Collectivist vs individualist cultures - example

Reading the paragraph on Edward Hall reminded me of the strong frustrations that can come out of such cultural differences. This is what is so fascinating about the subject, to my mind. It's not just that "cultures are different". Yeah, so some people eat with knives and forks, some with chopsticks, some with their hands: big deal! So what?? Yawn.

The big deal comes when you actually go to one of these countries where people eat differently, and you find that now have to decide whether to eat like the locals or stick to your ways of doing things. That's when you discover, for example, your deep-seated prejudice against eating with your hands. Or, let's say you do adapt to the local customs and eat with chopsticks: this now attracts (to your mind, unwarranted) admiration and fulsome praise - "Ooh!! You use chopsticks soooooo well!!" - that really really starts to annoy you after you've heard it for the 1,000th time (or even before then).

This is what Hall refers to as the "hidden" part of culture - the values and beliefs that have been embedded into us and become part of us, and we don't even realize it. These are the elements of cultural differences that cause miscommunication, frustration, anger, you name it. It is a big deal.

Hofstede, the Dutch cross-cultural trainer who wrote "Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind", (see sidebar for details and links) gives an example from his own experience of giving classes in a collectivist society: students hesitate to speak out by volunteering to answer teacher's questions, so it is hard to conduct a class as one might in an English-speaking (more individualist) society. To obtain an answer from a student, it is best to identify a particular student by name, then the responsibility is the teacher's. It's as if the student is relieved of any responsibility, and thus avoids possible criticism as "pushing herself forwards", "standing out", "showing off", etc.

However, this can lead to intense frustration for the English-speaking, individualist-culture-trained teacher, the desperation of which is captured in the title of a 1997 article in the JALT Journal: "Answer, please answer! A perspective on Japanese university students' silent response to questions" [JALT Journal 19.02: 279-91]

Hofstede points out that, whereas in an individualist culture, the individual's personal progress is considered important and therefore answering the question takes priority, for a collectivist culture the feelings of the group takes precedence.

Here's an example from my own experience. I recently attended a small Shinto ceremony in which I played a small part. I got the instructions for what to do just a few moments before the ceremony, and when my turn came (I was first), I was focused on just remembering what to do and in what order. After I was done, I sat back down, and the next person came up. The first thing this person did was, when he got to the front, turned and bowed to the rest of the assembly, then proceeded to perform the ritual; and when he had finished he again bowed to the assembly before returning to his seat. I had failed to bow to the assembled guests before and after.

I feel pretty sure this is an example of collectivist culture. If you consider that this kind of behaviour is repeated in many, many ceremonies and rituals that Japanese people have participated in since their earliest days, you begin to understand why a student in class, when invited to respond to a teacher's question or request, might hesitate. You can't just stand up and answer; first you have to obtain the group's (even tacit) approval. Now there's no protocol for clasroom behaviour that says you must first bow to the rest of the class before answering, but the feeling is still there. You bow to the group as if to say, "with your permission, I perform my task". But how is the group's approval/acceptance asked for and obtained in class? By the simple expedient of the teacher identifying a student by name.

And even then! It's not over! Students often turn to their neighbour and consult before answering! Again, I feel this is because of the collectivist-cultural thinking that places group harmony (and behaviour that enhances group harmony) over individual behaviour (and behaviour that risks the group harmony).

I'm not saying collectivist behaviours are better or worse than individualist ones. There are serious disadvantages to such collectivist behaviour as I've described above (one is, it is very difficult for changes to be accepted and carried out; it often requires a strong, autocratic leader). I'm an advocate of cultural relativism, not moral relativism.