Even when a group is involved in the U.S., the head man is the
spokes man and sets the tone. This is not always the case in Japan. Two
young Japanese once requested an older American widely respected in Tokyo
to accompany them so that they could "stand on his face." He was not
expected to enter into the negotiation; his function was simply to be
present as an indication that their intentions were serious.
ADJUSTMENT GOES BOTH WAYS
One need not have devoted his life to a study of various cultures to
see that none of them is static. All are constantly changing and one
element of change is the very fact that U.S. enterprise enters a foreign
field. This is inevitable and may be constructive if we know how to utilize
our knowledge. The problem is for us to be aware of our impact and to learn
how to induce changes skillfully.
Rather than try to answer the general question of how two cultures
interact, we will consider the key problem of personnel selection and
development in two particular intercultural situations, both in Latin
cultures.
One U.S. company had totally different experiences with "Smith" and
"Jones" in the handling of its labor relations. The local union leaders
were bitterly hostile to Smith, whereas they could not praise Jones enough.
These were puzzling reactions to higher management. Smith seemed a fair
minded and understanding man; it was difficult to fathom how anyone could
be bitter against him. At the same time, Jones did not appear to be
currying favor by his generosity in giving away the firm's assets. To
management, he seemed to be just as firm a negotiator as Smith.
The explanation was found in the two men's communication
characteristics. When the union leaders came in to negotiate with Smith, he
would let them state their case fully and freely-without interruption, but
also without comment. When they had finished, he would say, "I'm sorry, We
can't do it." He would follow this blunt statement with a brief and
entirely cogent explanation of his reasons for refusal. If the union
leaders persisted in their arguments, Smith would paraphrase his first
statement, calmly and succinctly. In either case, the discussion was over
in a few minutes. The union leaders would storm out of Smith's office
complaining bitterly about the cold and heartless man with whom they had to
deal.
Jones handled the situation differently. His final conclusion was the
same as Smith's-but he would state it only after two or three hours of
discussion. Furthermore, Jones participated actively in these discussions,
questioning the union leaders for more information, relating the case in
question to previous cases, philosophizing about labor relations and human
rights and exchanging stories about work experience. When the discussion
came to an end, the union leaders would leave the office, commenting on how
warmhearted and understanding he was, and how confident they were that he
would help them when it was possible for him to do so, They actually seemed
more satisfied with a negative decision from Jones than they did with a
hard-won concession from Smith.
This was clearly a case where the personality of Jones happened to
match certain discernible requirements of the Latin American culture. It
was happenstance in this case that Jones worked out and Smith did not, for
by American standards both were top-flight men. Since a talent for the kind
of negotiation that the Latin American considers graceful and acceptable
can hardly be developed in a grown man (or perhaps even in a young one),
the basic problem is one of personnel selection in terms of the culture
where the candidate is to work.
The second case is more complicated because it involves much deeper
intercultural adjustments. The management of the parent V.S. company
concerned had learned-as have the directors of most large firms with good-
sized installations overseas-that one cannot afford to have all of the top
and middle-management positions manned by North Americans. It is necessary
to advance nationals up the overseas-management ladder as rapidly as their
abilities permit. So the nationals have to learn not only the technical
aspects of their jobs but also how to function at higher levels in the
organization.
Latin culture emphasizes authority in the home, church, and community.
Within the organization this produces a built-in hesitancy about speaking
up to one's superiors. The initiative, the acceptance of responsibility
which we value in our organizations had to be stimulated. How could it be
done?
We observed one management man who had done a remarkable job of
building up these very qualities in his general foremen and foremen. To
begin with, he stimulated informal contacts between himself and these men
through social events to which the men and their wives came. He saw to it
that his senior North American assistants and their wives were' also
present. Knowing the language, he mixed freely with all. At the plant, he
circulated about, dropped in not to inspect or check up, but to joke and to
break down the great barrier that existed in the local traditions between
authority and the subordinates.
Next, he developed a pattern of three-level meetings. At the top, he
himself, the superintendents, and the general foremen. At the middle level,
the superintendents, general foremen, and foremen. Then the general
foremen, foremen, and workers.
At the top level meeting, the American management chief set the
pattern of encouraging his subordinates to challenge his own ideas, to come
up with original thoughts. When his superintendents (also North Americans)
disagreed with him, he made it clear that they were to state their
objections fully. At first, the general foreman looked surprised and
uneasy. They noted, however, that the senior men who argued with the boss
were encouraged and praised. Timorously, with great hesitation, they began
to add their own suggestions. As time went on, they more and more accepted
the new convention and pitched in without inhibition.
The idea of challenging the boss with constructive new ideas gradually
filtered down to the second and third level meetings. It took a lot of time
and gentle handling, but .out of this approach grew an extraordinary
morale. The native general foremen and foremen developed new pride in
themselves, accepted new responsibilities, even reached out for more. They
began to work to improve their capacities and to look forward to moving up
in the hierarchy.
CUISINE, ETIQUETTE & CULTURAL VALUES
Also, it is necessary to note that food is one of the most enjoyable
ways to experience another culture.
WHAT'S A "STAPLE" FOOD?
Every culture has staple foods. A staple food is a food that is rich
in carbohydrates, that is eaten daily, and that is a primary source of
calories and life energy. Rice is the staple food of much of Asia: from
China & Japan to Sri Lanka & India. For example, many Japanese eat rice
three times a day — with breakfast, lunch and dinner. If there is no rice,
diners feel dissatisfied: the meal simply is not complete.
Cuisine and Etiquette in Zambia
In traditional families, mothers eat together with the girls and the
small boys. Boys age seven and older eat with the father. This is because
all of the children below the age of seven live under the guidance of their
mother and much learning takes place through daily activities in the home.
Ibis is changing, however, especially in towns and cities. The new trend1
is that all members of the family eat together.
Before eating, everybody washes hands in order of the status of the
members of the family: father first, then mother, and the children follow
according to their ages. If a visitor happens to have a meal with the
family, he or she is given the honor of washing first.
It is rude to talk very much or loudly while eating. After eating, the
family members wash their hands again in the same order. The wife and the
young ones clear the table. Burping after a meal is a traditional
compliment, but it is not quite so common nowadays.
Zambia's staple food is maize (corn), and the inhabitants eat maize in
several ways. When the corn is new, it can be roasted or boiled. When it is
dry, it can be fried or boiled, either by itself or mixed with beans or
peanuts. Sometimes maize is ground to a size a little bigger than rice and
is cooked like rice. Finally, we have the fine cornmeal which is called
mealie-meal in Zambia. This is used for making nsima, the most popular way
of cooking maize. Nsima is steamed cornmeal.
Meat from cows, goats, sheep, and fish are used in sauces over nsima.
There are also a lot of vegetables put in sauces, such as leaves from bean
plants, okra, peas and pumpkins. Other vegetables eaten almost daily
include onions and tomatoe. Nsima is usually prepared for lunch and dinner
and not for breakfast. All the cooking is done by the wife.
Cuisine & Etiquette in Uganda
In Uganda, the staple food is matoke (a variety of semi-sweet bananas
with green peels used in cooking). Other food crops include sweet potatoes
or yams, white potatoes, beans, peas, peanuts, cabbage, onions, pumpkins,
and tomatoes. Some fruits, such as oranges, papayas, lemons, and
pineapples, are also grown.
Most people, except for a few who live in the city centers, produce
their own food. The responsibility of preparing the family's meals belongs
Страницы: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15
