COMMUNICATION STYLES AND CONFLICT IN INTERCULTURAL ACADEMIC SETTINGS

Problem Statement

Problem Statement

In academic intercultural meetings, communication can be complex due to diverse cultural backgrounds. Even educated individuals may have different beliefs and perspectives, leading to potential communication breakdowns. Despite using a common language like English, participants may still face temporary barriers due to their unique cultural values and perspectives.

Research questions

1. How are “face” and “politeness” framed by the community composed of Taiwanese and foreign participants in intercultural academic meetings?

2. How do communication styles used by local Taiwanese and teachers mainly from the United States vary in intercultural academic meeting conflict situations?

3. How are decisions reached in intercultural meetings in academic settings?

POLITENESS THEORY

• Politeness can be categorized into positive politeness and negative politeness.

• Positive politeness addresses the desire for one's wants to be seen as desirable by the addressee.

• Negative politeness addresses the addressee's want for freedom of action and unimpeded attention.

• Politeness is considered a form of language ideology in recent developments.

• The ideology of politeness varies across cultures but serves as a face-saving strategy for smooth communication and avoiding loss of face.

• In collectivistic cultures like China, Japan, and Korea, group membership defines identity and status.

• Emphasis is on establishing harmonious relationships within family, clan, school, and workplace.

• Gaining and losing face among Chinese is linked to various social factors like pride, honor, and trust.

• Conflicts in collectivistic cultures, especially in-group conflicts, are avoided to maintain social face and harmony.

• Cultural differences in conflict resolution styles are learned during the primary socialization process.

FACE CONCERNS AND DIMENSIONS OF CULTURAL VALUES

Styles of Conflict Handling and Negotiation

COMMUNICATION STYLES

DECISION MAKING

• Western individualistic cultures versus Eastern collectivist cultures in business decision making

• US corporate sector favors top-down decision-making process with emphasis on egalitarianism, independence, change, and conflict resolution

• Large Japanese corporations follow a bottom-up process starting from mid-level managers

• Consensus is crucial in Japanese decision making, focusing on agreement among all involved parties

• Cultural attitudes towards conflict vary, with US accepting and managing confrontations while Japan tends to avoid conflict

The community included 21 Chinese teachers, 6 foreign teachers, and 3 secretaries. English was the common language for department meetings held thrice per semester. Proposals ranged from routine regulations revision to challenging tasks like selecting the excellent teacher award annually.

Participants

The research site was the department faculty meeting held in an English department in Taiwan during the years 2012 through 2013.

Research Setting

In a tense confrontation, Professors A and B questioned the validity of proposed changes and the selection process for awards. This sparked a lively debate, shedding light on diverse approaches to managing conflicts. How can cultural differences enhance or hinder conflict resolution strategies? Let's explore the dynamics at play in Conflict Situation 1.

The initial election of the excellent teacher award, which is conducted annually, signals the highest honor for teachers’ work

achievement. Before the initial election was conducted in the department, the relevant school regulations had just been revised. To follow the school regulations concerning the excellent teacher award, the department needed to revise its own departmental regulations

accordingly

In the challenging environment of Conflict Situation 2, educators navigate complex hurdles to inspire student excellence. The weight of crafting impactful assessments falls heavily on instructors, demanding extensive effort in assessment preparation and feedback. Contrasting philosophies of Professors A and B ignite departmental tensions, underscoring the critical role of pedagogical unity in fostering student success.

Improving students’ English writing ability remains one of the main departmental objectives. However, to improve the students’ writing,checking

assignments is indeed time-consuming work for writing teachers.

Normally most of the faculty do not want to teach writing courses since they may need to spend time on their own preparations and research.

In Conflict Situation 3, tensions flared over a foreign teacher's website design, prompting a divided discussion. With opinions at odds, a second meeting was called, revealing, deep-rooted discrepancies in perspective. The department chair navigated a complex web of conflicting views, underscoring the criticality of alignment in decision-making.

This critical incident in question involved several teachers. It occurred shortly after Professor M, a foreign national, arrived.

The professor had been born and grown up in a Chinese-speaking country but had worked for several years in the U.S. in an academic setting.

Out of good intentions to improve the department webpage, the teacher raised the concerns about the website organization and appearance with the department

When Professor I, a Chinese department chair, chaired the department faculty meeting for the first few times in the first year of chairpersonship, for

efficiency she moved through the proposals quickly without restating the resolutions for each proposal that was discussed. This practice was challenged by faculty members who seemed uncertain about the outcome of discussions.

In Incident 4, Chinese teachers' deference to the department chair underscores the power of leadership styles. Professor A's strategic use of 'obliging style' demonstrates the nuance of handling authority with grace. How can such diplomacy shape organizational culture and foster collaboration? Dive deeper into the subtleties of leadership dynamics.