DeBow
Instructor
University of California, Irvine Extension
Amit Kothari
Instructor
University of California, Irvine Extension

[MUSIC]

In this situation, we have Pierre a European, French boss,

who has invited his colleague Hari from India to come to work in the office.

Pierre addresses Hari on a particular assignment that's to be completed.

And he asks him if he's complete or on his way to being complete and

have any questions at all.

Hari smiles at him, a lively smile.

And says, yes, sir, I've got it under control.

Pierre checks in a few days later wondering how the project's going, and

he finds that Hari has made no progress.

Hari, he finds, didn't understand the instructions.

And so Pierre sat with him, explained the project to him in further detail, and

helped Hari get through the areas where he was confused.

So we wonder what could've Pierre done to understand the situation and

moved to have a successful outcome.

If you assume in this situation that Hari's absolutely capable of the work,

then you're left with an intercultural conflict in communication.

We first have to know that it's always the leaders job to be responsible for

their own interaction in an intercultural situation

and to understand the party that he or she is dealing with.

So in this case,

Pierre should have extended himself to understand further the Indian culture.

And a particular dimension that we can highlight in this example

is the low context and high context cultures.

In a low context culture,

we tend to have individualistic behavior that's very aggressive.

In a high context culture, we have typically a more collectivist attitude.

And we have more words that are passive,

that are more towards describing a situation than giving the answer.

In a low context culture, we have matter of fact words.

In a high context culture, we have animated communication.

In a low context culture, we have assertiveness.

In a high context culture, we'll have reticence to communicate in silence.

So, in this example, Hari coming from a more high context culture

was animated in how he communicated with Pierre.

Giving Pierre the feeling that he understood what the project scope and

instructions were, he also was reticent to actually tell Pierre he didn't

understand out of complete fear of disappointing a boss.

So, in this case Pierre had a lot of responsibility to

help understand the situation.

And to help Hari have comfort in coming to him when really there was a lot

of fear between Hari and Pierre that Pierre was not fully aware of.

Which caused Hari to be reticent in communicating that he didn't fully

understand the project.

So hopefully we have given you some context to what Pierre could have done and

the concept of high and low context cultures.

[SOUND]

Explore our Catalog

Join for free and get personalized recommendations, updates and offers.

Coursera provides universal access to the world’s best education, partnering with top universities and organizations to offer courses online.

© 2018 Coursera Inc. All rights reserved.

Download on the App Store

Get it on Google Play