essay about communication in multicultural setting

Intercultural Communication Perspectives Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

Intercultural communications, intercultural communications has been necessitated by the following factors, case study- intercultural communication in classroom, personal experiences.

The ability of an individual to communicate meaningfully is considered a critical aspect of social interaction among people of different cultures. This essay explores various issues pertaining to intercultural communication and its application on the classroom setting.

These include the definition of intercultural communication and an overview of the contents involved in teaching it; it also provides a brief overview of personal experience as a teacher in an intercultural learning institution. With the advent of globalization and enhanced international integration, cross-cultural communication has become inevitable.

Intercultural communication occurs in a situation where distinct cultural communities negotiate shared values and meanings in social interaction. What is understood as intercultural communication depends on individual’s conceptualization of culture.

Intercultural communication can also refer to a communication between people of different nationalities or people of different economic classes; it may be inter-ethnic, inter-regional, or inter-religious. It may also encompass communication among individuals of different sexual orientations or gender.

Communication can be intercultural when the identities of the parties in the interaction are salient in their values, prejudice, language, non-verbal behavior and idiosyncratic characteristics (World Bank, n.d., p. 1).

The move towards a more interconnected world has been aided by rapid technological changes that have led to increased digital communications, good transportation systems and effective movement of people over vast distances. This has resulted in an unexpectedly high level of interaction between individuals of diverse national, ethnic and religious backgrounds (Samovar, Porter and McDaniel, 2009, p. 2).

Intercultural communication may be applied in the context of daily communications between national governments, in learning institutions and business circles. This essay will focus on the aspects of culture and communication that can affect intercultural communication, especially regarding the exchange of information and ideas with another individual of a different culture.

The study of intercultural matters heralds a new beginning. The world has witnessed an unprecedented level of interaction by people of different cultures throughout history in times of wars, religions and transacting commerce. It should also be noted that intercultural communications has its challenges and obstacles.

For people to coexist meaningfully in this multicultural setting, they must be competent and informed in intercultural communication.

Communication is an unavoidable act; it is fundamental to modern daily life, it is an act that we do and enjoy a lot at every moment. Communication is defined as “the management of messages with the objective of creating meaning” (Samovar, Porter and McDaniel, 2009, p. 9).

On the other hand, culture is defined as “historically transmitted pattern of meaning embodied in symbols, a system of inherited conceptions expressed in symbolic forms by means of which men communicate, perpetuate and develop their knowledge and attitudes towards life” (Samovar, Porter and McDaniel, 2009, p.10).

Intercultural communication is, therefore defined as a set of communication between people of different linguistic and cultural origins. Culture encompasses values, beliefs, norms, behaviors and attitude, which have the ability to define the levels of people’s interaction. People’s awareness of cultural variations can enhance meaningful and effective interaction.

A teacher, for example, can achieve better communication in the classroom if he/she factors in the cultural differences existing between him and the students. Consequently, an international businessman who is informed of the existence of cultural variations communication matters will be in a better position to negotiate contracts successfully.

Cross-cultural problems can be avoided by both parties if they become aware and develop an understanding of the various components of intercultural communication. These cultures should be applied in the immediate context of communication in order to enhance understanding between interacting parties.

Having the knowledge and understanding of intercultural communications and the ability to effectively use it can assist in bridging cultural differences and facilitates the realization of more harmonious and productive interactions (Martin and Nakayama, 2007, p. 24).

Technological Advancements

The development of modern means of information and technology has enhanced the flow of information, beliefs and ideas across boundaries. It has led to faster and efficient communication leading to interdependence among people. Communication technology has transformed human interaction by minimizing social, economic and cultural barriers.

This is an emerging phenomenon that is increasing daily. This has enhanced the ability of the people to speak and try their best to ensure that they understand unfamiliar language especially of the country they are migrating to because language is the principal tool that is used to conduct social relations.

In the modern world, therefore, intercultural communication is a necessity. This is due to the increased intermingling brought about by the recent developments in the field of information and communication technology which has increased the frequency of virtual interactions among people and states.

The changes in environmental conditions and demographics have led to increased migrations due to conflicts, commerce or for education purposes. This increased migration creates a likelihood of cultural conflicts.

There are various components of culture that are necessary in the analysis of intercultural communication; these are: “perception, cognitive patterns, verbal and non-behaviors and contextual influence” (Samovar, Porter and McDaniel, 2009, p.17).

Intercultural communication takes place whenever a message is transmitted by an individual of one culture for consumption by an individual of a different culture, in this event, the message must be effectively understood. Due to cultural differences, there might be a potentiality for misunderstanding or disagreement by the two parties and because of this risk, it is imperative to study intercultural communication.

There has been an urge to relate culture and language, but there is no consensus as to whether there exists direct relationship. According to Sapir-Whorf approach, language defines culture; there is a claim that language transmits and shapes the way we think, belief and our attitudes (Ting-Toomey, 2005, p. 6).

Intercultural communication is aimed at reducing culture shock. Culture shock is the feeling of anxiety when an individual loses grip of familiar symbols and signs of social intercourse due to the fact that it is the signs and the clues which define our communication orientation. Culture shock acknowledges that understanding the cultural symbols and differences are requisites for effective communication.

There are emerging complex problems that have been brought about by globalization and technological developments. Different cultures bring together diverse attitudes, values, languages and backgrounds into a campus and classroom environment. Communication in an intercultural education setting involves teaching and learning with people of diverse cultural backgrounds.

Cultural variations have both demands and challenges for teachers and students in any learning institution and cultural competence is of essence. Intercultural communication is an essential aspect in school if a teacher is to respond to students from different cultures while taking into consideration cultural differences and similarities of students from diverse individual background, communities and families (Gur, 2010, p. 65).

Education demands better and effective communication between the teacher and the students. Intercultural communication is gaining popularity because learning institutions are becoming culturally diverse due to globalization which has led to students from different countries learning in one institution.

It is argued that a successful educator must effectively communicate and be culturally competent in cross-cultural environments and cross-cultural communication. Teachers should be sensitive to and appreciative of the problems of intercultural communication in a culturally diverse class. Intercultural communication cannot be learned without understanding the intercultural aspect of it that is acquired through learning of culture.

The fundamental step in understanding of culture is having a vivid idea of other people’s culture and factoring in mind our perceptions towards the same culture.

When students, for example, are instructed by the teacher to write an essay about their understanding of marriage, it will be possible that students of different cultures will have varying perceptions of several cultural aspects of marriage, a factor that should be put into consideration by the teacher while assessing and marking the essays.

When students are shown photos of various ways of greeting may be between man and a woman, two men or two women, they will be in position to understand differences in cultures and they may develop a vivid understanding and perceptions about other cultures which will enable them to appreciate cultural differences (Van, Harmsen & Bruijnzeels, 2002, p. 63).

The teaching and learning of second or several languages are considered a perfect way of appreciating another culture and a way to enhance individual’s knowledge of intercultural communication. Culture and language is the core of teaching and learning; language is considered the window to understanding culture (Samovar, Porter and McDaniel, 2009, p. 53).

Having an understanding of intercultural communication will minimize tension associated with interactions in a multicultural setting. Communication is by itself a useful source of intercultural knowledge and mutual enrichment among students from different cultures when it is better managed by the teacher. It can as well be a source of frustration and intercultural conflict if it is ignored by the teacher.

Intercultural communication in classroom setting should strive to achieve two purposes: enjoyment and benefit; it should be pleasant, bring fun and beneficial to the students. Good interpersonal communication between the teacher and the students will facilitate the transfer of knowledge and skills; it will also enhance the transmission of information to the students.

Successful communication is a mode of knowledge transfer in learning institution. A better understanding of both verbal and nonverbal behaviors of students is necessary in an intercultural environment and better capabilities to react with fellow communicators from different cultures is a requirement in transmission of knowledge.

Intercultural communication teaching is the formal efforts that are designed to prepare students for better interpersonal relations when they interact with other people of different cultures. Also, intercultural communication is aimed at encouraging constructive and meaningful relations between people of different cultures.

There are several obstacles to intercultural communication, they are: dispositions, stereotyping and ethnocentrism (Van, Harmsen and Bruijnzeels, 2002, p. 64). In several learning institutions, it is the theoretical approach of intercultural communication that dominates and minimal cases of skill-oriented approach.

Teachers are faced with challenges of teaching in a classroom with students of different cultures, learning styles and abilities. Providing effective learning in such environment is an overwhelming task. Teachers should apply both variety and choice to enable students become independent learners.

With these developments, teachers have been forced to find out what and how learners should learn in order to live to their full potential and fulfilling lives. Teachers have the responsibility to develop learners who are motivated enough in order to meet the challenges of the modern world. In the ancient times, it was not essential or necessary to teach or learn intercultural communication in schools.

This was because students were surrounded by their cultures and their values, which at home, school or churches were constant; their standard of behavior was uniform. Children were secure and dominant with their cultures due to the minimal exposure to different cultures.

In the contemporary world, this situation is different since children are exposed to other cultures throughout their lives due to the presence of media and other modern means of communication. This has, therefore enabled education to enhance intercultural education by gaining knowledge of different cultures.

Intercultural understanding education-wise plays a very important role in ensuring that we benefit from cultural diversity (UNESCO, 2010, p. 7). Teaching in an intercultural environment, one should be motivated by a deeper understanding of cultures and the desire to impart knowledge. A teacher should also explore various personal values and attitudes.

Students undertaking studies at an intercultural institution face alienation and marginalization due to cultural incompatibility, they experience perceived difficulties and deficiencies.

As a teacher it is imperative to avoid the assumptions on how students learn due to their cultural background, this is because there are some cases that teachers take shortcuts while teaching or interacting with students due to the assumptions that all students are homogeneous.

Teachers, for example, can refer students as from South Asia or Africa without putting into consideration their social, political, linguistic or cultural backgrounds since not all students of South Asia are of the same culture. Teachers also assume that students can comprehend the meaning of a particular story or metaphor without explaining its meaning since different cultures have various interpretation of a similar metaphor.

It is understood that teachers can not contextualize past cultural experience or the expectations of international students, but it is critical to have sensitive approach while teaching them. Teachers should design contexts that deem fit for all students to be included and allowed to participate in class discussions.

Classrooms, which are culturally diverse, present a lot of opportunities for intercultural communication skills for international and local students.

Teachers should devise strategies that promote cultural interaction and which can offer a learning environment where students can nurture their skills to communicate in a multicultural setting and widen their appreciation of global understanding of knowledge (Carroll and Ryan, 2005, p. 16).

A successful teacher in an intercultural setting should have a strong understanding of his cultural heritage and be willing to share it with the students, and should also have knowledge of the culture of his/her students. The promotion of intercultural interaction requires various teaching and learning strategies ranging from curriculum content to assessment techniques.

Teachers have a role to create and promote an environment of inclusion among students both local and international; this is critical in encouraging intercultural learning. Culture of inclusion is understood as a mode of teaching that emphasize on interaction and changing ones attitude, it encourages deeper approach to personal transformation (Carroll and Ryan, 2005, p. 14).

An effective teacher should be in a position to address the needs of the students. Teachers should be aware of and sensitive to the realities of divergent backgrounds and needs of the classroom.

The teacher should endeavor to learn new things and they should review existing teaching practices in order to factor in the dynamics of intercultural fusion. The teacher should be sensitive to review his/her teaching tactics and approaches to meet the needs of all students and not only the needs of the students of dominant culture in the classroom (Gur, 2010, p. 65).

Employing variety and choice while teaching in a multicultural setting involves the use of various instructional approaches which may include powerpoint presentations, handouts, problem-based learning and computer-aided instructions. Teachers in an intercultural environment must factor in communication issues and different learning styles of the culturally diverse learners.

The needs of both local and international students should be put into considerations in the lessons. Teachers should understand the cultural background of learners, together with their beliefs and attitude.

Teaching in a multicultural learning institution presents a lot of challenges. First is the unequal treatment of students. This is because some teachers are not at ease in giving instructions using a different language than his/her native one which can be replicated during exams time where they may award international students more marks to avoid conflict arising from teacher’s inability to decipher well their language.

Different language proficiency between the teacher and the students affects instructions in classroom settings. Some students may not effectively contribute or respond to lessons due to lack of or their limited language proficiency (Gao, n.d., p. 1).

Other challenges facing teachers in multicultural environment are: social, economic and gender discrimination due to differences in culture which affect the quality of education.

There is also lack of appropriate resources which can meet the demands of both international and local students that are required in order to achieve educational goals. There are also cases of misrepresentation of learning techniques by the students from different cultures in classroom setting.

There are several problems that are encountered when people of more than one culture interact in educational setting. It is acknowledgeable that the world is becoming interconnected at a faster rate and due to these people of different cultures interact more frequent times which makes intercultural communication paramount.

Intercultural communication regards two main aspects; communication and training or teaching, it analyzes cultural differences that affect communication in all aspects of life (Stein, n.d., p. 4). Language can influence communication because culture is transmitted through language, all values, attitudes and beliefs that are common to culture are also common to a particular extent in language.

The meaning, wordings and interpretation of a particular group are an indication of the culture of that social group and the analysis of the meanings that are attached to those words is tantamount to the study and understanding of that culture. The language that is taught in any learning institution has explicit reference to a particular culture and this makes intercultural communication in a multicultural setting a sensitive issue.

A better knowledge of intercultural communication can be instrumental in solving problems of communication. Intercultural communication is not a new phenomenon, but it gained prominence when people from different cultures encountered each other.

The new aspect of intercultural communication is the study of how cross-culture interactions occur. The intensification of contacts and interactions among people of different cultures has led to enhanced efforts to comprehend which and why some beliefs, values, attitudes of people vary.

In a classroom setting, all stakeholders should develop an integrated and collaborated approach in multicultural communication.

It is important for a teacher to have an open mind when soliciting for an opportunity to teach in a multicultural setting and for teachers to be culturally competent in class; they should infuse culturally relevant interactions among students which may be achieved through language or teaching materials.

Intercultural communication is a natural phenomenon in an organization which is made up of individuals of diverse social, ethnic, economic and religious backgrounds.

It defines how people from different countries and cultures act, perceive or communicate with people of different cultures around them. Intercultural communication also focuses on social characteristics and attributes of different people.

Intercultural communication is necessary to reduce cases of misunderstanding and antagonism in social interaction because people of different cultural backgrounds encode and decipher languages differently.

Teachers, as well as students, should learn to assimilate with people of different cultures as this will make it possible for understanding to be achieved. The learning process will also be effectively carried achieved when the players involved understand each other well.

Carroll, J. & Ryan, J. (2005) Teaching international students: improving learning for all. New York, NY: Rutledge.

Gao, F. Language is culture: on intercultural communication. Web.

Gur, C. (2010) Cultural competence in high school , Research Journal of International Studies, Issue 16, pp 64-72. Web.

Martin, J. N. & Nakayama, T. K. (2007) Intercultural communication in contexts. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

Samovar, L., Porter, R and McDaniel, E. (2009) Intercultural communication . New York, NY: Cengage learning.

Stein, A. Intercultural communication : and overview . Web.

Ting-Toomey, S. (2005) Understanding intercultural communication. Los Angeles, LA: Roxbury Publishing Company.

UNESCO. (2010) Education for intercultural understanding . Web.

Van, W. J., Harmsen, J. and Bruijnzeels, M. (2002) Intercultural communication in general practice. European Journal of Public Health, Vol. 12(1), pp. 63-68.

World Bank. Intercultural communication. Web.

• Importance of Communication Models Essay
• Saudi Citizens Desire to Communicate to their Visitors
• The Engagement of Christian Intercultural Communication
• Intercultural Communication: Workers From Diverse Backgrounds
• Understanding Intercultural Communication by Ting-Toomey and Leeva
• Cross-Cultural Communication in the Business Setting
• Boundary issues and dual relationships
• Interpersonal Communication Concepts in Everyday Relationships
• Effects of Violating Contracts in Business
• Intercultural Communication and Success at Work
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, May 11). Intercultural Communication Perspectives. https://ivypanda.com/essays/intercultural-communication-perspectives-essay/

"Intercultural Communication Perspectives." IvyPanda , 11 May 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/intercultural-communication-perspectives-essay/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'Intercultural Communication Perspectives'. 11 May.

IvyPanda . 2019. "Intercultural Communication Perspectives." May 11, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/intercultural-communication-perspectives-essay/.

1. IvyPanda . "Intercultural Communication Perspectives." May 11, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/intercultural-communication-perspectives-essay/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Intercultural Communication Perspectives." May 11, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/intercultural-communication-perspectives-essay/.

IvyPanda uses cookies and similar technologies to enhance your experience, enabling functionalities such as:

• Basic site functions
• Ensuring secure, safe transactions
• Secure account login
• Remembering account, browser, and regional preferences
• Remembering privacy and security settings
• Analyzing site traffic and usage
• Personalized search, content, and recommendations
• Displaying relevant, targeted ads on and off IvyPanda

Please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy for detailed information.

Certain technologies we use are essential for critical functions such as security and site integrity, account authentication, security and privacy preferences, internal site usage and maintenance data, and ensuring the site operates correctly for browsing and transactions.

Cookies and similar technologies are used to enhance your experience by:

• Remembering general and regional preferences
• Personalizing content, search, recommendations, and offers

Some functions, such as personalized recommendations, account preferences, or localization, may not work correctly without these technologies. For more details, please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy .

To enable personalized advertising (such as interest-based ads), we may share your data with our marketing and advertising partners using cookies and other technologies. These partners may have their own information collected about you. Turning off the personalized advertising setting won't stop you from seeing IvyPanda ads, but it may make the ads you see less relevant or more repetitive.

Personalized advertising may be considered a "sale" or "sharing" of the information under California and other state privacy laws, and you may have the right to opt out. Turning off personalized advertising allows you to exercise your right to opt out. Learn more in IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy .

Language Learning: Why Is Intercultural Communication Important?

March 24, 2023

Thanks to fast transportation, global media, and the world wide web, we are now more connected than ever to other people worldwide. 

Working with the international community for economic survival means countries and cultures can no longer operate in a vacuum. Because of this, intercultural communication is no longer a choice but a must .

In addition, misunderstandings resulting from a lack of familiarity with another culture are often embarrassing. Blunders like these can make it difficult, if not impossible, to reach an agreement with another country or close a business contract with a foreign partner. For travelers, a faux pas can also make interactions more awkward. In this article, we’ll be discussing the importance of intercultural communication.

CHECK OUR LANGUAGE PROGRAMS !

Intercultural Communication Definition

The capacity to communicate with people from diverse cultures is referred to as intercultural communication. Interacting effectively across cultural lines requires perseverance and sensitivity to one another’s differences. This encompasses language skills, customs, ways of thinking, social norms, and habits.

There are many ways in which people all around the world are similar, yet it is our differences that truly define us. To put it simply, communication is the exchange of ideas and information between individuals by any means, verbal or otherwise. Sharing knowledge with others requires familiarity with social norms, body language, and etiquette.

Having the ability to communicate effectively across cultural boundaries is critical for the success of any intercultural or multinational endeavor. Additionally, it helps improve relationships by facilitating two-way conversations, which in turn foster mutual understanding between people of diverse backgrounds.

Intercultural Communication Examples

There are several facets to intercultural communication competence, from language skills to knowledge of social practices and cultural norms. These capabilities are constantly used throughout organizations and in all forms of communication. Here are a few examples of intercultural communication in action:

It can be challenging for multinational corporations to find appropriate product names that will not offend customers in their target markets due to linguistic differences. For instance, Coca-Cola initially considered renaming its brand KeKou-KeLa for the Chinese market. However, they didn’t take into account that this cute moniker means “female horse stuffed with wax” or “bite the wax tadpole.” Unsurprisingly, a rebrand was necessary. Coke then looked up 40,000 Chinese characters to get a phonetic equivalent and came up with “ko-kou-ko-le,” which roughly translates to “happiness in the mouth.”

LEARN CHINESE !

Business Relationships

Respecting the social norms of another culture requires an understanding that practices may vary. While Americans value making small talk with potential business partners, the British may try humor, while the Germans may jump right to the point.

In contrast, people from Thailand don’t bat an eye when asked what may be seen as intrusive questions in the West, such as whether you’re married or what you do for a living. Similarly, Americans prefer first names, but in Austria, titles are used to prevent coming off as disrespectful.

Advertising

You may have heard the popular myth that the Chevrolet Nova of the 1970s was a resounding flop in Latin America due to its name, since “no va” translates to “no go” in Spanish . The car was a smashing success since the name “nova” also means “new.” Nevertheless, there are innumerable examples of poorly translated advertisements across cultures that led to more severe outcomes.

For example, the Spanish equivalent of the American “Got Milk?” campaign featured the phrase “Tienes leche?” which translates as “Are you lactating?” The campaign completely bombed, ruining the brand’s reputation in that area. This mishap could have been avoided with more thorough focus group testing of intercultural communication.

LEARN SPANISH !

Public Relations and Media Events

Executives from the United States frequently interview international media and publicly appear in other countries. Working knowledge of the language is obviously necessary for such work, but words alone can’t account for how people will interpret things like tone of voice, the pace of speech, gestures, and facial expressions. In Japan, for instance, it’s rude to point out. Instead, you should wave politely in that direction. Similarly, the Indian equivalents of “please” and “thank you” are sometimes seen as overly formal and even disrespectful.

The Importance of Intercultural Communication

When we investigate the cultural influences on communication, we gain a deeper understanding of both areas. Additionally, it aids in expanding our knowledge of who we are as individuals and as a society.

Understanding our communication styles, habits, and tendencies and how they may serve or work against us when interacting with others from other cultural backgrounds is a valuable personal benefit of studying intercultural communication.

When seen in a broader context, intercultural communication can shed light on a wide range of human experiences, from the process of defining the workings of the brain to the power of languages in bringing people together.

As the world gets more interconnected, the ability to communicate successfully across cultural boundaries is becoming more and more vital. Since we are now able to travel to more places, we are exposed to other cultures and ways of living.

The ability to communicate effectively across cultural boundaries is crucial for the successful collaboration and relationship-building of multiethnic and international communities. It is also essential for avoiding and resolving conflicts. If you want to learn about other people and their customs and find common ground around the world, this is how to do it.

Intercultural Communication Competence

There are a variety of skills that are necessary for effective intercultural communication; some of them may be taught, while others are inherent and just require practice. Let’s take a look at some of the most crucial personal competencies for intercultural communication, as opposed to just linguistic ones like speaking, listening, and body language.

• Self-awareness: Recognizing how your personal views, behaviors, and possible prejudices and stereotypes might affect a conversation is a massive step in improving your ability to have meaningful interactions with others.
• Empathy: Intercultural communication relies heavily on empathizing with others and gaining insight into their experiences.
• Respect: Even if you don’t agree with or appreciate every aspect of another person’s or group’s culture, you may still respect them by recognizing their right to do so.
• Emotional intelligence: Learning to pick up on the subtleties of communication is essential when working with people from other cultures. Whether you get what is being communicated or not depends on how well you use your senses, how well you know yourself, and how well you can empathize with others.
• Adaptability: One of the goals of intercultural communication is to teach people how to modify their way of speaking to replace ambiguity, conflict, and antagonism with clarity, harmony, and cooperation. That’s why it’s important to be adaptable in our thinking, reactions, and interactions with others, as well as in our speech, listening, and body language.
• Patience: Effective communication across cultural boundaries doesn’t happen immediately. That’s why you need to have patience. Don’t rush through the process of becoming well-versed in best practices; instead, take your time and make them part of your routine. Due to cultural differences, it may take more or less time than usual to absorb new information.
• Positivity: Maintaining an optimistic attitude when interacting with people of other cultures is crucial. Misunderstandings occur all the time, and in most cases, it’s not because someone was trying to be deliberately unclear. Those of us who aren’t well-versed in other cultures often fail to grasp the intended meaning of a message. This is why it’s essential to look at every intercultural exchange in a constructive light.

Improving Your Intercultural Communication Skills

Here are some steps you can take to begin improving your intercultural communication skills:

Acquire Cultural Knowledge

Discovering the world through the lens of other people’s beliefs, values, and ways of expression is a fascinating and eye-opening experience. Educating yourself on the fundamentals of intercultural communication, such as language and gestures, is just as important as expanding your knowledge of the world’s diverse cultures.

Watch International Shows

To truly immerse oneself in the nuances of a different culture, indulging in international films in their original language proves far more rewarding than enduring subpar English dubs. It’s akin to embarking on a sensory journey, where the cadence of speech, the inflections, and the expressions hold the essence of the culture itself. Delving into Indian, Turkish, or Chinese cinema unveils a tapestry of traditions, values, and societal dynamics that might otherwise remain obscured in translation.

Enhancing this experience can be as simple as grabbing a beverage from the drinks fridge , settling comfortably, and letting the cinematic journey unfold. Modern streaming platforms offer a treasure trove of international TV shows and films, granting viewers a window into distant cultures from the comfort of their homes.

Speak to People

When you have coworkers or neighbors from other countries, you gain access to a wealth of undiscovered possibilities. In-depth conversations with people about their backgrounds and the culture shock they may have felt upon arriving in your country can yield a great deal of valuable knowledge and perspective. If they are treated with respect and dignity, people all around the world are happy to have their voices heard.

Take in What You Hear and See

There are a wide variety of ways to enhance your intercultural communication competence. Among these are learning when to ask open-ended questions, stick to yes/no answers, and decide when to use humor. The two most crucial pieces of advice for improving your communication skills are to listen attentively and to watch what others do.

ENROLL NOW !

Final Thoughts

Whether you’re a tourist taking a trip overseas, a businessperson negotiating a merger, or a professor teaching a classroom full of international students, you need to be aware of the importance of effective intercultural communication.

In today’s interconnected world, the ability to communicate across cultural boundaries is more important than ever. It facilitates communication across linguistic and cultural boundaries, leading to more tolerance, acceptance, and, ultimately, stronger relationships amongst people of diverse backgrounds.

Enrolling in a language program is an excellent first step if you’re interested in learning more about intercultural communication and identifying and overcoming your own cultural biases. You can improve your language skills and your ability to communicate across cultures by enrolling in one of the Middlebury Language Schools’ immersion programs . Teaching both beginners and more advanced students, our immersion and graduate programs cover a wide range of languages.

When you need help learning a new language, Middlebury Language Schools is here to guide you. Contact us today !

CHECK ADMISSIONS !

Free audits

Take advantage of our complimentary, no-obligation audits.

Social media audit Problem definition workshop Code audit ISO/SOC readiness

Communication in a multicultural environment

Share this:.

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on X (Opens in new window)

Master the art of multicultural communication in the global business landscape, navigating through cultural nuances to foster understanding and collaboration.

Key takeaways

• Cultural Complexity: Understanding both surface and deep cultural elements is crucial for effective communication in a multicultural environment.
• Meyer’s 8 Scales: Erin Meyer’s framework outlines essential aspects of multicultural communication, including communicating, evaluating, persuading, leading, deciding, trusting, disagreeing, and scheduling.
• Low-context vs. High-context: Communication styles vary, with some cultures preferring direct and explicit messages, while others rely on context and indirect expressions.
• Feedback and Persuasion: Approaches to feedback range from direct to indirect, and persuasion tactics can be principles-first or applications-first, differing across cultures.
• Leadership and Decision-making: Egalitarian versus hierarchical leadership styles and consensual versus top-down decision-making processes reflect cultural variances in authority and consensus.
• Building Trust: Trust can be task-based or relationship-based, emphasizing the importance of business activities or personal interactions.
• Confronting Disagreements: Cultures differ in their approach to confrontation, with some addressing disagreements directly and others preferring to avoid them.
• Time Perception: The understanding of time can be linear and punctual or flexible, impacting scheduling and deadlines.
• Adapting Communication: Success in a multicultural environment hinges on recognizing these differences and adapting communication styles to bridge cultural gaps.

The role of culture

“If you go into every interaction assuming that culture doesn’t matter, your default mechanism will be to view others through your own cultural lens and to judge or misjudge them accordingly.” Erin Meyer, The Culture Map

One of the biggest and growing challenges facing global businesses is how to effectively communicate with different cultures across an organisation. Cultural nuances exist within every nation, ethnicity, and culture. These are made even more apparent when a single organisation has operations in different geographies or employs people from various nationalities and cultures. 

Cultural and contextual misunderstandings can hinder a business when its cross-cultural collaboration is ineffective. Now that our interconnected global economy is in full swing, the need for international businesses to develop cultural literacy for effective communications is crucial. 

The Culture Map

In her fascinating book, The Culture Map: Breaking Through the Invisible Boundaries of Global Business , INSEAD professor Erin Meyer describes the specific differences in how people from different cultures communicate and consider work ideas. 

Meyer outlines 8 criteria that form the basis of effective multicultural communication, which we will explore in this article.

But first, for us to understand how we can effectively communicate with people in a multicultural environment, let’s first consider the definition of ‘culture’.

What is ‘culture’ exactly?

According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, the term ‘culture’ is defined as:

• The customary beliefs, social forms, and material traits of a racial, religious, or social group;
• The set of shared attitudes, values, goals, and practices that characterise an institution or organisation;
• The set of values, conventions, or social practices associated with a particular field, activity, or societal characteristic

Additionally, we can categorise culture into 2 components: surface culture and deep culture . 

Surface culture refers to culturally specific foods, languages, art, literature, festivals, fashion, etc. Surface culture includes the obvious and most immediately recognisable aspects of a culture. 

Deep culture is a more nuanced understanding of culture and refers to body language, communication styles and rules, concepts of self and society, notions of manners, etc. Deep culture is often what people experience first-hand when visiting or having interpersonal interactions with a new culture.

When communicating in a multicultural environment, it is important to be mindful of a person’s surface and deep cultural specifications to successfully and respectfully engage in communication.

8 scales of communication in a multicultural environment 

Whether you need to motivate employees, delight clients, or simply organise a conference call among members of a cross-cultural team, Meyer’s 8 scales will help you improve your communication effectiveness. 

These scales help to improve relationships by considering where you and your international colleagues fall on each of these scales.

1. Communicating

Cultures communicate in either low-context or high-context styles. A low-context communication style is simple, explicit, and direct. Countries like Switzerland, Germany, USA, and UK prefer a low-context communication style.

A high-context communication style is implicit, indirect, and based on internalised rules. Countries like Japan, China, Thailand, and the UAE use a high-context communication style.

2. Evaluating

This involves providing direct negative feedback or indirect negative feedback. Commonly, Israelis, Dutch, and Russians are the most direct when it comes to negative feedback. This results in frank, blunt, and honest feedback. Japanese, on the other hand, are among the most indirect and will approach providing negative feedback softly and discreetly.

3. Persuading

This can be viewed as a principles-first vs. applications-first approach to communication. Some cultures like Italians and French use holistic arguments that focus on theories before presenting a fact or opinion. In other cultures, predominantly in the Commonwealth, people prefer arguments of logic before discussing a theory. 

The concept of leadership differs from culture to culture. Egalitarian vs. Hierarchical leadership styles are the most common. Egalitarian leadership prefers a flat organisational structure where bosses and workers are on a similar level of perception. Countries like Denmark and Sweden are quintessentially egalitarian in nature. In countries like Saudi Arabia and Korea, the hierarchical leadership style is preferred where the boss is viewed above all workers.

5. Deciding

Cultures have either a consensual or a top-down decision-making style. Countries such as Japan and the Netherlands adopt consensus-based decisions that take into account many perspectives to gauge how the collective feels. Countries like Nigeria and China prefer a top-down style which involves bosses and business owners making decisions on behalf of the entire organisation.

6. Trusting

There are 2 types of trust styles that cultures use: task-based and relationship-based. This asks the question of whether people base trust on how well they know each other, or how well they work together. In task-based cultures such as Australia and the USA, trust is built through business-related activities. In relationship-based cultures like India and China, trust is established through personal interactions and experience.

7. Disagreeing

Cultures have different styles of disagreement: confrontational or avoiding confrontation. Countries like Israel, France, and Germany prefer to tackle disagreements directly without allowing them to negatively affect the relationship. Alternatively, countries such as Thailand and Ghana tend to avoid confrontations and find them to be inappropriate in an organisational and/or team setting.

8. Scheduling

The concept of time differs drastically from culture to culture, and generally, the West adopts a Linear time style and the East prefers a flexible style. Germany and Switzerland are known for their absolute linear and precise concept of time, whereas India and most African countries perceive time as highly flexible.

Understanding builds harmony

Meyer’s 8 scales of cultural communication provide a unique insight into how we view the world and operate within it differently, according to geography and culture. The scales aren’t scored, the point is to highlight the differences and for global businesses to be aware of the various cultural contexts which shape a person’s perspective.

The key to unlocking effective multicultural communication across entire global organisations lies in understanding these contexts and adapting our personal styles when engaging with others.

Elvire Jaspers

How augmented reality (ar) is restyling fashion, digital fashion: binary is the new black, related posts.

Meet Pavlo, our iOS maverick

Meet Anastasiia, bringing the human back in HR

Dmytro Konstandaki – Android wizard

WeAreBrain becomes Vanta Managed Service Provider in the Benelux

Hot topics 🔥, working machines.

An executive’s guide to AI and Intelligent Automation. Working Machines takes a look at how the renewed vigour for the development of Artificial Intelligence and Intelligent Automation technology has begun to change how businesses operate.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

8.3 Intercultural Communication

Learning objectives.

• Define intercultural communication.
• List and summarize the six dialectics of intercultural communication.
• Discuss how intercultural communication affects interpersonal relationships.

It is through intercultural communication that we come to create, understand, and transform culture and identity. Intercultural communication is communication between people with differing cultural identities. One reason we should study intercultural communication is to foster greater self-awareness (Martin & Nakayama, 2010). Our thought process regarding culture is often “other focused,” meaning that the culture of the other person or group is what stands out in our perception. However, the old adage “know thyself” is appropriate, as we become more aware of our own culture by better understanding other cultures and perspectives. Intercultural communication can allow us to step outside of our comfortable, usual frame of reference and see our culture through a different lens. Additionally, as we become more self-aware, we may also become more ethical communicators as we challenge our ethnocentrism , or our tendency to view our own culture as superior to other cultures.

As was noted earlier, difference matters, and studying intercultural communication can help us better negotiate our changing world. Changing economies and technologies intersect with culture in meaningful ways (Martin & Nakayama). As was noted earlier, technology has created for some a global village where vast distances are now much shorter due to new technology that make travel and communication more accessible and convenient (McLuhan, 1967). However, as the following “Getting Plugged In” box indicates, there is also a digital divide , which refers to the unequal access to technology and related skills that exists in much of the world. People in most fields will be more successful if they are prepared to work in a globalized world. Obviously, the global market sets up the need to have intercultural competence for employees who travel between locations of a multinational corporation. Perhaps less obvious may be the need for teachers to work with students who do not speak English as their first language and for police officers, lawyers, managers, and medical personnel to be able to work with people who have various cultural identities.

“Getting Plugged In”

The Digital Divide

Many people who are now college age struggle to imagine a time without cell phones and the Internet. As “digital natives” it is probably also surprising to realize the number of people who do not have access to certain technologies. The digital divide was a term that initially referred to gaps in access to computers. The term expanded to include access to the Internet since it exploded onto the technology scene and is now connected to virtually all computing (van Deursen & van Dijk, 2010). Approximately two billion people around the world now access the Internet regularly, and those who don’t face several disadvantages (Smith, 2011). Discussions of the digital divide are now turning more specifically to high-speed Internet access, and the discussion is moving beyond the physical access divide to include the skills divide, the economic opportunity divide, and the democratic divide. This divide doesn’t just exist in developing countries; it has become an increasing concern in the United States. This is relevant to cultural identities because there are already inequalities in terms of access to technology based on age, race, and class (Sylvester & McGlynn, 2010). Scholars argue that these continued gaps will only serve to exacerbate existing cultural and social inequalities. From an international perspective, the United States is falling behind other countries in terms of access to high-speed Internet. South Korea, Japan, Sweden, and Germany now all have faster average connection speeds than the United States (Smith, 2011). And Finland in 2010 became the first country in the world to declare that all its citizens have a legal right to broadband Internet access (ben-Aaron, 2010). People in rural areas in the United States are especially disconnected from broadband service, with about 11 million rural Americans unable to get the service at home. As so much of our daily lives go online, it puts those who aren’t connected at a disadvantage. From paying bills online, to interacting with government services, to applying for jobs, to taking online college classes, to researching and participating in political and social causes, the Internet connects to education, money, and politics.

• What do you think of Finland’s inclusion of broadband access as a legal right? Is this something that should be done in other countries? Why or why not?
• How does the digital divide affect the notion of the global village?
• How might limited access to technology negatively affect various nondominant groups?

Intercultural Communication: A Dialectical Approach

Intercultural communication is complicated, messy, and at times contradictory. Therefore it is not always easy to conceptualize or study. Taking a dialectical approach allows us to capture the dynamism of intercultural communication. A dialectic is a relationship between two opposing concepts that constantly push and pull one another (Martin & Nakayama, 2010). To put it another way, thinking dialectically helps us realize that our experiences often occur in between two different phenomena. This perspective is especially useful for interpersonal and intercultural communication, because when we think dialectically, we think relationally. This means we look at the relationship between aspects of intercultural communication rather than viewing them in isolation. Intercultural communication occurs as a dynamic in-betweenness that, while connected to the individuals in an encounter, goes beyond the individuals, creating something unique. Holding a dialectical perspective may be challenging for some Westerners, as it asks us to hold two contradictory ideas simultaneously, which goes against much of what we are taught in our formal education. Thinking dialectically helps us see the complexity in culture and identity because it doesn’t allow for dichotomies. Dichotomies are dualistic ways of thinking that highlight opposites, reducing the ability to see gradations that exist in between concepts. Dichotomies such as good/evil, wrong/right, objective/subjective, male/female, in-group/out-group, black/white, and so on form the basis of much of our thoughts on ethics, culture, and general philosophy, but this isn’t the only way of thinking (Marin & Nakayama, 1999). Many Eastern cultures acknowledge that the world isn’t dualistic. Rather, they accept as part of their reality that things that seem opposite are actually interdependent and complement each other. I argue that a dialectical approach is useful in studying intercultural communication because it gets us out of our comfortable and familiar ways of thinking. Since so much of understanding culture and identity is understanding ourselves, having an unfamiliar lens through which to view culture can offer us insights that our familiar lenses will not. Specifically, we can better understand intercultural communication by examining six dialectics (see Figure 8.1 “Dialectics of Intercultural Communication” ) (Martin & Nakayama, 1999).

Figure 8.1 Dialectics of Intercultural Communication

Source: Adapted from Judith N. Martin and Thomas K. Nakayama, “Thinking Dialectically about Culture and Communication,” Communication Theory 9, no. 1 (1999): 1–25.

The cultural-individual dialectic captures the interplay between patterned behaviors learned from a cultural group and individual behaviors that may be variations on or counter to those of the larger culture. This dialectic is useful because it helps us account for exceptions to cultural norms. For example, earlier we learned that the United States is said to be a low-context culture, which means that we value verbal communication as our primary, meaning-rich form of communication. Conversely, Japan is said to be a high-context culture, which means they often look for nonverbal clues like tone, silence, or what is not said for meaning. However, you can find people in the United States who intentionally put much meaning into how they say things, perhaps because they are not as comfortable speaking directly what’s on their mind. We often do this in situations where we may hurt someone’s feelings or damage a relationship. Does that mean we come from a high-context culture? Does the Japanese man who speaks more than is socially acceptable come from a low-context culture? The answer to both questions is no. Neither the behaviors of a small percentage of individuals nor occasional situational choices constitute a cultural pattern.

The personal-contextual dialectic highlights the connection between our personal patterns of and preferences for communicating and how various contexts influence the personal. In some cases, our communication patterns and preferences will stay the same across many contexts. In other cases, a context shift may lead us to alter our communication and adapt. For example, an American businesswoman may prefer to communicate with her employees in an informal and laid-back manner. When she is promoted to manage a department in her company’s office in Malaysia, she may again prefer to communicate with her new Malaysian employees the same way she did with those in the United States. In the United States, we know that there are some accepted norms that communication in work contexts is more formal than in personal contexts. However, we also know that individual managers often adapt these expectations to suit their own personal tastes. This type of managerial discretion would likely not go over as well in Malaysia where there is a greater emphasis put on power distance (Hofstede, 1991). So while the American manager may not know to adapt to the new context unless she has a high degree of intercultural communication competence, Malaysian managers would realize that this is an instance where the context likely influences communication more than personal preferences.

The differences-similarities dialectic allows us to examine how we are simultaneously similar to and different from others. As was noted earlier, it’s easy to fall into a view of intercultural communication as “other oriented” and set up dichotomies between “us” and “them.” When we overfocus on differences, we can end up polarizing groups that actually have things in common. When we overfocus on similarities, we essentialize , or reduce/overlook important variations within a group. This tendency is evident in most of the popular, and some of the academic, conversations regarding “gender differences.” The book Men Are from Mars and Women Are from Venus makes it seem like men and women aren’t even species that hail from the same planet. The media is quick to include a blurb from a research study indicating again how men and women are “wired” to communicate differently. However, the overwhelming majority of current research on gender and communication finds that while there are differences between how men and women communicate, there are far more similarities (Allen, 2011). Even the language we use to describe the genders sets up dichotomies. That’s why I suggest that my students use the term other gender instead of the commonly used opposite sex . I have a mom, a sister, and plenty of female friends, and I don’t feel like any of them are the opposite of me. Perhaps a better title for a book would be Women and Men Are Both from Earth .

The static-dynamic dialectic suggests that culture and communication change over time yet often appear to be and are experienced as stable. Although it is true that our cultural beliefs and practices are rooted in the past, we have already discussed how cultural categories that most of us assume to be stable, like race and gender, have changed dramatically in just the past fifty years. Some cultural values remain relatively consistent over time, which allows us to make some generalizations about a culture. For example, cultures have different orientations to time. The Chinese have a longer-term orientation to time than do Europeans (Lustig & Koester, 2006). This is evidenced in something that dates back as far as astrology. The Chinese zodiac is done annually (The Year of the Monkey, etc.), while European astrology was organized by month (Taurus, etc.). While this cultural orientation to time has been around for generations, as China becomes more Westernized in terms of technology, business, and commerce, it could also adopt some views on time that are more short term.

The history/past-present/future dialectic reminds us to understand that while current cultural conditions are important and that our actions now will inevitably affect our future, those conditions are not without a history. We always view history through the lens of the present. Perhaps no example is more entrenched in our past and avoided in our present as the history of slavery in the United States. Where I grew up in the Southern United States, race was something that came up frequently. The high school I attended was 30 percent minorities (mostly African American) and also had a noticeable number of white teens (mostly male) who proudly displayed Confederate flags on their clothing or vehicles.

There has been controversy over whether the Confederate flag is a symbol of hatred or a historical symbol that acknowledges the time of the Civil War.

Jim Surkamp – Confederate Rebel Flag – CC BY-NC 2.0.

I remember an instance in a history class where we were discussing slavery and the subject of repatriation, or compensation for descendants of slaves, came up. A white male student in the class proclaimed, “I’ve never owned slaves. Why should I have to care about this now?” While his statement about not owning slaves is valid, it doesn’t acknowledge that effects of slavery still linger today and that the repercussions of such a long and unjust period of our history don’t disappear over the course of a few generations.

The privileges-disadvantages dialectic captures the complex interrelation of unearned, systemic advantages and disadvantages that operate among our various identities. As was discussed earlier, our society consists of dominant and nondominant groups. Our cultures and identities have certain privileges and/or disadvantages. To understand this dialectic, we must view culture and identity through a lens of intersectionality , which asks us to acknowledge that we each have multiple cultures and identities that intersect with each other. Because our identities are complex, no one is completely privileged and no one is completely disadvantaged. For example, while we may think of a white, heterosexual male as being very privileged, he may also have a disability that leaves him without the able-bodied privilege that a Latina woman has. This is often a difficult dialectic for my students to understand, because they are quick to point out exceptions that they think challenge this notion. For example, many people like to point out Oprah Winfrey as a powerful African American woman. While she is definitely now quite privileged despite her disadvantaged identities, her trajectory isn’t the norm. When we view privilege and disadvantage at the cultural level, we cannot let individual exceptions distract from the systemic and institutionalized ways in which some people in our society are disadvantaged while others are privileged.

As these dialectics reiterate, culture and communication are complex systems that intersect with and diverge from many contexts. A better understanding of all these dialectics helps us be more critical thinkers and competent communicators in a changing world.

“Getting Critical”

Immigration, Laws, and Religion

France, like the United States, has a constitutional separation between church and state. As many countries in Europe, including France, Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden, have experienced influxes of immigrants, many of them Muslim, there have been growing tensions among immigration, laws, and religion. In 2011, France passed a law banning the wearing of a niqab (pronounced knee-cobb ), which is an Islamic facial covering worn by some women that only exposes the eyes. This law was aimed at “assimilating its Muslim population” of more than five million people and “defending French values and women’s rights” (De La Baume & Goodman, 2011). Women found wearing the veil can now be cited and fined $150 euros. Although the law went into effect in April of 2011, the first fines were issued in late September of 2011. Hind Ahmas, a woman who was fined, says she welcomes the punishment because she wants to challenge the law in the European Court of Human Rights. She also stated that she respects French laws but cannot abide by this one. Her choice to wear the veil has been met with more than a fine. She recounts how she has been denied access to banks and other public buildings and was verbally harassed by a woman on the street and then punched in the face by the woman’s husband. Another Muslim woman named Kenza Drider, who can be seen in Video Clip 8.2, announced that she will run for the presidency of France in order to challenge the law. The bill that contained the law was broadly supported by politicians and the public in France, and similar laws are already in place in Belgium and are being proposed in Italy, Austria, the Netherlands, and Switzerland (Fraser, 2011).

• Some people who support the law argue that part of integrating into Western society is showing your face. Do you agree or disagree? Why?
• Part of the argument for the law is to aid in the assimilation of Muslim immigrants into French society. What are some positives and negatives of this type of assimilation?
• Identify which of the previously discussed dialectics can be seen in this case. How do these dialectics capture the tensions involved?

Video Clip 8.2

Veiled Woman Eyes French Presidency

(click to see video)

Intercultural Communication and Relationships

Intercultural relationships are formed between people with different cultural identities and include friends, romantic partners, family, and coworkers. Intercultural relationships have benefits and drawbacks. Some of the benefits include increasing cultural knowledge, challenging previously held stereotypes, and learning new skills (Martin & Nakayama, 2010). For example, I learned about the Vietnamese New Year celebration Tet from a friend I made in graduate school. This same friend also taught me how to make some delicious Vietnamese foods that I continue to cook today. I likely would not have gained this cultural knowledge or skill without the benefits of my intercultural friendship. Intercultural relationships also present challenges, however.

The dialectics discussed earlier affect our intercultural relationships. The similarities-differences dialectic in particular may present challenges to relationship formation (Martin & Nakayama, 2010). While differences between people’s cultural identities may be obvious, it takes some effort to uncover commonalities that can form the basis of a relationship. Perceived differences in general also create anxiety and uncertainty that is not as present in intracultural relationships. Once some similarities are found, the tension within the dialectic begins to balance out and uncertainty and anxiety lessen. Negative stereotypes may also hinder progress toward relational development, especially if the individuals are not open to adjusting their preexisting beliefs. Intercultural relationships may also take more work to nurture and maintain. The benefit of increased cultural awareness is often achieved, because the relational partners explain their cultures to each other. This type of explaining requires time, effort, and patience and may be an extra burden that some are not willing to carry. Last, engaging in intercultural relationships can lead to questioning or even backlash from one’s own group. I experienced this type of backlash from my white classmates in middle school who teased me for hanging out with the African American kids on my bus. While these challenges range from mild inconveniences to more serious repercussions, they are important to be aware of. As noted earlier, intercultural relationships can take many forms. The focus of this section is on friendships and romantic relationships, but much of the following discussion can be extended to other relationship types.

Intercultural Friendships

Even within the United States, views of friendship vary based on cultural identities. Research on friendship has shown that Latinos/as value relational support and positive feedback, Asian Americans emphasize exchanges of ideas like offering feedback or asking for guidance, African Americans value respect and mutual acceptance, and European Americans value recognition of each other as individuals (Coller, 1996). Despite the differences in emphasis, research also shows that the overall definition of a close friend is similar across cultures. A close friend is thought of as someone who is helpful and nonjudgmental, who you enjoy spending time with but can also be independent, and who shares similar interests and personality traits (Lee, 2006).

Intercultural friendship formation may face challenges that other friendships do not. Prior intercultural experience and overcoming language barriers increase the likelihood of intercultural friendship formation (Sias et al., 2008). In some cases, previous intercultural experience, like studying abroad in college or living in a diverse place, may motivate someone to pursue intercultural friendships once they are no longer in that context. When friendships cross nationality, it may be necessary to invest more time in common understanding, due to language barriers. With sufficient motivation and language skills, communication exchanges through self-disclosure can then further relational formation. Research has shown that individuals from different countries in intercultural friendships differ in terms of the topics and depth of self-disclosure, but that as the friendship progresses, self-disclosure increases in depth and breadth (Chen & Nakazawa, 2009). Further, as people overcome initial challenges to initiating an intercultural friendship and move toward mutual self-disclosure, the relationship becomes more intimate, which helps friends work through and move beyond their cultural differences to focus on maintaining their relationship. In this sense, intercultural friendships can be just as strong and enduring as other friendships (Lee, 2006).

The potential for broadening one’s perspective and learning more about cultural identities is not always balanced, however. In some instances, members of a dominant culture may be more interested in sharing their culture with their intercultural friend than they are in learning about their friend’s culture, which illustrates how context and power influence friendships (Lee, 2006). A research study found a similar power dynamic, as European Americans in intercultural friendships stated they were open to exploring everyone’s culture but also communicated that culture wasn’t a big part of their intercultural friendships, as they just saw their friends as people. As the researcher states, “These types of responses may demonstrate that it is easiest for the group with the most socioeconomic and socio-cultural power to ignore the rules, assume they have the power as individuals to change the rules, or assume that no rules exist, since others are adapting to them rather than vice versa” (Collier, 1996). Again, intercultural friendships illustrate the complexity of culture and the importance of remaining mindful of your communication and the contexts in which it occurs.

Culture and Romantic Relationships

Romantic relationships are influenced by society and culture, and still today some people face discrimination based on who they love. Specifically, sexual orientation and race affect societal views of romantic relationships. Although the United States, as a whole, is becoming more accepting of gay and lesbian relationships, there is still a climate of prejudice and discrimination that individuals in same-gender romantic relationships must face. Despite some physical and virtual meeting places for gay and lesbian people, there are challenges for meeting and starting romantic relationships that are not experienced for most heterosexual people (Peplau & Spalding, 2000).

As we’ve already discussed, romantic relationships are likely to begin due to merely being exposed to another person at work, through a friend, and so on. But some gay and lesbian people may feel pressured into or just feel more comfortable not disclosing or displaying their sexual orientation at work or perhaps even to some family and friends, which closes off important social networks through which most romantic relationships begin. This pressure to refrain from disclosing one’s gay or lesbian sexual orientation in the workplace is not unfounded, as it is still legal in twenty-nine states (as of November 2012) to fire someone for being gay or lesbian (Human Rights Campaign, 2012). There are also some challenges faced by gay and lesbian partners regarding relationship termination. Gay and lesbian couples do not have the same legal and societal resources to manage their relationships as heterosexual couples; for example, gay and lesbian relationships are not legally recognized in most states, it is more difficult for a gay or lesbian couple to jointly own property or share custody of children than heterosexual couples, and there is little public funding for relationship counseling or couples therapy for gay and lesbian couples.

While this lack of barriers may make it easier for gay and lesbian partners to break out of an unhappy or unhealthy relationship, it could also lead couples to termination who may have been helped by the sociolegal support systems available to heterosexuals (Peplau & Spalding, 2000).

Despite these challenges, relationships between gay and lesbian people are similar in other ways to those between heterosexuals. Gay, lesbian, and heterosexual people seek similar qualities in a potential mate, and once relationships are established, all these groups experience similar degrees of relational satisfaction (Peplau & Spalding, 2000). Despite the myth that one person plays the man and one plays the woman in a relationship, gay and lesbian partners do not have set preferences in terms of gender role. In fact, research shows that while women in heterosexual relationships tend to do more of the housework, gay and lesbian couples were more likely to divide tasks so that each person has an equal share of responsibility (Peplau & Spalding, 2000). A gay or lesbian couple doesn’t necessarily constitute an intercultural relationship, but as we have already discussed, sexuality is an important part of an individual’s identity and connects to larger social and cultural systems. Keeping in mind that identity and culture are complex, we can see that gay and lesbian relationships can also be intercultural if the partners are of different racial or ethnic backgrounds.

While interracial relationships have occurred throughout history, there have been more historical taboos in the United States regarding relationships between African Americans and white people than other racial groups. Antimiscegenation laws were common in states and made it illegal for people of different racial/ethnic groups to marry. It wasn’t until 1967 that the Supreme Court ruled in the case of Loving versus Virginia , declaring these laws to be unconstitutional (Pratt, 1995). It wasn’t until 1998 and 2000, however, that South Carolina and Alabama removed such language from their state constitutions (Lovingday.org, 2011). The organization and website lovingday.org commemorates the landmark case and works to end racial prejudice through education.

Even after these changes, there were more Asian-white and Latino/a-white relationships than there were African American–white relationships (Gaines Jr. & Brennan, 2011). Having already discussed the importance of similarity in attraction to mates, it’s important to note that partners in an interracial relationship, although culturally different, tend to be similar in occupation and income. This can likely be explained by the situational influences on our relationship formation we discussed earlier—namely, that work tends to be a starting ground for many of our relationships, and we usually work with people who have similar backgrounds to us.

There has been much research on interracial couples that counters the popular notion that partners may be less satisfied in their relationships due to cultural differences. In fact, relational satisfaction isn’t significantly different for interracial partners, although the challenges they may face in finding acceptance from other people could lead to stressors that are not as strong for intracultural partners (Gaines Jr. & Brennan, 2011). Although partners in interracial relationships certainly face challenges, there are positives. For example, some mention that they’ve experienced personal growth by learning about their partner’s cultural background, which helps them gain alternative perspectives. Specifically, white people in interracial relationships have cited an awareness of and empathy for racism that still exists, which they may not have been aware of before (Gaines Jr. & Liu, 2000).

The Supreme Court ruled in the 1967 Loving v. Virginia case that states could not enforce laws banning interracial marriages.

Bahai.us – CC BY-NC 2.0.

Key Takeaways

• Studying intercultural communication, communication between people with differing cultural identities, can help us gain more self-awareness and be better able to communicate in a world with changing demographics and technologies.
• A dialectical approach to studying intercultural communication is useful because it allows us to think about culture and identity in complex ways, avoiding dichotomies and acknowledging the tensions that must be negotiated.
• Intercultural relationships face some challenges in negotiating the dialectic between similarities and differences but can also produce rewards in terms of fostering self- and other awareness.
• Why is the phrase “Know thyself” relevant to the study of intercultural communication?
• Apply at least one of the six dialectics to a recent intercultural interaction that you had. How does this dialectic help you understand or analyze the situation?
• Do some research on your state’s laws by answering the following questions: Did your state have antimiscegenation laws? If so, when were they repealed? Does your state legally recognize gay and lesbian relationships? If so, how?

Allen, B. J., Difference Matters: Communicating Social Identity , 2nd ed. (Long Grove, IL: Waveland, 2011), 55.

ben-Aaron, D., “Bringing Broadband to Finland’s Bookdocks,” Bloomberg Businessweek , July 19, 2010, 42.

Chen, Y. and Masato Nakazawa, “Influences of Culture on Self-Disclosure as Relationally Situated in Intercultural and Interracial Friendships from a Social Penetration Perspective,” Journal of Intercultural Communication Research 38, no. 2 (2009): 94. doi:10.1080/17475750903395408.

Coller, M. J., “Communication Competence Problematics in Ethnic Friendships,” Communication Monographs 63, no. 4 (1996): 324–25.

De La Baume, M. and J. David Goodman, “First Fines over Wearing Veils in France,” The New York Times ( The Lede: Blogging the News ), September 22, 2011, accessed October 10, 2011, http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/22/first-fines-over -wearing-full-veils-in-france .

Fraser, C., “The Women Defying France’s Fall-Face Veil Ban,” BBC News , September 22, 2011, accessed October 10, 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15023308 .

Gaines Jr. S. O., and Kelly A. Brennan, “Establishing and Maintaining Satisfaction in Multicultural Relationships,” in Close Romantic Relationships: Maintenance and Enhancement , eds. John Harvey and Amy Wenzel (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2011), 239.

Stanley O. Gaines Jr., S. O., and James H. Liu, “Multicultural/Multiracial Relationships,” in Close Relationships: A Sourcebook , eds. Clyde Hendrick and Susan S. Hendrick (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2000), 105.

Hofstede, G., Cultures and Organizations: Softwares of the Mind (London: McGraw-Hill, 1991), 26.

Human Rights Campaign, “Pass ENDA NOW”, accessed November 5, 2012, http://www.hrc.org/campaigns/employment-non-discrimination-act .

Lee, P., “Bridging Cultures: Understanding the Construction of Relational Identity in Intercultural Friendships,” Journal of Intercultural Communication Research 35, no. 1 (2006): 11. doi:10.1080/17475740600739156.

Loving Day, “The Last Laws to Go,” Lovingday.org , accessed October 11, 2011, http://lovingday.org/last-laws-to-go .

Lustig, M. W., and Jolene Koester, Intercultural Competence: Interpersonal Communication across Cultures , 2nd ed. (Boston, MA: Pearson, 2006), 128–29.

Martin, J. N., and Thomas K. Nakayama, Intercultural Communication in Contexts , 5th ed. (Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill, 2010), 4.

Martin, J. N., and Thomas K. Nakayama, “Thinking Dialectically about Culture and Communication,” Communication Theory 9, no. 1 (1999): 14.

McLuhan, M., The Medium Is the Message (New York: Bantam Books, 1967).

Peplau, L. A. and Leah R. Spalding, “The Close Relationships of Lesbians, Gay Men, and Bisexuals,” in Close Relationships: A Sourcebook , eds. Clyde Hendrick and Susan S. Hendrick (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2000), 113.

Pratt, R. A., “Crossing the Color Line: A Historical Assessment and Personal Narrative of Loving v. Virginia ,” Howard Law Journal 41, no. 2 (1995): 229–36.

Sias, P. M., Jolanta A. Drzewiecka, Mary Meares, Rhiannon Bent, Yoko Konomi, Maria Ortega, and Colene White, “Intercultural Friendship Development,” Communication Reports 21, no. 1 (2008): 9. doi:10.1080/08934210701643750.

Smith, P., “The Digital Divide,” New York Times Upfront , May 9, 2011, 6.

Sylvester, D. E., and Adam J. McGlynn, “The Digital Divide, Political Participation, and Place,” Social Science Computer Review 28, no. 1 (2010): 64–65. doi:10.1177/0894439309335148.

van Deursen, A. and Jan van Dijk, “Internet Skills and the Digital Divide,” New Media and Society 13, no. 6 (2010): 893. doi:10.1177/1461444810386774.

Communication in the Real World Copyright © 2016 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

• Search Menu
• Sign in through your institution
• Advance articles
• Editor's Choice
• Key Concepts
• The View From Here
• Author Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Open Access
• Why Publish?
• About ELT Journal
• Editorial Board
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Journals Career Network
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Dispatch Dates
• Terms and Conditions
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

• < Previous

Intercultural communication

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Will Baker, Intercultural communication, ELT Journal , Volume 78, Issue 2, April 2024, Pages 212–215, https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccad040

• Permissions Icon Permissions

Intercultural communication (IC) can be defined as communication where cultural and linguistic differences are perceived as relevant to the interaction by the participants or researchers involved ( Zhu 2019 ; Baker 2022 ). In IC, participants make use of and negotiate between different cultural resources and languages in interaction, including intersecting cultural identities, communities, references, and meanings (eg nationality, ethnicity, class, profession, gender, sexuality), at a range of scales from the local, to the national, and the global. Due to its focus on linguistic and cultural practices, language learning is inevitably an intercultural process, whether or not it is explicitly recognized in teaching. The intercultural dimensions of language learning become particularly important when the focus is on developing learners’ communicative competence since that communication is typically intercultural. Indeed, the idea of culture as part of language teaching has a long history. In the nineteenth century, languages were learnt primarily through works of literature to gain a better understanding of the culture of the target language community ( Risager 2007 ). In the twentieth century, there was an emphasis on learning languages as a means of communicating across national cultural borders, often for economic or political advantage ( Jenkins 2015 ). The rapid increase in globalization at the end of the previous century and during the first decades of this century has seen a focus on learning languages for global connections and intercultural communication. This has been particularly true of English and ELT due to the role that the expansion of English language use has played in the processes of globalization ( Moran Panero 2018 ).

IC perspectives are at times used interchangeably with cross-cultural (CC) perspectives, and there are overlaps between them. However, a broad (and somewhat simplified) distinction can be made between IC and earlier CC perspectives that have been prevalent in ELT ( Scollon et al. 2012 ; Baker 2022 ). In CC approaches, communicative practices of different groups are frequently compared at the national scale with differences identified, for instance comparing different greetings in Chinese and English. This has been criticized for presenting stereotyped and essentialist characterizations of culture through reducing individuals to representations of a national culture ( Holliday 2011 ). In contrast, IC approaches investigate instances of interaction between individuals at a range of cultural levels ( Scollon et al. 2012 ). This is a crucial distinction because people in intercultural interactions typically communicate differently to how they would in intracultural (shared culture) scenarios ( Scollon et al. 2012 ). For example, English people may shake hands when meeting someone for the first time in a formal situation, and in a similar situation Thai people place their hands, palms together, in front of their face and bow their head in a wai . However, when a Thai person meets an English person, neither will expect a wai or a handshake: each realizes that their interlocutor may not be familiar with their greeting norms. Thus, a CC comparison would be unhelpful for predicting the flexibility that is usual in actual instances of intercultural communication. Nevertheless, even within IC perspectives the ‘who’, ‘how’, and ‘why’ of culture needs to be critically investigated to avoid stereotyping others. This includes acknowledging cultural groupings beyond the nation, such as ethnicity, gender, religion, sexuality, and profession ( Scollon et al. 2012 ). Most recently, transcultural communication (TC) has been proposed as a new direction in IC understanding. TC recognizes the complex ways languages, cultures, identities, and communities come together in highly diverse contemporary social settings where boundaries between languages and cultures are not easily distinguished. This includes multilingual and multicultural urban centres, international business and academia, and global social networking platforms ( Baker and Ishikawa 2021 ).

In relation to language teaching, one important insight from IC research has been that the competence needed to interact across and through cultural and linguistic borders will be an intercultural competence rather than the linguistic competence of an idealized ‘native speaker’. This has led to a core concept in language teaching, communicative competence, being expanded through the addition of intercultural dimensions. The most well-known model of this is Byram’s (1997 , 2021 ) intercultural communicative competence (ICC). ICC takes key features of communicative competence (linguistic, sociolinguistic, and discourse competence) and incorporates intercultural elements. These include skills of interpreting and relating, skills of discovery and interaction, knowledge (of own and other cultures, as well as IC), attitudes of curiosity and openness, and critical cultural awareness ( Byram 2021 : 62). ICC has been hugely influential in language teaching as a way of systematically incorporating intercultural dimensions into language teaching, assessment, and curricula ( McConachy et al. 2022 ). However, there are concerns that Byram’s conception of ICC is too focused on the national scale and does not sufficiently recognize that other cultural groupings (discussed above) may be equally or more relevant ( Holliday 2011 ; Baker 2022 ). Most significant to discussions of English and ELT is that ICC, especially in the earlier versions ( Byram 1997 : 114) that have been most influential in ELT, does not account for languages used as a lingua franca where no native speaker communities or cultures are present, as is the case in most English interactions globally ( Baker and Ishikawa 2021 ).

Intercultural awareness (ICA) represents a further expansion of IC in language teaching that builds on ICC but is specifically focused on the global use of English as a lingua franca (ELF) in diverse settings in which there are often no native speakers present (although native English speakers can, of course, also engage in IC through ELF, they are present in much smaller numbers and so are not the focus). ICA is, thus, of direct relevance to ELT due to its focus on English and ‘non-native’ multilingual English users. ICA is defined as an ‘understanding of the role culturally based forms, practices and frames of understanding can have in intercultural communication, and an ability to put these conceptions into practice in a flexible and context specific manner in communication’ ( Baker 2022 : 42). It is divided into three levels: starting from a basic understanding of culture at a simplistic and stereotyped level; to cultural awareness, similar to ICC; then the final level of intercultural or transcultural awareness in which the relationship between language, culture, and communication is approached as complex and emergent, not necessarily linked to any single community ( Baker 2022 ). In terms of teaching practices, IC-related materials and classroom activities can be tailored to the learners based on their level of ICA and the ICA levels can also be used as a framework to document progress ( Baker 2022 ).

At present, the extent to which ICC, ICA, or other intercultural elements are incorporated into ELT classroom practices is debatable. Culture and the intercultural are often tacked on as a ‘fifth skill’ ( Kramsch 1993 : 1) to be addressed only when other aspects of language and communication have been covered. Evidence suggests that teachers typically fail to teach culture or IC in a systematic or in-depth way ( Young and Sachdev 2011 ). This is not surprising given the restricted time and resources many ELT teachers face and that few assessments include aspects of IC. Additionally, teaching materials frequently cover culture and the intercultural in a simplistic and stereotyped manner ( Gray 2010 ). Furthermore, intercultural dimensions are often not part of pre-service teacher education.

Nonetheless, there are now decades’ worth of research and theory suggesting a wide variety of approaches to applying IC in language classrooms ( Risager 2007 ; Baker 2022 among many others). Shared features of these approaches include expanding communicative competence to incorporate ICC and ICA, and linked to this, replacing the native speaker with an intercultural speaker/citizen model as more appropriate and achievable for L2 learners (discussed above). Intercultural language education also involves a critical approach to language, culture, and identity that encourages learners to question taken-for-granted assumptions about national cultures, identities, languages, and the connections between them. In relation to English, rather than just Anglophone varieties and cultures, this entails recognizing its global role as a multilingua franca for intercultural and transcultural communication in diverse cultural settings. This also means centring on the cultures, and related needs and goals, of local teachers and learners, rather than imposing external teaching approaches and materials. IC is increasingly part of in-service teacher education, particularly at postgraduate levels in university courses. IC is also more frequently appearing in language teaching policy documents in diverse settings, including the United States, Europe and Southeast and East Asia ( Baker and Ishikawa 2021 ). All these factors combined underscore the growing importance of IC in ELT and the need to incorporate it more deeply and systematically into teacher education, teaching materials, classroom practices, and assessment.

Final version received July 2023

Will Baker University of Southampton, UK.

Email: [email protected]

Baker , W. 2022 . Intercultural and Transcultural Awareness in Language Teaching. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press .

Google Scholar

Google Preview

Baker , W. , and Ishikawa , T. 2021 . Transcultural Communication through Global Englishes. Abingdon : Routledge .

Byram , M. 1997 . Teaching and Assessing Intercultural Communicative Competence . Bristol : Multilingual Matters .

Byram , M. 2021 . Teaching and Assessing Intercultural Communicative Competence: Revisited . Bristol : Multilingual Matters .

Gray , J. 2010 . The Construction of English: Culture, Consumerism and Promotion in the ELT Global Coursebook . Basingstoke : Palgrave Macmillan

Holliday , A. 2011 . Intercultural Communication and Ideology . London : Sage .

Jenkins , J. 2015 . Global Englishes: A Resource Book for Students . 3rd ed. London : Routledge .

Kramsch , C. 1993 . Context and Culture in Language Teaching. Oxford : Oxford University Press .

McConachy , T. , Golubeva , I. , and Wagner , M. 2022 . Intercultural Learning in Language Education and Beyond: Evolving Concepts, Perspectives and Practices. Bristol : Multilingual Matters .

Moran Panero , S. 2018 . ‘ Global Languages and Lingua Franca Communication.’ In The Routledge Handbook of English as a Lingua Franca , edited by J. Jenkins , W. Baker , and M. Dewey , 556 – 69 . Abingdon : Routledge .

Risager , K. 2007 . Language and Culture Pedagogy. Bristol : Multilingual Matters .

Scollon , R. , Scollon , S. B. K. , and Jones , R. H. 2012 . Intercultural Communication: A Discourse Approach . 3rd ed. Chichester : Wiley-Blackwell .

Young , T. J. , and I. Sachdev . 2011 . ‘ Intercultural Communicative Competence: Exploring English Language Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices .’ Language Awareness 20 ( 2 ): 81 – 98 .

Zhu , H. 2019 . Exploring Intercultural Communication: Language in Action . 2nd ed. Abingdon : Routledge .

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

• Recommend to Your Library

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 1477-4526
• Print ISSN 0951-0893
• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Transforming Communication in Multicultural Contexts

• First Online: 08 November 2016

Cite this chapter

• Renate Motschnig 3 &
• David Ryback 4  

3750 Accesses

The present workplace is often characterized by people of different origins, bringing with them diverse cultural and religious habits. The first part of the chapter deals with the question whether the conditions we set up for transforming communication are valid across cultures or whether they are culturally biased and restricted to their origin, namely Western culture. The second part addresses characteristics of multicultural teams, gives a glimpse on how today’s managers think about dealing with cultural differences, and provides resources for transforming communication in teams whose members stem from different cultures. Finally, we suggest transformative communication as the basis and expression of a common meta-culture in multicultural settings, living side by side with national cultures.

To understand another person’s thoughts and feelings thoroughly, with the meanings they have for him, and to be thoroughly understood by this person in return — this is one of the most rewarding of human experiences, and all too rare. Carl Rogers (1961 p. 323)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Multicultural Communication and Trust in the Contemporary Workplace

Cultural Change by Speech: Team Learning and the Role of Interaction

Cultural gap bridging in multinational teams

Avery, D. R. (2011). Support for diversity in organizations: A theoretical exploration of its origins and offshoots. Organizational Psychology Review, 1 (3), 239–256.

Article   Google Scholar  

Böhm, C., & Motschnig-Pitrik, R. (2015). New research perspective on managing diversity in International ICT Project Teams. In G. Chroust & Sushil (Eds.), Systemic flexibility and business agility (pp. 21–31). India: Springer.

Google Scholar  

Cornelius-White, J. H. D., & Rogers, C. R. (2012). Carl Rogers: The China diary . Ross-on-Wye, UK: PCCS Books.

Cornelius-White, J. H. D., Motschnig-Pitrik, R., & Lux, M. (2013). Interdisciplinary handbook of the person-centered approach: Research and Theory . New York, USA: Springer.

Book   Google Scholar  

Damasio, A. R. (2000). The feeling of what happens: Body and emotion in the making of consciousness . London, UK: Vintage.

Damasio, A. R. (2003). Looking for Spinoza: Joy, sorrow and the feeling brain . Orlando, FL: Harcourt.

Damasio, A. R. (2012). The self comes to mind . London, UK: Vintage.

Güver, S. (2016). Communication in multicultural project Teams: Developing a communication model . PhD thesis concept, submitted to the Faculty of Management, University of Vienna.

iCom Team. (2014). Constructive communication in international teams: An experience-based guide . DE: Waxmann.

Kriz, J. (2008). Self-actualization: Person-centred approach and systems theory. Ross-on-Wye, UK : PCCS-books. ISBN 978-1-906254-03-2

Lago, C. and McMillan, M. (1999) Experiences in Relatedness: Groupwork in the Person Centered Approach . Llangarron, Ross-on-Wye, UK: PCCS Books.

Lago, C. (2011). The handbook of transcultural counselling and psychotherapy . UK: McGraw Hill.

Lago, C. (2013). The Person-Centered Approach and its capacity to enhance constructive international communication. In J. H. D. Cornelius-White, R. Motschnig-Pitrik, & M. Lux (Eds.), Interdisciplinary applications of the person-centered approach . New York, USA: Springer.

Lux, M. (2013). The circle of contact: A neuroscience view on the formation of relationships. In J. H. D. Cornelius-White, R. Motschnig-Pitrik, & M. Lux (Eds.), Interdisciplinary handbook of the person-centered approach: Research and theory . New York, USA: Springer.

Lynch, M., La Guardia, J. G., & Ryan, R. M. (2009). On being yourself in different cultures: Ideal and actual self-concept, autonomy support, and well-being in China, Russia, and the United States. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 4 (4), 290–304.

Motschnig-Pitrik, R., & Lux, M. (2008). The Person-Centered Approach meets neuroscience: Mutual support for C. R. Rogers’s and A. Damasio’s theories. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 48 , 287–319.

Motschnig-Pitrik, R., Lux, M., & Cornelius-White, J. H. D. (2013). The Person-Centered Approach: An emergent paradigm. In J. H. D. Cornelius-White, R. Motschnig-Pitrik, & M. Lux (Eds.), Interdisciplinary applications of the person-centered approach . New York, USA: Springer.

Motschnig-Pitrik, R., & Nykl, L. (2003). Towards a cognitive-emotional model of Rogers’ Person-Centered Approach. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 43 (4), 8–45.

Motschnig-Pitrik, R., & Nykl, L. (2013). An interactive cognitive-emotional model of the Person-Centered Approach. In J. H. D. Cornelius-White, R. Motschnig-Pitrik, & M. Lux (Eds.), Interdisciplinary handbook of the person-centered approach: Research and theory . New York, USA: Springer.

Motschnig, R., & Nykl, L. (2014). Person-Centred communication: Theory, skills, and practice . McGraw Hill, UK: Open University Press.

Rogers, C.R. (1980) A Way of Being . Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.

Ryback, D. (2013). Mindfulness, authentic connection, and making “right” decisions: Using neuroscience to build a bridge with the Person-Centered Approach. In J. H. D. Cornelius-White, R. Motschnig-Pitrik, & M. Lux (Eds.), Interdisciplinary handbook of the person-centered approach: Research and theory . New York, USA: Springer.

Senge, P.M. (2006) The Fifth Discipline, The Art & Practice of the Learning Organization . USA: Currency Doubleday.

Silani, G., Zucconi, A., & Lamm, C. (2013). Carl Rogers meets the neurosciences: Insights from social neuroscience for client-centered therapy. In J. H. D. Cornelius-White, R. Motschnig-Pitrik, & M. Lux (Eds.), Interdisciplinary handbook of the person-centered approach: Research and theory . New York, USA: Springer.

Van Zyl, L., & Stander, M. (2013). A strengths-based approach towards coaching in a multicultural environment. In J. H. D. Cornelius-White, R. Motschnig-Pitrik, & M. Lux (Eds.), Interdisciplinary handbook of the person-centered approach: Research and theory . New York, USA: Springer.

Van Zyl, L. E., Motschnig-Pitrik, R., & Stander, M. W. (2016). Exploring positive psychology and person-centred psychology in multi-cultural coaching. In L. E. Van Zyl, M. W. Stander, & A. Odendaal (Eds.), Coaching psychology: Meta-theoretical perspectives and applications in multicultural contexts (pp. 315–356). Springer International Publishing Switzerland.

Wood, J., K. (2008) Carl Rogers’ person-centered approach: Toward an understanding of its implications . Ross-on-Wye, UK: PCCS-books.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Computer Science, CSLEARN—Educational Technologies, University of Vienna, Waehringer Strasse 29, 1090, Vienna, Austria

Renate Motschnig

EQ Associates International, Atlanta, Georgia, USA

David Ryback

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Renate Motschnig or David Ryback .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Motschnig, R., Ryback, D. (2016). Transforming Communication in Multicultural Contexts. In: Transforming Communication in Leadership and Teamwork. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45486-3_18

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45486-3_18

Published : 08 November 2016

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-45485-6

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-45486-3

eBook Packages : Behavioral Science and Psychology Behavioral Science and Psychology (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Tools and Resources
• Customer Services
• Communication and Culture
• Communication and Social Change
• Communication and Technology
• Communication Theory
• Critical/Cultural Studies
• Gender (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Studies)
• Health and Risk Communication
• Intergroup Communication
• International/Global Communication
• Interpersonal Communication
• Journalism Studies
• Language and Social Interaction
• Mass Communication
• Media and Communication Policy
• Organizational Communication
• Political Communication
• Rhetorical Theory
• Share Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Intercultural competence.

• Lily A. Arasaratnam Lily A. Arasaratnam Director of Research, Department of Communication, Alphacrucis College
• https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.68
• Published online: 03 February 2016

The phrase “intercultural competence” typically describes one’s effective and appropriate engagement with cultural differences. Intercultural competence has been studied as residing within a person (i.e., encompassing cognitive, affective, and behavioral capabilities of a person) and as a product of a context (i.e., co-created by the people and contextual factors involved in a particular situation). Definitions of intercultural competence are as varied. There is, however, sufficient consensus amongst these variations to conclude that there is at least some collective understanding of what intercultural competence is. In “Conceptualizing Intercultural Competence,” Spitzberg and Chagnon define intercultural competence as, “the appropriate and effective management of interaction between people who, to some degree or another, represent different or divergent affective, cognitive, and behavioral orientations to the world” (p. 7). In the discipline of communication, intercultural communication competence (ICC) has been a subject of study for more than five decades. Over this time, many have identified a number of variables that contribute to ICC, theoretical models of ICC, and quantitative instruments to measure ICC. While research in the discipline of communication has made a significant contribution to our understanding of ICC, a well-rounded discussion of intercultural competence cannot ignore the contribution of other disciplines to this subject. Our present understanding of intercultural competence comes from a number of disciplines, such as communication, cross-cultural psychology, social psychology, linguistics, anthropology, and education, to name a few.

• intercultural competence
• intercultural communication
• appropriate

A Brief Introduction

With increasing global diversity, intercultural competence is a topic of immediate relevance. While some would question the use of the term “competence” as a Western concept, the ability to understand and interact with people of different cultures in authentic and positive ways is a topic worth discussing. Though several parts of the world do remain culturally homogenous, many major cities across the world have undergone significant transformation in their cultural and demographic landscape due to immigration. Advances in communication technologies have also facilitated intercultural communication without the prerequisite of geographic proximity. Hence educational, business, and other projects involving culturally diverse workgroups have become increasingly common. In such contexts the success of a group in accomplishing its goals might not depend only on the group members’ expertise in a particular topic or ability to work in a virtual environment but also on their intercultural competence (Zakaria, Amelinckx, & Wilemon, 2004 ). Cultural diversity in populations continues to keep intercultural competence (or cultural competence, as it is known in some disciplines) on the agenda of research in applied disciplines such as medicine (Bow, Woodward, Flynn, & Stevens, 2013 ; Charles, Hendrika, Abrams, Shea, Brand, & Nicol, 2014 ) and education (Blight, 2012 ; Tangen, Mercer, Spooner-Lane, & Hepple, 2011 ), for example.

As noted in the historiography section, early research in intercultural competence can be traced back to acculturation/adaptation studies. Labels such as cross-cultural adaptation and cross-cultural adjustment/effectiveness were used to describe what we now call intercultural competence, though adaptation and adjustment continue to remain unique concepts in the study of migrants. It is fair to say that today’s researchers would agree that, while intercultural competence is an important part of adapting to a new culture, it is conceptually distinct.

Although our current understanding of intercultural competence is (and continues to be) shaped by research in many disciplines, communication researchers can lay claim to the nomenclature of the phrase, particularly intercultural communication competence (ICC). Intercultural competence is defined by Spitzberg and Chagnon ( 2009 ) as “the appropriate and effective management of interaction between people who, to some degree or another, represent different or divergent affective, cognitive, and behavioral orientations to the world” (p. 7), which touches on a long history of intercultural competence being associated with effectiveness and appropriateness. This is echoed in several models of intercultural competence as well. The prevalent characterization of effectiveness as the successful achievement of one’s goals in a particular communication exchange is notably individualistic in its orientation. Appropriateness, however, views the communication exchange from the other person’s point of view, as to whether the communicator has communicated in a manner that is (contextually) expected and accepted.

Generally speaking, research findings support the view that intercultural competence is a combination of one’s personal abilities (such as flexibility, empathy, open-mindedness, self-awareness, adaptability, language skills, cultural knowledge, etc.) as well as relevant contextual variables (such as shared goals, incentives, perceptions of equality, perceptions of agency, etc.). In an early discussion of interpersonal competence, Argyris ( 1965 ) proposed that competence increases as “one’s awareness of relevant factors increases,” when one can solve problems with permanence, in a manner that has “minimal deterioration of the problem-solving process” (p. 59). This view of competence places it entirely on the abilities of the individual. Kim’s ( 2009 ) definition of intercultural competence as “an individual’s overall capacity to engage in behaviors and activities that foster cooperative relationships in all types of social and cultural contexts in which culturally or ethnically dissimilar others interface” (p. 62) further highlights the emphasis on the individual. Others, however, suggest that intercultural competence has an element of social judgment, to be assessed by others with whom one is interacting (Koester, Wiseman, & Sanders, 1993 ). A combination of self and other assessment is logical, given that the definition of intercultural competence encompasses effective (from self’s perspective) and appropriate (from other’s perspective) communication.

Before delving further into intercultural competence, some limitations to our current understanding of intercultural competence must be acknowledged. First, our present understanding of intercultural competence is strongly influenced by research emerging from economically developed parts of the world, such as the United States and parts of Europe and Oceania. Interpretivists would suggest that the (cultural) perspectives from which the topic is approached inevitably influence the outcomes of research. Second, there is a strong social scientific bias to the cumulative body of research in intercultural competence so far; as such, the findings are subject to the strengths and weaknesses of this epistemology. Third, because many of the current models of intercultural competence (or intercultural communication competence) focus on the individual, and because individual cultural identities are arguably becoming more blended in multicultural societies, we may be quickly approaching a point where traditional definitions of intercultural communication (and by association, intercultural competence) need to be refined. While this is not an exhaustive list of limitations, it identifies some of the parameters within which current conceptualizations of intercultural competence must be viewed.

The following sections discuss intercultural competence, as we know it, starting with what it is and what it is not . A brief discussion of well-known theories of ICC follows, then some of the variables associated with ICC are identified. One of the topics of repeated query is whether ICC is culture-general or culture-specific. This is addressed in the section following the discussion of variables associated with ICC, followed by a section on assessment of ICC. Finally, before delving into research directions for the future and a historiography of research in ICC over the years, the question of whether ICC can be learned is addressed.

Clarification of Nomenclature

As noted in the summary section, one of the most helpful definitions of intercultural competence is provided by Spitzberg and Chagnon ( 2009 ), who define it as “the appropriate and effective management of interaction between people who, to some degree or another, represent different or divergent affective, cognitive, and behavioral orientations to the world” (p. 7). However, addressing what intercultural competence is not is just as important as explaining what it is, in a discussion such as this. Conceptually, intercultural competence is not equivalent to acculturation, multiculturalism, biculturalism, or global citizenship—although intercultural competence is a significant aspect of them all. Semantically, intercultural efficiency, cultural competence, intercultural sensitivity, intercultural communication competence, cross-cultural competence, and global competence are some of the labels with which students of intercultural competence might be familiar.

The multiplicity in nomenclature of intercultural competence has been one of the factors that have irked researchers who seek conceptual clarity. In a meta-analysis of studies in intercultural communication competence, Bradford, Allen, and Beisser ( 2000 ) attempted to synthesize the multiple labels used in research; they concluded that intercultural effectiveness is conceptually equivalent to intercultural communication competence. Others have proposed that intercultural sensitivity is conceptually distinct from intercultural competence (Chen & Starosta, 2000 ). Others have demonstrated that, while there are multiple labels in use, there is general consensus as to what intercultural competence is (Deardorff, 2006 ).

In communication literature, it is fair to note that intercultural competence and intercultural communication competence are used interchangeably. In literature in other disciplines, such as medicine and health sciences, cultural competence is the label with which intercultural competence is described. Some have also proposed the phrase cultural humility as a deliberate alternative to cultural competence, suggesting that cultural humility involves life-long learning through self-awareness and critical reflection (Tervalon & Murray-Garcia, 1998 ).

The nature of an abstract concept is such that its reality is defined by the labels assigned to it. Unlike some concepts that have been defined and developed over many years within the parameters of a single discipline, intercultural competence is of great interest to researchers in multiple disciplines. As such, researchers from different disciplines have ventured to study it, without necessarily building on findings from other disciplines. This is one factor that has contributed to the multiple labels by which intercultural competence is known. This issue might not be resolved in the near future. However, those seeking conceptual clarity could look for the operationalization of what is being studied, rather than going by the name by which it is called. In other words, if what is being studied is effectiveness and appropriateness in intercultural communication (each of these terms in turn need to be unpacked to check for conceptual equivalency), then one can conclude that it is a study of intercultural competence, regardless of what it is called.

Theories of Intercultural Competence

Many theories of intercultural (communication) competence have been proposed over the years. While it is fair to say that there is no single leading theory of intercultural competence, some of the well-known theories are worth noting.

There are a couple of theories of ICC that are identified as covering laws theories (Wiseman, 2002 ), namely Anxiety Uncertainty Management (AUM) theory and Face Negotiation theory. Finding its origins in Berger and Calabrese ( 1975 ), AUM theory (Gudykunst, 1993 , 2005 ) proposes that the ability to be mindful and the effective management of anxiety caused by the uncertainty in intercultural interactions are key factors in achieving ICC. Gudykunst conceptualizes ICC as intercultural communication that has the least amount of misunderstandings. While AUM theory is not without its critics (for example, Yoshitake, 2002 ), it has been used in a number of empirical studies over the years (examples include Duronto, Nishida, & Nakayama, 2005 ; Ni & Wang, 2011 ), including studies that have extended the theory further (see Neuliep, 2012 ).

Though primarily focused on intercultural conflict rather than intercultural competence, Face Negotiation theory (Ting-Toomey, 1988 ) proposes that all people try to maintain a favorable social self-image and engage in a number of communicative behaviours designed to achieve this goal. Competence is identified as being part of the concept of “face,” and it is achieved through the integration of knowledge, mindfulness, and skills in communication (relevant to managing one’s own face as well as that of others). Face Negotiation theory has been used predominantly in intercultural conflict studies (see Oetzel, Meares, Myers, & Lara, 2003 ). As previously noted, it is not primarily a theory of intercultural competence, but it does address competence in intercultural settings.

From a systems point of view, Spitzberg’s ( 2000 ) model of ICC and Kim’s ( 1995 ) cultural adaptation theory are also well-known. Spitzberg identifies three levels of analysis that must be considered in ICC, namely the individual system, the episodic system, and the relational system. The factors that contribute to competence are delineated in terms of characteristics that belong to an individual (individual system), features that are particular to a specific interaction (episodic system), and variables that contribute to one’s competence across interactions with multiple others (relational system). Kim’s cultural adaptation theory recognizes ICC as an internal capacity within an individual; it proposes that each individual (being an open system) has the goal of adapting to one’s environment and identifies cognitive, affective, and behavioral dimensions of ICC.

Wiseman’s ( 2002 ) chapter on intercultural communication competence, in the Handbook of International and Intercultural Communication provides further descriptions of theories in ICC. While there have been several models of ICC developed since then, well-formed and widely tested theories of ICC remain few.

Variables Associated with Intercultural Competence

A number of variables have been identified as contributors to intercultural competence. Among these are mindfulness (Gudykunst, 1993 ), self and other awareness (Deardorff, 2006 ), listening skills (Ting-Toomey & Kurogi, 1998 ), positive attitude toward other cultures, and empathy (Arasaratnam & Doerfel, 2005 ), to name a few. Further, flexibility, tolerance for ambiguity, capacity for complexity, and language proficiency are also relevant. There is evidence to suggest that personal spiritual wellbeing plays a positive role in intercultural competence (Sandage & Jankowski, 2013 ). Additionally, there is an interesting link between intercultural competence and a biological variable, namely sensation seeking. Evidence suggests that, in the presence of a positive attitude towards other cultures and motivation to interact with people from other cultures, there is a positive relationship between sensation seeking and intercultural competence (Arasaratnam & Banerjee, 2011 ). Sensation seeking has also been associated with intercultural friendships (Morgan & Arasaratnam, 2003 ; Smith & Downs, 2004 ).

Cognitive complexity has also been identified with intercultural competence (Gudykunst & Kim, 2003 ). Cognitive complexity refers to an individual’s ability to form multiple nuanced perceptual categories (Bieri, 1955 ). A cognitively complex person relies less on stereotypical generalizations and is more perceptive to subtle racism (Reid & Foels, 2010 ). Gudykunst ( 1995 ) proposed that cognitive complexity is directly related to effective management of uncertainty and anxiety in intercultural communication, which in turn leads to ICC (according to AUM theory).

Not all variables are positively associated with intercultural competence. One of the variables that notably hinder intercultural competence is ethnocentrism. Neuliep ( 2002 ) characterizes ethnocentrism as, “an individual psychological disposition where the values, attitudes, and behaviors of one’s ingroup are used as the standard for judging and evaluating another group’s values, attitudes, and behaviors” (p. 201). Arasaratnam and Banerjee ( 2011 ) found that introducing ethnocentrism into a model of ICC weakened all positive relationships between the variables that otherwise contribute to ICC. Neuliep ( 2012 ) further discovered that ethnocentrism and intercultural communication apprehension debilitate intercultural communication. As Neuliep observed, ethnocentrism hinders mindfulness because a mindful communicator is receptive to new information, while the worldview of an ethnocentric person is rigidly centered on his or her own culture.

This is, by no means, an exhaustive list of variables that influence intercultural competence, but it is representative of the many individual-centered variables that influence the extent to which one is effective and appropriate in intercultural communication. Contextual variables, as noted in the next section, also play a role in ICC. It must further be noted that many of the ICC models do not identify language proficiency as a key variable; however, the importance of language proficiency has not been ignored (Fantini, 2009 ). Various models of intercultural competence portray the way in which (and, in some cases, the extent to which) these variables contribute to intercultural competence. For an expansive discussion of models of intercultural competence, see Spitzberg and Chagnoun ( 2009 ).

If one were to broadly summarize what we know thus far about an interculturally competent person, one could say that she or he is mindful, empathetic, motivated to interact with people of other cultures, open to new schemata, adaptable, flexible, able to cope with complexity and ambiguity. Language skills and culture-specific knowledge undoubtedly serve as assets to such an individual. Further, she or he is neither ethnocentric nor defined by cultural prejudices. This description does not, however, take into account the contextual variables that influence intercultural competence; highlighting the fact that the majority of intercultural competence research has been focused on the individual.

The identification of variables associated with intercultural competence raises a number of further questions. For example, is intercultural competence culture-general or culture-specific; can it be measured; and can it be taught or learned? These questions merit further exploration.

Culture General or Culture Specific

A person who is an effective and appropriate intercultural communicator in one context might not be so in another cultural context. The pertinent question is whether there are variables that facilitate intercultural competence across multiple cultural contexts. There is evidence to suggest that there are indeed culture-general variables that contribute to intercultural competence. This means there are variables that, regardless of cultural perspective, contribute to perception of intercultural competence. Arasaratnam and Doerfel ( 2005 ), for example, identified five such variables, namely empathy, experience, motivation, positive attitude toward other cultures, and listening. The rationale behind their approach is to look for commonalities in emic descriptions of intercultural competence by participants who represent a variety of cultural perspectives. Some of the variables identified by Arasaratnam and Doerfel’s research are replicated in others’ findings. For example, empathy has been found to be a contributor to intercultural competence in a number of other studies (Gibson & Zhong, 2005 ; Nesdale, De Vries Robbé, & Van Oudenhoven, 2012 ). This does not mean, however, that context has no role to play in perception of ICC. Contextual variables, such as the relationship between the interactants, the values of the cultural context in which the interaction unfolds, the emotional state of the interactants, and a number of other such variables no doubt influence effectiveness and appropriateness. Perception of competence in a particular situation is arguably a combination of culture-general and contextual variables. However, the aforementioned “culture-general” variables have been consistently associated with perceived ICC by people of different cultures. Hence they are noteworthy. The culture-general nature of some of the variables that contribute to intercultural competence provides an optimistic perspective that, even in the absence of culture-specific knowledge, it is possible for one to engage in effective and appropriate intercultural communication. Witteborn ( 2003 ) observed that the majority of models of intercultural competence take a culture-general approach. What is lacking at present, however, is extensive testing of these models to verify their culture-general nature.

The extent to which the culture-general nature of intercultural competence can be empirically verified depends on our ability to assess the variables identified in these models, and assessing intercultural competence itself. To this end, a discussion of assessment is warranted.

Assessing Intercultural Competence

Researchers have employed both quantitative and qualitative techniques in the assessment of intercultural competence. Deardorff ( 2006 ) proposed that intercultural competence should be measured progressively (at different points in time, over a period of time) and using multiple methods.

In terms of quantitative assessment, the nature of intercultural competence is such that any measure of this concept has to be one that (conceptually) translates across different cultures. Van de Vijver and Leung ( 1997 ) identified three biases that must be considered when using a quantitative instrument across cultures. First, there is potential for construct biases where cultural interpretations of a particular construct might vary. For example, “personal success” might be defined in terms of affluence, job prestige, etc., in an individualistic culture that favors capitalism, while the same construct could be defined in terms of sense of personal contribution and family validation in a collectivistic culture (Arasaratnam, 2007 ). Second, a method bias could be introduced by the very choice of the use of a quantitative instrument in a culture that might not be familiar with quantifying abstract concepts. Third, the presence of an item that is irrelevant to a particular cultural group could introduce an item bias when that instrument is used in research involving participants from multiple cultural groups. For a more detailed account of equivalence and biases that must be considered in intercultural research, see Van de Vijver and Leung ( 2011 ).

Over the years, many attempts have been made to develop quantitative measures of intercultural competence. There are a number of instruments that have been designed to measure intercultural competence or closely related concepts. A few of the more frequently used ones are worth noting.

Based on the Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity (DMIS) (Bennett, 1986 ), the Intercultural Development Inventory (IDI) measures three ethnocentric and three ethno-relative levels of orientation toward cultural differences, as identified in the DMIS model (Hammer, Bennett, & Wiseman, 2003 ). This instrument is widely used in intercultural research, in several disciplines. Some examples of empirical studies that use IDI include Greenholtz ( 2000 ), Sample ( 2013 ), and Wang ( 2013 ).

The Intercultural Sensitivity Inventory (ICSI) is another known instrument that approaches intercultural competence from the perspective of a person’s ability to appropriately modify his or her behavior when confronted with cultural differences, specifically as they pertain to individualistic and collectivistic cultures (Bhawuk & Brislin, 1992 ). It must be noted, however, that intercultural sensitivity is not necessarily equivalent to intercultural competence. Chen and Starosta ( 2000 ), for example, argued that intercultural sensitivity is a pre-requisite for intercultural competence rather than its conceptual equivalent. As such, Chen and Starosta’s Intercultural Sensitivity scale should be viewed within the same parameters. The authors view intercultural sensitivity as the affective dimension of intercultural competence (Chen & Starosta, 1997 ).

Although not specifically designed to measure intercultural competence, the Multicultural Personality Questionnaire (MPQ) measures five dimensions, namely open mindedness, emotional stability, cultural empathy, social initiative, and flexibility (Van Oudenhoven & Van der Zee, 2002 ), all of which have been found to be directly related to intercultural competence, in other research (see Matsumoto & Hwang, 2013 ).

Quantitative measures of intercultural competence almost exclusively rely on self-ratings. As such, they bear the strengths and weaknesses of any self-report (for a detailed discussion of self-knowledge, see Bauer & Baumeister, 2013 ). There is some question as to whether Likert-type scales favor individuals with higher cognitive complexity because such persons have a greater capacity for differentiating between constructs (Bowler, Bowler, & Cope, 2012 ). Researchers have also used other methods such as portfolios, reflective journals, responses to hypothetical scenarios, and interviews. There continues to be a need for fine-tuned methods of assessing intercultural competence that utilize others’ perceptions in addition to self-reports.

Can Intercultural Competence Be Learned?

If competence is the holy grail of intercultural communication, then the question is whether it can be learned. On the one hand, many researchers suggest that the process of learning intercultural competence is developmental (Beamer, 1992 ; Bennett, 1986 ; Hammer, Bennett, & Wiseman, 2003 ). Which means that over time, experiences, and deliberate reflection, people can learn things that cumulatively contribute to intercultural competence. Evidence also suggests that collaborative learning facilitates the development of intercultural competence (Helm, 2009 ; Zhang, 2012 ). On the other hand, given research shows that there are many personality variables that contribute to intercultural competence; one could question whether these are innate or learned. Further, many causal models of intercultural competence show that intercultural competence is the product of interactions between many variables. If some of these can be learned and others are innate, then it stands to reason that, given equal learning opportunities, there would still be variations in the extent to which one “achieves” competence. There is also evidence to suggest that there are certain variables, such as ethnocentrism, that debilitate intercultural competence. Thus, it is fair to conclude that, while there is the potential for one to improve one’s intercultural competence through learning, not all can or will.

The aforementioned observation has implications for intercultural training, particularly training that relies heavily on dissemination of knowledge alone. In other words, just because someone knows facts about intercultural competence, it does not necessarily make them an expert at effective and appropriate communication. Developmental models of intercultural competence suggest that the learning process is progressive over time, based on one’s reaction to various experiences and one’s ability to reflect on new knowledge (Saunders, Haskins, & Vasquez et al., 2015 ). Further, research shows that negative attitudes and attitudes that are socially reinforced are the hardest to change (Bodenhausen & Gawronski, 2013 ). Hence people with negative prejudices toward other cultures, for example, may not necessarily be affected by an intercultural training workshop. While many organizations have implemented intercultural competency training in employee education as a nod to embracing diversity, the effectiveness of short, skilled-based training bears further scrutiny. For more on intercultural training, see the Handbook of Intercultural Training by Landis, Bennett, and Bennett ( 2004 ).

Research Directions

In a review of ICC research between 2003 and 2013 , Arasaratnam ( 2014 ) observed that there is little cross-disciplinary dialogue when it comes to intercultural competence research. Even though intercultural competence is a topic of interest to researchers in multiple disciplines, the findings from within a discipline appear to have limited external disciplinary reach. This is something that needs to be addressed. While the field of communication has played a significant role in contributing to current knowledge of intercultural competence, findings from other disciplines not only add to this knowledge but also potentially address gaps in research that are inevitable from a single disciplinary point of view. As previously observed, one of the reasons for lack of cross-disciplinary referencing (apart from lack of familiarity with work outside of one’s own discipline) could be the use of different labels to describe intercultural competence. Hence, students and scholars would do well to include these variations in labels when looking for research in intercultural competence. This would facilitate consolidation of inter-disciplinary knowledge in future research.

New and robust theories of intercultural competence that are empirically tested in multiple cultural groups are needed. As previously observed, the majority of existing theories in intercultural communication competence stem from the United States, and as such are influenced by a particular worldview. Theories from other parts of the world would enrich our current understanding of intercultural competence.

Thus far, the majority of research in intercultural communication has been done with the fundamental assumption that participants in a dyadic intercultural interaction arrive at it from two distinct cultural perspectives. This assumption might not be valid in all interactions that could still be classified as intercultural. With increasing global mobility, there are more opportunities for people to internalize more than one culture, thus becoming bicultural or blended in their cultural identity. This adds a measure of complexity to the study of intercultural competence because there is evidence to show that there are cultural differences in a range of socio-cognitive functions such as categorization, attribution, and reasoning (Miyamoto & Wilken, 2013 ), and these functions play important roles in how we perceive others, which in turn influences effective and appropriate communication (Moskowitz & Gill, 2013 ).

The concept of competence itself merits further reflection. Because the majority of voices that contribute to ongoing discussions on intercultural competence arise from developed parts of the world, it is fair to say that these discussions are not comprehensively representative of multiple cultural views. Further, the main mechanisms of academic publishing favor a peer-review system which can be self-perpetuating because the reviewers themselves are often the vocal contributors to the existing body of knowledge. For a more well rounded reflection of what it means to engage in authentic and affirming intercultural communication, sources of knowledge other than academic publications need to be considered. These may include the work done by international aid agencies and not-for-profit organizations for example, which engage with expressions of intercultural communication that are different from those that are observed among international students, expatriates, or medical, teaching, or business professionals, who inform a significant amount of intercultural competence research in academia.

Historiography: Research in Intercultural Competence over the Years

The concept of “competence” is not recent. For example, in an early use of the term, psychologist Robert W. White ( 1959 ) characterized competence as “an organism’s capacity to interact effectively with its environment” (p. 297) and proposed that effectance motivation (which results in feelings of efficacy) is an integral part of competence. Today’s research in intercultural competence has been informed by the work of researchers in a number of disciplines, over several decades.

In the field of communication, some of the pioneers of ICC research are Mary Jane Collier ( 1986 ), Norman G. Dinges ( 1983 ), William B. Gudykunst ( 1988 ), Mitchell R. Hammer ( 1987 ), T. Todd Imohari (Imohari & Lanigan, 1989 ), Daniel J. Kealey ( 1989 ), Young Yun Kim ( 1991 ), Jolene Koester (Koester & Olebe, 1988 ), Judith N. Martin ( 1987 ), Hiroko Nishida ( 1985 ), Brent D. Ruben ( 1976 ), Brian H. Spitzberg ( 1983 ), Stella Ting-Toomey ( 1988 ), and Richard L. Wiseman (Wiseman & Abe, 1986 ).

While much of the momentum in communication research started in the late 1970s, a conservative (and by no means comprehensive) glance at history traces back some of the early works in intercultural competence to the 1960s, where researchers identified essential characteristics for intercultural communication. This research was based on service personnel and Americans travelling overseas for work (Gardner, 1962 ; Guthrie & Zetrick, 1967 ; Smith, 1966 ). The characteristics they identified include flexibility, stability, curiosity, openness to other perspectives, and sensitivity, to name a few, and these characteristics were studied in the context of adaptation to a new culture.

In the 1970s, researchers built on early work to further identify key variables in intercultural “effectiveness” or “cross-cultural” competency. Researchers in communication worked toward not only identifying but also assessing these variables (Hammer, Gudykunst, & Wiseman, 1978 ; Ruben & Kealey, 1979 ), primarily using quantitative methods. Ruben, Askling, and Kealey ( 1977 ) provided a detailed account of “facets of cross-cultural effectiveness” identified by various researchers.

In the 1980s, research in ICC continued to gain momentum, with a special issue of the International Journal of Intercultural Relations dedicated to this topic. ICC was still approached from the point of view of two specific cultures interacting with each other, similar to the acculturation approach in the previous decade. Many of the conceptualizations of ICC were derived from (interpersonal) communication competence, extending this to intercultural contexts. For example, Spitzberg and Cupach’s ( 1984 ) conceptualization of communication competence as effective and appropriate communication has been foundational to later work in ICC.

Researchers in the 1990s built on the work of others before them. Chen ( 1990 ) presented eleven propositions and fifteen theorems in regards to the components of ICC, building from a discussion of Dinges’ ( 1983 ) six approaches to studying effective and appropriate communication in intercultural contexts. Chen went on to propose that competence is both inherent and learned. The 1993 volume of the International and Intercultural Communication Annual was dedicated to ICC, introducing some of the theories that later become influential in intercultural research, such as Gudykunst’s ( 1993 ) Anxiety/Uncertainty Management (AUM) theory, Cupach and Imahori’s ( 1993 ) Identity Management theory, and Ting-Toomey’s ( 1993 ) Identity Negotiation theory. Contributions to intercultural competence theory came from other disciplines as well, such as a learning model for becoming interculturally competent (Taylor, 1994 ) and an instructional model of intercultural strategic competence (Milhouse, 1996 ), for example. The formation of the International Academy for Intercultural Research, in 1997 , marked a significant step toward interdisciplinary collaboration in intercultural research. Research in the 1990s contributed to the strides made in the 2000s.

In a meta-review of ICC, Bradford, Allen, and Beisser ( 2000 ) observed that ICC and intercultural communication effectiveness have been used (conceptually) interchangeably in previous research. Despite the different labels under which this topic has been studied, Arasaratnam and Doerfel ( 2005 ) made the case for the culture-general nature of ICC, and Deardorff ( 2006 ) demonstrated that there is consensus amongst experts as to what ICC is. The publication of the SAGE Handbook of Intercultural Competence (Deardorff, 2009 ) and Spitzberg and Chagnon’s ( 2009 ) comprehensive introductory chapter on conceptualizing intercultural competence are other noteworthy contributions to literature in intercultural competence. In 2015 , the publication of another special issue on intercultural competence by the International Journal of Intercultural Relations (some 25 years after the 1989 special issue) signals that intercultural competence continues to be a topic of interest amongst researchers in communication and other disciplines. As discussed in the Research Directions section, the areas that are yet to be explored would hopefully be addressed in future research.

Further Reading

• Arasaratnam, L. A. (2014). Ten years of research in intercultural communication competence (2003–2013): A retrospective. Journal of Intercultural Communication , 35 .
• Arasaratnam, L. A. , & Deardorff, D. K. (Eds.). (2015). Intercultural competence [Special issue]. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 48 .
• Bennett, J. M. (2015). The SAGE encyclopedia of intercultural competence . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Bradford, L. , Allen, M. , & Beisser, K. R. (2000). An evaluation and meta-analysis of intercultural communication competence research. World Communication , 29 (1), 28–51.
• Deardorff, D. K. (2009). The SAGE handbook of intercultural competence . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Martin, J. N. (Ed.). (1989). Intercultural communication competence [Special issue]. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 13 (3).
• Wiseman, R. L. (2002). Intercultural communication competence. In W. B. Gudykunst & B. Moody (Eds.), Handbook of international and intercultural communication (pp. 207–224). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Wiseman, R. L. , & Koester, J. (1993). Intercultural communication competence . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Arasaratnam, L. A. (2007). Empirical research in intercultural communication competence: A review and recommendation. Australian Journal of Communication , 34 , 105–117.
• Arasaratnam, L. A. , & Banerjee, S. C. (2011). Sensation seeking and intercultural communication competence: A model test. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 35 , 226–233.
• Arasaratnam, L. A. , & Doerfel, M. L. (2005). Intercultural communication competence: Identifying key components from multicultural perspectives. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 29 , 137–163.
• Argyris, C. (1965). Explorations in interpersonal competence-I. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science , 1 , 58–83.
• Bauer, I. M. , & Baumeister, R. F. (2013). Self-knowledge. In D. Reisberg (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive psychology [online publication]. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Beamer, L. (1992). Learning intercultural competence. International Journal of Business Communication , 29 (3), 285–303.
• Bennett, M. J. (1986). A developmental approach to training for intercultural sensitivity. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 10 , 179–196.
• Berger, C. R. , & Calabrese, R. J. (1975). Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond: Toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication. Human Communication Theory , 1 , 99–112.
• Bhawuk, D. P. S. , & Brislin, R. W. (1992). The measurement of intercultural sensitivity using the concepts of individualism and collectivism. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 16 (4), 413–436.
• Bieri, J. (1955). Cognitive complexity-simplicity and predictive behaviour. Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology , 51 , 263–268.
• Blight, M. (2012). Cultures education in the primary years: Promoting active global citizenship in a changing world. Journal of Student Engagement: Educational Matters , 2 (1), 49–53.
• Bodenhausen, G. V. , & Gawronski, B. (2013). Attitude change. In D. Reisberg (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive psychology [online publication]. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Bow, C. , Woodward, R. , Flynn, E. , & Stevens, M. (2013). Can I ask you something about your personal life? Sensitive questioning in intercultural doctor-patient interviews. Focus on Health Professional Education , 15 (2), 67–77.
• Bowler, M. C. , Bowler, J. L. , & Cope, J. G. (2012). Further evidence of the impact of cognitive complexity on the five-factor model. Social Behaviour and Personality , 40 (7), 1083–1098.
• Bradford, L. , Allen, M. , & Beisser, K. R. (2000). Meta-analysis of intercultural communication competence research. World Communication , 29 (1), 28–51.
• Charles, L. , Hendrika, M. , Abrams, S. , Shea, J. , Brand, G. , & Nicol, P. (2014). Expanding worldview: Australian nursing students’ experience of cultural immersion in India. Contemporary Nurse: A Journal for the Australian Nursing Profession , 48 (1), 67–75.
• Chen, G. M. (1990). Intercultural communication competence: Some perspectives of research. The Howard Journal of Communications , 2 (3), 243–261.
• Chen, G. M. , & Starosta, W. J. (1997). A review of the concept of intercultural sensitivity. Human Communication , 1 , 1–16.
• Chen, G. M. , & Starosta, W. J. (2000). The development and validation of the intercultural communication sensitivity scale. Human Communication , 3 , 1–15.
• Collier, M. J. (1986). Culture and gender: Effects on assertive behavior and communication competence. In M. McLaughlin (Ed.), Communication yearbook 9 (pp. 576–592). Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
• Cupach, W. R. , & Imahori, T. T. (1993). Identity management theory: Communication competence in intercultural episodes and relationships. In R. L Wiseman & J. Koester (Eds.), Intercultural communication competence (pp. 112–131). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Deardorff, D. K. (2006). Identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student outcome of internationalization. Journal of Studies in Intercultural Education , 10 , 241–266.
• Dinges, N. (1983). Intercultural competence. In D. Landis & R. W. Brislin (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural training (Vol. 1) : Issues in theory and design (pp. 176–202). New York: Pergamon.
• Duronto, P. M. , Nishida, T. , & Nakayama, S. I. (2005). Uncertainty, anxiety, and avoidance in communication with strangers. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 29 (5), 549–560.
• Fantini, A. E. (2009). Assessing intercultural competence. In D. K. Deardorff (Ed.), The SAGE Handbook of Intercultural Competence (pp. 456–476). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Gardner, G. H. (1962). Cross-cultural communication. Journal of Social Psychology , 58 , 241–256.
• Gibson, D. W. , & Zhong, M. (2005). Intercultural communication competence in the healthcare context. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 29 , 621–634.
• Greenholtz, J. (2000). Assessing cross-cultural competence in transnational education: The intercultural development inventory. Higher Education in Europe , 25 (3), 411–416.
• Gudykunst, W. B. (1988). Uncertainty and anxiety. In Y. Kim & W. Gudykunst (Eds.), Theories in intercultural communication (pp. 123–156). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
• Gudykunst, W. B. (1993). Toward a theory of effective interpersonal and intergroup communication: An anxiety/uncertainty management (AUM) perspective. In R. L Wiseman & J. Koester (Eds.), Intercultural communication competence (pp. 33–71). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Gudykunst, W. B. (1995). Anxiety/uncertainty management (AUM) theory. In R. Wiseman (Ed.), Intercultural communication theory (pp. 8–58). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Gudykunst, W. B. (2005). An anxiety/uncertainty management (AUM) theory of effective communication: Making the mesh of the net finer. In W. B. Gudykunst (Ed.), Theorizing about intercultural communication (pp. 281–322). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Gudykunst, W. B. , & Kim, Y. (2003). Communicating with strangers: An approach to intercultural communication . New York: McGraw Hill.
• Guthrie, G. M. , & Zetrick, I. N. (1967). Predicting performance in the Peace Corps. Journal of Social Psychology , 71 , 11–21.
• Hammer, M. R. (1987). Behavioral dimensions of intercultural effectiveness: A replication and extension. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 11 , 65–88.
• Hammer, M. R. , Bennett, M. J. , & Wiseman, R. L. (2003). Measuring intercultural sensitivity: The intercultural development inventory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 27 , 421–443.
• Hammer, M. R. , Gudykunst, W. B. , & Wiseman, R. L. (1978). Dimensions of intercultural effectiveness: An exploratory study. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 2 (4), 382–393.
• Helm, F. (2009). Language and culture in an online context: What can learner diaries tell us about intercultural competence? Language & Intercultural Communication , 9 , 91–104.
• Imohari, T. , & Lanigan, M. (1989). Relational model of intercultural communication competence. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 13 (3), 269–289.
• Kealey, D. J. (1989). A study of cross-cultural effectiveness: Theoretical issues, practical applications. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 13 (3), 397–428.
• Koester, J. , & Olebe, M. (1988). The behavioral assessment scale for intercultural communication effectiveness. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 12 , 233–246.
• Kim, Y. (1991). Intercultural communication competence. In S. Ting-Toomey & F. Korzennt (Eds.), Cross-cultural personal communication (pp. 259–275). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
• Kim, Y. (1995). Cross-cultural adaptation: An integrative theory. In R. L. Wiseman (Ed.), Intercultural communication theory (pp. 170–193). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Kim, Y. (2009). The identity factor in intercultural competence. In D. K. Deardorff (Ed.), The SAGE Handbook of Intercultural Competence (pp. 53–65). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Koester, J. , Wiseman, R. L. , & Sanders, J. A. (1993). Multiple perspectives of intercultural communication competence. In R. L Wiseman & J. Koester (Eds.), Intercultural communication competence (pp. 3–15). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Landis, D. , Bennett, J. , & Bennett, M. (2004). Handbook of intercultural training . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Martin, J. N. (1987). The relationship between student sojourner perceptions of intercultural competencies and previous sojourn experience. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 11 , 337–355.
• Matsumoto, D. , & Hwang, H. C. (2013). Assessing cross-cultural competence: A review of available tests. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology , 44 (6), 849–873.
• Milhouse, V. H. (1996). Intercultural strategic competence: An effective tool collectivist and individualist students can use to better understand each other. Journal of Instructional Psychology , 23 (1), 45–52.
• Miyamoto, Y. , & Wilken, B. (2013). Cultural differences and their mechanisms. In D. Reisberg (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive psychology [online publication]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Morgan, S. E. , & Arasaratnam, L. A. (2003). Intercultural friendships as social excitation: Sensation seeking as a predictor of intercultural friendship seeking behavior. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research , 32 , 175–186.
• Moskowitz, G. B. , & Gill, M. J. (2013). Person perception. In D. Reisberg (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive psychology [online publication]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Nesdale, D. , De Vries Robbé, M. , & Van Oudenhoven, J. P. (2012). Intercultural effectiveness, authoritarianism, and ethnic prejudice. Journal of Applied Social Psychology , 42 , 1173–1191.
• Neuliep, J. W. (2002). Assessing the reliability and validity of the generalized ethnocentrism scale. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research , 31 (4), 201–215.
• Neuliep, J. W. (2012). The relationship among intercultural communication apprehension, ethnocentrism, uncertainty reduction, and communication satisfaction during initial intercultural interaction: An extension of Anxiety Uncertainty Management (AUM) theory. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research , 41 (1), 1–16.
• Ni, L. , & Wang, Q. (2011). Anxiety and uncertainty management in an intercultural setting: The impact on organization-public relationships. Journal of Public Relations , 23 (3), 269–301.
• Nishida, H. (1985). Japanese intercultural communication competence and cross-cultural adjustment. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 9 (3), 247–269.
• Oetzel, J. , Meares, M. , Myers, K. K. , & Lara, E. (2003). Interpersonal conflict in organizations: Explaining conflict styles via face-negotiation theory. Communication Research Reports , 20 (2), 106–115.
• Reid, L. D. , & Foels, R. (2010). Cognitive complexity and the perception of subtle racism. Basic and Applied Social Psychology , 32 , 291–301.
• Ruben, B. D. (1976). Assessing communication competency for intercultural adaptation. Group and Organization Studies , 1 , 334–354.
• Ruben, B. D. , Askling, L. R. , & Kealey, D. J. (1977). Cross-cultural effectiveness. In D. S. Hoopes , P. B. Pedersen , and G. Renwick (Eds.), Overview of intercultural education, training, and research . (Vol. I): Theory (pp. 92–105). Washington, DC: Society for Intercultural Education, Training, and Research.
• Ruben, B. D. , & Kealey, D. J. (1979). Behavioral assessment of communication competency and the prediction of cross-cultural adaptation. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 3 (1), 15–47.
• Sample, S. G. (2013). Developing intercultural learners through the international curriculum. Journal of Studies in International Education , 17 (5), 554–572.
• Sandage, S. J. , & Jankowski, P. J. (2013). Spirituality, social justice, and intercultural competence: Mediator effects for differentiation of self. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 37 , 366–374.
• Smith, M. B. (1966). Explorations in competence: A study of Peace Corps teachers in Ghana. American Psychologist , 21 , 555–566.
• Smith, R. A. , & Downs, E. (2004). Flying across cultural divides: Sensation seeking and engagement in intercultural communication. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research , 33 (3), 223–230.
• Spitzberg, B. H. (1983). Communication competence as knowledge, skill, and impression. Communication Education , 32 , 323–329.
• Spitzberg, B. H. (2000). A model of intercultural communication competence. In L. Samovar & R. Porter (Eds.), Intercultural communication: A reader (pp. 375–387). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
• Spitzberg, B. H. , & Chagnon, G. (2009). Conceptualizing intercultural competence. In D. K. Deardorff (Ed.), The SAGE Handbook of Intercultural Competence (pp. 2–52). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Spitzberg, B. H. , & Cupach, W. R. (1984). Interpersonal communication competence . Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
• Saunders, J. A. , Haskins, M. , & Vasquez, M. (2015). Cultural competence: A journey to an elusive goal. Journal of Social Work Education , 51 , 19–34.
• Tangen, D. , Mercer, K. L. , Spooner-Lane, R. , & Hepple, E. (2011). Exploring intercultural competence: A service-learning approach. Australian Journal of Teacher Education , 36 (11), 62–72.
• Taylor, E. W. (1994). A learning model for becoming interculturally competent. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 18 (3), 389–408.
• Tervalon, M. , & Murray-Garcia, J. (1998). Cultural humility versus cultural competence: A critical distinction in identifying physician training outcomes in multicultural education. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Undeserved , 9 (2), 117–125.
• Ting-Toomey, S. (1988). Intercultural conflicts: A face-negotiation theory. In Y. Y. Kim and W. B. Gudykunst (Eds.), Theories in intercultural communication (pp. 213–235). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
• Ting-Toomey, S. (1993). Communicative resourcefulness: An identity negotiation perspective. In R. L Wiseman & J. Koester (Eds.), Intercultural communication competence (pp. 72–111). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Ting-Toomey, S. , & Kurogi, A. (1998). Facework competence in intercultural conflict: An updated face-negotiation theory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 22 , 187–225.
• Van de Vijver, F. J. R. , & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Van de Vijver, F. J. R. , & Leung, K. (2011). Equivalence and bias: A review of concepts, models, and data analytic procedures. In D. Matsumoto & F. J. R. Van de Vijver (Eds.), Cross-cultural research methods in psychology (pp. 17–45). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Van Oudenhoven, J. P. , & Van der Zee, K. (2002). Predicting multicultural effectiveness of international students: The multicultural personality questionnaire. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 26 , 679–694.
• Wang, J. (2013). Moving towards ethnorelativism: A framework for measuring and meeting students’ needs in cross-cultural business and technical communication. Journal of Technical Writing & Communication , 43 (2), 201–218.
• White, R. W. (1959). Motivation reconsidered: The concept of competence. Psychological Review , 66 (5), 297–333.
• Wiseman, R. L. (2002). Intercultural communication competence. In W. B. Gudykunst and B. Moody (Eds.), Handbook of international and intercultural communication (pp. 207–224). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Wiseman, R. L. , & Abe, H. (1986). Cognitive complexity and intercultural effectiveness. In M. McLaughlin (Ed.), Communication yearbook 9 (pp. 611–624). Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
• Witteborn, S. (2003). Communicative competence revisited: An emic approach to studying intercultural communicative competence. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research , 32 , 187–203.
• Yoshitake, M. (2002). Anxiety/uncertainty management (AUM) theory: A critical examination of an intercultural communication theory. Intercultural Communication Studies , 11 , 177–193.
• Zakaria, N. , Amelinckx, A. , & Wilemon, D. (2004). Working together apart? Building a knowledge-sharing culture for global virtual teams. Creativity and Innovation Management , 13 (1), 15–29.
• Zhang, H. (2012). Collaborative learning as a pedagogical tool to develop intercultural competence in a multicultural class. China Media Research , 8 , 107–111.

Related Articles

• Women Entrepreneurs, Global Microfinance, and Development 2.0
• Movements and Resistance in the United States, 1800 to the Present
• Rhetorical Construction of Bodies
• Intercultural Friendships
• A Culture-Centered Approach to Health and Risk Communication
• Race, Nationalism, and Transnationalism
• Methods for Intercultural Communication Research
• Globalizing and Changing Culture
• Communication Skill and Competence
• Intercultural Conflict
• Anxiety, Uncertainty, and Intercultural Communication
• Bella Figura: Understanding Italian Communication in Local and Transatlantic Contexts

Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, Communication. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 15 September 2024

• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility
• [185.39.149.46]
• 185.39.149.46

Character limit 500 /500

TRAINING: LEADERSHIP

• Inclusive Leadership Sessions
• Leading International Sales Teams

TRAINING: COMMUNICATION

• Communicating effectively with culturally diverse audiences
• Inclusive Communication
• Inclusive Writing Workshop
• Intercultural Communication
• Conferences
• Culturally Adapted Copywriting

• Tools for teachers

Communicating effectively in a multicultural context

• 30 March, 2021

Language is the chief point of contact between cultures. When we want to communicate with a person or an audience from a different culture, we first consider the language. After all, we want to be understood. When an organization addresses a specific audience through ad campaigns, social media or personalized emails, its communication specialists will translate it into the target market’s language. But informing, convincing or seducing is not simply a matter of translating into English, Spanish or Italian. You must consider the origin (are you targeting a British audience or one in the United-States?) and the values and other cultural aspects that influence the perception of the message.

Nelson Mandela understood this perfectly when he said that “if you speak to a person in a language they understand, it goes to their head. If you speak to them in THEIR LANGUAGE, it goes straight to their heart.

How to “speak the language of your audience”?

First, it is a matter of language. But we know that language acculturates. Thus, while you may find a skeleton in an American’s “closet,” you might rather find one in a Brit’s “cupboard.” While both idioms refer to hiding a shameful secret, the English metaphor varies according to its origin.

According to Ethnologue.com, 7139 languages are spoken on the planet today . If Chinese Mandarin is the mother tongue of the largest number of people, English is the most spoken language in the world, both as a mother tongue (370M people) and as a learned language (978M people) .

If 978 million people speak English as a second (or third or other) language, then we understand why the language “regionalizes.” For example, British English differs from U.S. English in spelling, expressions, inflections, etc. The English spoken in London differs greatly from the English used in Texas.

During a conference given to a group of French entrepreneurs who came to seek business opportunities in Quebec, I asked a simple question: what is your biggest challenge in doing business in Quebec? The answer was unanimous: understanding the expressions and language of Quebec. And yet, we all speak French.

We cannot think that a universal language exists, even if it is the “same” language. If you are addressing an international audience and you want to cut costs by translating your communications into “one French,” you risk not only losing the attention of your target audience but worse, making costly mistakes.

Lost in translation

Imagine a major Canadian clothing brand launching a global promotion on sweaters. They develop a fantastic campaign that draws significant sales in North America and the UK. However, they realize sales are plummeting in Australia. After some cultural research, the brand’s marketing team realizes that Australians don’t wear “sweaters”; they wear “jumpers.” So, no one there was googling “sweater”…

Translators are increasingly aware of the nuances involved, and the notions of acculturation, cultural adaptation and localization are gaining a foothold in the international communications realm. Ans so we will better understand the messages we receive from advertisers, who increasingly understand that we must understand our audience to be better understood.

Phew… So, it’s all about understanding, but it’s not only about language. Cultural values also influence the perception of messages.

Understanding cultural values

In a culture where communication is direct, messages promoting context subtlety, for example, will be misunderstood (or not understood at all). Where the direct communication cultural value dominates, it is best to call a spade a spade or state your request precisely. On the other hand, in a culture where indirect communication prevails, such an approach will likely repel your audience because it is perceived as too abrupt or even offensive.

In North America, direct communication is highly favoured. This is problematic if North Americans want to engage an audience in China, for example, where the focus is more on implied aspects and contextual elements of the message. A message that is too direct and does not take this cultural value into account will be misunderstood or even ignored. Let’s hope, of course, that it does not offend.

To avoid misunderstandings and other cross-cultural communication pitfalls, it is best to understand the different cultural values and their impact on message perception and consumer behaviour.

Understanding cultural values for better communication

In his research on culture and society, Dutch social psychologist Geert Hofstede developed a theory of 6 cultural values and how they influence behaviors in different countries. In its Cultural Values Profile, the Cultural Intelligence Center explores 10 pairs of cultural values. Based on facts and scientific research, the tool can identify respondents’ cultural values and demonstrate their position compared to 10 global cultural clusters. This provides a valuable way to avoid misunderstandings and anticipate blind spots.

Acculturating texts and better understanding the cultural values involved when addressing a market, a public, or an audience from a culture other than our own allows us to better speak the language of our audience and, above all, to avoid possible pitfalls in cross-cultural communications.

To explore cultural values and understand how they influence communications, see our exclusive program Communicating Effectively with Culturally Diverse Audiences .

Related Articles

Inclusive writing goes beyond gender

Inclusive writing raises many questions, debates and, worse, ire—not just from linguists. Why all the fuss? Firstly, because too many associate inclusive writing with the

Inclusive Leadership: 4 fundamental principles

Inclusive leadership is a leadership style that emphasizes the importance of diversity, equity, and inclusion in the workplace. Inclusive leaders value their team members’ unique

7 tips for more inclusive communications

In today’s world, where diversity and inclusion have become critical values, and a competitive advantage, communicating inclusively is essential. Inclusive communication creates an environment where

Inclusive communications and cultural intelligence

Understanding and respecting others’ cultural backgrounds, values, and norms is more important than ever in today’s increasingly diverse and interconnected world. Cultural intelligence (CQ) is

What is Cultural Intelligence – According to ChatGPT

We asked Chat GPT to write a 500-word blog on cultural intelligence, specifically: What is cultural intelligence? The result, as copy-pasted below, is impressive. However,