 ‘What feels polite in one language can sound evasive in another – misunderstanding is often our first shared culture.’ (Yoon Jeong Kim) I had a funny and embarrassing experience in a German supermarket this weekend. I had gone to buy some milk and fruit and, when I arrived at the checkout, the young assistant picked up the loose bananas, looked at me quizzically and said, ‘Wiegen?’ (pronounced in the same way as the English word ‘vegan’). I was puzzled. ‘Is she asking me if I’m vegan?’, ‘Is she asking if the bananas are vegan?’, ‘Aren’t all bananas vegan?’ After an awkward moment – and with a visibly restless queue forming behind me – she pointed to a weigh scale. ‘Aaah.’ Now I understood. It felt to me like a classic illustration of what can happen in communication more broadly. It’s a particular risk when speaking in a different language, or when trying to understand what another has said in a different language. We can wonder, ‘Have they understood me correctly?’, ‘Have I understood them correctly?’ It’s even more complex when communicating cross-culturally where the same words, expressions or gestures may carry and convey very different underlying meanings. Misunderstandings occur when we think we've understood, and we haven’t. Peter Cotterell explained this phenomenon well when, as Principal and lecturer at a theological school where I studied, he introduced the idea of a presuppositional pool. This is a concept used in linguistics to describe a set of shared, background assumptions that speakers, authors or presenters from a specific culture and context take for granted in communication. It’s a bit like a subconscious underlying framework that enables their communications to make sense to others. Problems arise when we find ourselves swimming in different pools without realising it. Do want to enhance your communication skills? Get in touch!
0 Comments
 ‘Globalisation has obliterated distance, not just physically but also, most dangerously, mentally. It creates the illusion of intimacy when, in fact, the mental distances have changed little. It has concertinaed the world without engendering the necessary respect, recognition and tolerance that must accompany it.’ (Martin Jacques) At a Chinese New Year celebration meal last week, I looked around the dinner table at my family: my brother who lived in Brunei, his Malaysian wife, my sister who lived in Germany, her husband who travels the world with work, my niece who lived in Spain, my nephew who also lived in Spain and my Mum who has visited more countries than she can remember. My daughters are internationally-minded too: one taught herself Japanese and the other recently visited Austria. It struck me how much the world has changed in my own lifetime. The ability to communicate and build relationships with people all over the world has never been easier, thanks to advances in technology. International travel has never been easier too, at least for those who have the financial resources and visa permits to do it. Given these opportunities to rub shoulders with our global neighbours, we might expect a ‘one world’ outlook increasingly to predominate. Yet, take a cursory glance across current news headlines and we see an increasingly polarised world, divided along national, political and ideological lines. We see a profound fracturing in the breakdown of the rules-based international order with nationalism on the rise, and within nations where different -isms or -phobias tear at each other in heated culture wars. Perhaps global idealists forgot a deep human desire for distinctive identity, belonging, security – and power?  ‘Every border I crossed blurred another line inside me, between who I was and who I was becoming.’ (Yoon Jeong Kim) When I trained to be an English teacher for speakers of other languages, one of the things we discussed was to look out for was false friends, also called false cognates. These are words from different languages that appear similar yet have very different meanings. An example is the word ‘sensible’ which means something like ‘reasonable’ in English, but ‘sensitive’ in Spanish. A risk for language learners is that they assume that familiar, similar-sounding words, phrases or even gestures used by others carry the same meanings as their own, and that can lead to all kinds of misunderstandings. Language and culture are closely-linked, and similar risks can occur when we meet or work with people from different cultural backgrounds. We may assume that others’ similar behaviours carry the same meaning as ours, or assume that different behaviours of others mean the same as they would in our own culture. An example is nodding or saying ‘Yes’ which in many Western cultures would signal ‘I agree’ or ‘I consent’, whereas in many Eastern cultures it could mean ‘I hear you’ or ‘I understand what you are saying’. In some Eastern and African cultures it could simply be a sign of respect. Given the potential for confusion, consternation, embarrassment or frustration, I try to approach cross-cultural conversations and relationships in a spirit of curiosity. If a person or group from another culture says or does something (especially if this is a recurring pattern) that confuses, surprises or jars me, I try to pause, breathe, suspend my own judgement (based on my own cultural values) and inquire tentatively what it could mean for them. I encourage them to do the same with me. This isn’t always easy and often calls for prayer, humility and patience, yet the benefits can be immeasurable.  ‘I know you think you understand what you thought I said but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.’ ‘I guess I should warn you, if I turn out to be particularly clear, you’ve probably misunderstood what I said.’ (Alan Greenspan) You may have had that experience of communicating something you thought was perfectly clear, only to discover that the other person got the completely wrong end of the proverbial stick. How is that possible? Was it something in what you said or, perhaps, how you said it that influenced how the message was received, distorted or misunderstood? Whatever the cause, when it does happen, you can both feel bemused, confused or frustrated – and the consequences can be difficult, damaging or dangerous. I want to suggest this occurs mainly as a result of mismatched beliefs, values, assumptions and emotions in four critical areas: language, culture, context and relationship. There are, of course, situations in which a person may wilfully misinterpret what you said or simply choose to ignore you. However, I’m thinking more here about when it happens inadvertently and out of awareness. It’s something about what influences (a) what we infer and (b) how we interpret, when we communicate – so that we can improve it. The language question means the same words can mean different things to different people, even in the same language group. The culture question means the assumptions I make appear obvious or self-evident in the groups or teams I belong to. The context question means I interpret what you say based on my own perspective and understanding of the situation. The relationship question means I filter what you say based on what I perceive and feel about the nature, dynamics and quality of our relationship. So – this where a spirit of inquiry can help: Check what the other has heard and understood. Notice the language they use. Be curious about their cultural and contextual perspectives. Sense and explore how they are feeling. Build trust.  ‘Learn your theories as well as you can, but put them aside when you touch the miracle of the living soul.’ (Carl Jung) It’s not every day that one has opportunity to lead a coach training workshop for participants from Asia, Africa, the Middle East and Europe all in the same online room at the same time. I’m greatly indebted to insightful contributions from group members as we looked at how to navigate cross-cultural dynamics in coaching conversations. We spent some time exploring, critiquing and adapting a conventional Western coaching model, with all its embedded cultural assumptions, to people and relationships in very different global contexts. I noticed that finding a way to navigate a group conversation about such complex issues was, in itself, a cross-cultural experience in real time. I was particularly interested, for my own development too, in how to offer challenge in collectivistic cultures where group harmony, cohesion and interdependence are valued highly and indirect communication is the norm. A direct challenge could be perceived as disruptive to relationship and, therefore, experienced as blunt, threatening or rude. The wisdom that emerged from today’s participants began to take shape in something like the following form (below) – although I’m aware that I’m imposing a structure on a conversation and ideas that felt more fluid and emergent at the time. It offers a window of insight, shared by people with far greater cultural-lived experience than my own:
 ‘Who looks outside dreams; who looks inside awakes.’ (Carl Jung) I’m running a foundation-level coaching programme for participants from Burundi, DRC, Kenya, Lebanon, Mali, Nepal, Philippines, Rwanda and the UK this week. I find the diverse cultural insights and approaches fascinating. The programme is based on John Whitmore’s GROW model because that’s client organisation’s model of choice. At a previous workshop, we looked at how we might adapt GROW to different cultural contexts, particularly those with a more collectivist than individualist orientation. This week we will be looking at how to go deeper at each stage of GROW by asking 2nd level (follow-up) questions. 2nd level questions are challenging and call for trust. Here are some examples of what we might think of as 1st level (often surface-level, or transactional) and 2nd level (often deeper level, or transformational) questions at each stage of the GROW process. The 2nd level questions invite the coachee to build on or delve deeper into their own responses to the 1st level questions – if they want to: Goal. 1st level: ‘What do you want to achieve?’ 2nd level: ‘Why’s that outcome so important to you?’ or ‘What goal might really stretch or scare you?’ Realities. 1st level: ‘What’s holding you back?’ 2nd level: ‘What's your own contribution to what you're experiencing?’ or ‘What truth might another see that you don’t see?’ Options. 1st level: ‘What are your options?’ 2nd level: ‘What (limiting) assumptions are you making?’ or ‘What options have you ruled out because they feel too risky?’ Will. 1st level: ‘What will you do?’ 2nd level: ‘What action will prove you’re serious about doing this?’ ‘If you don’t do it, what will you be telling yourself a month from now?’ I had a valuable conversation with a close friend in Germany this week about how to work with 2nd level questions in such a variety of cultural contexts. He proposed writing a question down; inviting participants to reflect on, ‘How would you pose this question in your culture?’ and, if they wouldn't ask this question, ‘What might you ask instead?’  ‘A garden’s beauty never lies in one flower.’ (Matshona Dhliwayo) I had a fascinating experience yesterday, leading a foundational coach training workshop for insightful and enthusiastic participants from countries as diverse as Burundi, DRC, Ethiopia, Kenya, Lebanon, Mali, Nepal, Philippines, Rwanda and the UK. I was struck by the great range and depth of awareness and wisdom in the group, particularly when it came to exploring and understanding dynamics that can and do influence coaching practice in very different cultures, contexts and relationships. It left me feeling humbled, inspired and motivated to continue learning from the very different lived experiences, insights and ideas of others. What a privilege to spend time with such amazing people. Thank you, God – and to all who help me learn.  ‘Research is seeing what everybody else has seen and thinking what nobody else has thought.’ (Albert Szent-Györgyi) Today’s focus group with participants from Colombia, England, Iran and Scotland was an intriguing experience. They are all employed as research professionals at a university and their expertise was evidenced as much by the questions they asked as the insights they shared. As facilitator, I spent much of the time listening to discern underlying themes as they spoke together in free-flow around issues and experiences that matter to them. I was aware of both tuning in to hear and understand, and tuning out to maintain an independent perspective. One of the participants reflected astutely from the outset that the order in which discussion questions had been framed mirrored symbolically something of their experience. The first question was focused on organisational issues, the second on cross-departmental and the third on individual. This represented, for them, a perceived hierarchy of importance in the culture of the university itself – with organisational agendas at the top of the pyramid and individual interests at the bottom. It was a profound insight that proved pivotal to the conversation. In debrief afterwards in a café with the client, we reflected on how best to present the outputs of the focus group to organisational decision-makers. If it’s true that leaders are focused first and foremost on the needs of the institution, whereas the researchers were primarily concerned with issues affecting individuals, we will aim to demonstrate how addressing the researchers’ recommendations would benefit the institution, whilst also hold up an observation of the perceived need to do so, as a mirror to raise awareness of implicit cultural values.  ‘Taken out of context, I must seem so strange.’ (Ani Difranco) It’s an awareness of the context (in Gestalt psychology, the backdrop or ground) that often enables us to make sense of and navigate the specific issue (the focus or figure) in front of us. This principle came in useful today whilst facilitating a focus group of university research and teaching professionals in Scotland with cultural backgrounds in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Germany, Greece, Turkey and the UK. They knew their context well and were able to draw on insights from personal experience. This created the conditions for a rich conversation and diverse ideas to emerge. There were benefits, too, to my involvement as an independent facilitator. In that role, I was external to their system – intentionally out-of-context if you like – and that helped me to avoid making some of the same assumptions, and to ask questions from a fresh place or guide the group’s gaze towards unexplored places. I was detached and unaffected by the issues they wanted to discuss and that helped me to stay focused: to help them discern their wood from their trees. So, out-of-context within a context can be an advantage; as can contextual knowledge and understanding.  ‘We don’t see things as they are – we see them as we are.’ (Anaïs Nin) Social constructionism is a way looking at how we construe reality to help us make sense of it. The ‘we’ is important here because it’s not just what I do but what we do, what others around us do and what others before us have done. If I haven’t lost you already, imagine seeing a person hand someone else a bunch of flowers. Neuroscience can shed little or no light on understanding this event. That’s because the meaning of giving someone flowers is socially-constructed – that is, it’s something we attribute to the act within a specific culture and context, rather than something that is inherent to the act per se. In my own UK culture, giving a person flowers could mean, for instance: a gesture of romantic love; or of thanks and appreciation; or to celebrate a special occasion; or a token of apology; or a wish for someone who is sick that they’ll get well soon; or a sign of empathy if someone has died. In some cultures or contexts, it could signify wealth (e.g. ‘I have enough money to buy you to a gift’) or imply a request for a response (e.g. ‘Will you marry me?’). Types, colours and numbers of flowers convey different meanings in different cultures too. So, social constructionism: a way of making sense of human sense-making. |
Nick WrightI'm a psychological coach, trainer and OD consultant. Curious to discover how can I help you? Get in touch! 
Like what you read? Simply enter your email address below to receive regular blog updates!
|
RSS Feed