First, high-context communication involves emotions and close relationships while low-context interactions use the logical part of the brain and are less personal (Hall, 1998). For example, a typical Malay tradition is to serve beverages and local cakes when guests visit their homes. Malays like their guests to feel comfortable and welcomed when the guests pay them a visit, so the way to do this is to provide a hospitable atmosphere. This practice is brought into their organizational business meetings during which business partners are typically served refreshments and light snacks during meetings. To the Malays building relationships comes before getting down to business. In one observation, Abdullah (1996) notes that, “Malays tend to engage in social pleasantries before getting down to business. They see it as a form of ‘ice-breaker’ which can smoothen [sic] the flow of conversation and enable both parties to assess one another” (p. 79). On the other hand, Westerners are more direct and explicit (Abdullah, 1996) and would like to put the cards on the table and get down to the business.
In most Western negotiations, rationality is favored over emotionality. Individuals are encouraged to negotiate using the principled negotiation approach (Rothwell, 2004), where negotiators remain unconditionally constructive throughout the process. This technique outlines a set of rules that focus on content with an emphasis on results that are based on objective standards. Unlike soft bargaining which value building relationships and friendships (Rothwell, 2004), principled negotiation can be categorized as low-context communication.
The second high-context communication characteristic is indirectness. According to Hall (1976) a high-context individual would talk around things expecting the interlocutor to understand the cues. The speaker provides part of the message and leaves the remaining pieces to be filled by the listener. For example a friend says that he is hungry but could not leave his work to buy food. For a low- context person this means that the friend will be hungry until he finishes work, but a high-context person may get the signal that his friend would like him to get food for him. Saying this directly might appear demanding, so by talking around what he wants, the listener might be able to pick up the cues. In this case Hall (1976) notes that in-group members in high-context cultures are expected to know what is troubling a group member. Details are not specified but considered to be known by the other person placing the burden of understanding and responding to the problem on the interlocutor.
First, high-context communication involves emotions and close relationships while low-context interactions use the logical part of the brain and are less personal (Hall, 1998). For example, a typical Malay tradition is to serve beverages and local cakes when guests visit their homes. Malays like their guests to feel comfortable and welcomed when the guests pay them a visit, so the way to do this is to provide a hospitable atmosphere. This practice is brought into their organizational business meetings during which business partners are typically served refreshments and light snacks during meetings. To the Malays building relationships comes before getting down to business. In one observation, Abdullah (1996) notes that, “Malays tend to engage in social pleasantries before getting down to business. They see it as a form of ‘ice-breaker’ which can smoothen [sic] the flow of conversation and enable both parties to assess one another” (p. 79). On the other hand, Westerners are more direct and explicit (Abdullah, 1996) and would like to put the cards on the table and get down to the business.In most Western negotiations, rationality is favored over emotionality. Individuals are encouraged to negotiate using the principled negotiation approach (Rothwell, 2004), where negotiators remain unconditionally constructive throughout the process. This technique outlines a set of rules that focus on content with an emphasis on results that are based on objective standards. Unlike soft bargaining which value building relationships and friendships (Rothwell, 2004), principled negotiation can be categorized as low-context communication.The second high-context communication characteristic is indirectness. According to Hall (1976) a high-context individual would talk around things expecting the interlocutor to understand the cues. The speaker provides part of the message and leaves the remaining pieces to be filled by the listener. For example a friend says that he is hungry but could not leave his work to buy food. For a low- context person this means that the friend will be hungry until he finishes work, but a high-context person may get the signal that his friend would like him to get food for him. Saying this directly might appear demanding, so by talking around what he wants, the listener might be able to pick up the cues. In this case Hall (1976) notes that in-group members in high-context cultures are expected to know what is troubling a group member. Details are not specified but considered to be known by the other person placing the burden of understanding and responding to the problem on the interlocutor.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
