Hall's Model of Cultural Communication, Economy and Business in Turkey and the 7-D Model for analyzing Cultural Differences


Submitted Assignment, 2017
55 Pages, Grade: 1,0
Anonymous

Excerpt

4
Table of Contents
List of Abbreviations ...6
List of Tables...7
List of Figures ...8
1.
Hall's Model of Cultural Communication ­ Outlining Business Cultures
(France / USA) ...9
1.1
Hall's Model of Cultural Communication ...9
1.1.1
Context...9
1.1.2
Space...11
1.1.3
Time ...12
1.2
Comparing U.S. and French Business Culture ...13
1.2.1
Context in the U.S. and France ...13
1.2.2
Space in the U.S. and France ...16
1.2.3
Time in the U.S. and France ...17
2.
Economy and Business in Turkey ...19
2.1
Economy of Turkey ­ Introduction ...19
2.2
Economic Development and Economic Situation ...19
2.3
Major Industries and Important Companies ...25
2.3.1
Agriculture ...25
2.3.2
Industrial Sector ...26
2.3.3
Services ...27
2.3.4
Major Companies ...28
2.4
Foreign Trade ...29
2.5
Current Challenges...31
3.
The 7-D-Model for analyzing cultural differences ...33
3.1
Hampden-Turner and Trompenaars' 7-D-Model...33
3.1.1
Universalism versus Particularism ...34
3.1.2
Individualism versus Collectivism...36
3.1.3
Neutral vs. Affective ...38
3.1.4
Specific vs. Diffuse...40
3.1.5
Achievement vs. Ascription ...42
3.1.6
Human-Time-Relationship ...43
3.1.7
Human-Nature Relationship ...46
4.
References ...49

5

6
List of Abbreviations
CAGR
Compound Annual Growth Rate
Cf.
Confer (compare)
CIA
Central Intelligence Agency
DP
Democratic Party (Turkey)
e.g.
exempli gratia / for example
EU
European Union
f.
(and the) following (page)
ff.
(and the) following (pages)
GDP
Gross Domestic Product
HC
high-context
i.e.
id est / that is to say
IMF
International Monetary Fund
LC
low-context
MBO
Management by Objectives
OECD
Organization for Economic Co-operation and
Development
PPP
Purchasing Power Parity
p.
Page
pp.
Pages
USD
United States Dollar (currency)
USA
United States of America
WWI
1st World War
WWII
2nd World War

7
List of Tables
Table 1: Communication factors in high- and low-context cultures ...11
Table 2: Differences between monochronic and polychronic cultures ...13
Table 4: The Turkish Republic in Figures (Profile) ...25
Table 5: Turkey's biggest Companies in 2015 (billion USD) ...28
Table 6: Important private holdings in Turkey ...29
Table 7: Top 10 Export Product Groups in 2016...30
Table 8: Universalism vs. Particularism ...36
Table 9: Individualism vs. Collectivism...37
Table 10: Neutral vs. Emotional/Affective ...39
Table 11: Specific vs. Diffuse...41
Table 12: Achievement vs. Ascription ...43
Table 13: Past- / Present- / Future-Orientation ...45
Table 14: Sequential vs. Synchronic...46
Table 15: Internal vs. External control ...48

8
List of Figures
Figure 1: Growth Domestic Product - Turkey 1960-2015 (current USD)...23
Figure 2: FDI, net Inflows, current USD, Turkey 1974 - 2015 ...23
Figure 3: Structure of gross value added by sectors - Turkey ...24

9
1. Hall's Model of Cultural Communication ­ Outlining
Business Cultures (France / USA)
1.1
Hall's Model of Cultural Communication
Edward T. Hall (1914-2009) was one of the first researchers in the field of
intercultural communication. He stated that "culture is communication."
1
In his
early works, he defined various concepts of space and demonstrated how
people's use of it can affect cross-cultural behavior. This spatial approach in
cultural differences resulted in the concept of proxemics. In Hidden Dimension,
Hall also described polychronic and monochronic approaches to time. Lately, in
Beyond Culture he identified the context dimension, which distinguishes between
low-context (LC)
and high-context (HC)
cultures. To enable
a basic
understanding of Halls concept, the next parts will detailly explain the dimensions'
space, time and context. Afterwards these will be used to compare US and
French business cultures. It is necessary to say that in Hall's latest publications,
he also described cultural differences in the Speed of Messages, Information
Flow and the use of Action Chains, which won't be part of this essay.
2
The
following explanations should help managers to use Hall's explanations in
practice. However, one should be careful not to prejudice about individuals.
Instead, these explanations can be used to gain sensibility for one's own culture
and possible sources of conflict with others. Furthermore, they dispel the notion
that there is one best way of doing things.
3
1.1.1 Context
Context describes the information surrounding an event. Depending on the
culture, the elements event and context combine in different proportions to
produce a given meaning. In a high-context communication, most of the
information is already within the person or environment - very little is in the coded,
explicit, transmitted part of the message. In a low-context communication, most
of the information is transferred by the explicit code. Low-context cultures
1
Hall and Reed Hall (1990, p. 3)
2
Cf. Hall and Reed Hall (1990, pp. 3­29); Rothlauf (2014, p. 32); Dumetz (2012); Berger and
Hagemann (2011, p. 17); Müller and Gelbrich (2013, pp. 6­26); Hall (1973, 1969, 1963);
Engelen and Tholen (2014, pp. 25­30); Gutting (2016, pp. 47­52); Kumbruck and Derboven
(2016, pp. 28­29)
3
Cf. Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner (2012, p. 3)

10
compartmentalize their personal relationships, work, and day-to-day life. Thus,
they need background information each time they interact with others. HC
cultures focus on interpersonal relations and extensive information networks. For
most normal transactions in life they don't require, nor expect, much background
information. ,,High-context people are apt to become impatient and irritated when
low-context people insist on giving them information they don't need. Conversely,
low-context people are at a loss when high-context people do not provide enough
information. One of the great communication challenges in life is to find the
appropriate level of contexting needed in each situation. Too much information
leads people to feel they are being talked down to; too little information can
mystify them or make them feel left out. Ordinarily, people make these
adjustments automatically in their own country, but in other countries their
messages frequently miss the target."
4
Any shift in the level of context is a
communication: It can be indicating a warming of the relationship (upscale of
context) or communicate displeasure (downscaling of context). In LC cultures,
people can separate conflict issues from the person involved, they even perceive
conflicts as instrumental in nature. In HC cultures, a conflict is almost always
attached to people. As Table 1 shows, the differences between high- and low-
context cultures affect several parts of business. These assumptions are
important for theorizing and researching about interpersonal conflict in an
organizational setting. When people communicate cross-culturally, they need to
know different communication patterns across cultures to resolve conflict
situations.
5
Factor
Low-Context Culture
High-Context Culture
Communication and
language
Many overt and explicit
messages are simple
and clear
Many covert and implicit
messages, with use of
metaphor and reading
between the lines
Dress Code
Dressing is highly
individual and signals
personality
Dressing follows a code,
indicates position and
signals status
4
Hall and Reed Hall (1990, p. 9)
5
Cf. Rothlauf (2014, pp. 32­33); Carté and Fox (2004, p. 18), Hall (1973); Hall and Reed Hall
(1990, pp. 6­10); Müller and Gelbrich (2013, pp. 21­24); Hall and Reed Hall (1990, pp. 6­10);
Blom and Meier (2004, pp. 93­95); Matveev (2016, pp. 93­94); Ting-Toomey and Kurogi
(1998); Gutting (2016, pp. 49­51); Moll (2012, pp. 85­88)

11
Factor
Low-Context Culture
High-Context Culture
Locus of control and
attribution for failure
Outer locus of control
and blame of others for
failure
Inner locus of control
and personal
acceptance for failure
Working/management
style
Deal oriented: get down
to business; work has
value
Relationship oriented:
first make friends then
business; work is a
necessity
Use of non-verbal
communication
More focus on verbal
communication than
body language
Much nonverbal
communication
Expression of reaction
Visible, external,
outward reaction
Reserved, inward
reactions
Values and norms
Independence,
confrontation accepted
Conformity, harmony
Cohesion, family and
friends
Flexible and open
grouping patterns,
changing as needed;
value youth; little sense
of loyalty
Strong distinction
between in group and
out group, Strong sense
of family; value age;
high sense of loyalty
Table 1: Communication factors in high- and low-context cultures
6
1.1.2 Space
Halls explanation about cultural differences in the use of space formed the basis
for the proxemics approach in cultural studies. Proxemics means the reference
of space in human behavior or as Hall describes it: "[...] the study of how men
unconsciously structure microspace: The distance between men in the conduct
of daily transactions, the organization of space in his houses and buildings and,
ultimately the layout of his towns."
7
Hall distinguishes between personal space
and territory. Personal space is the invisible circle surrounding a person, which
may not be entered by someone else without permission. It varies depending on
one's relationship to the people, the emotional state, cultural background, and
the activity being performed. Territoriality is an innate characteristic. It describes
the act of laying claim to and defending a specific territory. An example are
cultures where people tend to establish places that they label "mine." Space can
also communicate power and is perceived by all senses (auditory-, thermal-,
kinesthetic-, and olfactory space). Spatial differences can give tone to
communication, accent it, and even override the spoken word. As people interact,
6
Based on Hollensen (2007, p. 220); Berger and Hagemann (2011, p. 17)
7
Hall (1963, p. 1003)

12
the flow and shift of distance between them is integral to the communication
process. People of close societies have little need for personal space and much
lower territoriality. The opposite counts for far societies.
8
1.1.3 Time
In his explanations, Hall distinguishes between polychronic and monochronic
orientations of time. The monochronic concept follows the notion of handling
tasks sequentially (one at a time). Time is experienced and used in a linear way,
divided quite naturally into segments, scheduled and compartmentalized. It is
used as a classification system for organizing life and setting priorities. Basically,
time is used as a tool to prioritize tasks. One's schedule may take priority above
everything else. Time is perceived as being almost tangible. Thus, it can be
spent, saved, wasted and lost. Polychronic systems are the absolute antithesis
of that: They follow the notion of handling multiple tasks at a time, subordinate to
interpersonal relations. There is more emphasis on completing human
transactions than on holding to schedules. Time is experienced as much less
tangible. In addition, Hall describes a strong relation in cultures between time and
space: In monochromic cultures, the emphasis is on the compartmentalization of
functions and people (e.g. private offices are sound-proof). Polychronic people
feel that separated offices disrupt the flow of communication by shutting people
off from each other.
9
Monochronic People
Polychronic People
- Do one thing at a time concentrate
on the job.
- Take time commitments (deadlines,
schedules) seriously.
- Are Low-Context and need
information.
- Are committed to the job.
- Adhere religiously to plans.
- Are concerned about not disturbing
others; follow rules of privacy and
consideration.
- Show great respect for private
property; seldom borrow or lend.
- Do many things at once.
- Are Highly distractible and subject
to interruptions.
- Consider time commitments an
objective to be achieved, if possible.
- Are high-context and already have
information.
- Are committed to people and human
relationships.
- Change plans often and easily.
- Are more concerned with those who
are closely related (family, friends,
8
Cf. Hall (1969, 1973), Dumetz (2012); Hall and Reed Hall (2001, p. 29); Rothlauf (2014,
pp. 34­35); Müller and Gelbrich (2013, pp. 18­26); Gutting (2016, p. 48)
9
Cf. Hall and Reed Hall (2001, pp. 31­33); Berger and Hagemann (2011, p. 18); Hall (1969,
1973), Dumetz (2012); Hall and Reed Hall (1990, pp. 12­22); Gutting (2016, pp. 51­52)

13
Monochronic People
Polychronic People
- Emphasize promptness.
- Are accustomed to short-term
relationships.
close business associates) than
with privacy.
- Borrow and lend things often and
easily.
- Base promptness on the
relationship.
- Have strong tendency to build
lifetime relationships.
Table 2: Differences between monochronic and polychronic cultures
10
1.2
Comparing U.S. and French Business Culture
The size of the United States as well as the ethnic and regional diversity of its
population make it difficult to generalize about Americans.
11
While the country
has absorbed millions of people from cultures around the globe, the core has its
roots in northern European or Anglo-Saxon culture. Thus, to succeed in the
American economic system, people must adapt to schedules and other
conventions of doing business in a monochromic, low-context environment.
12
In contrast, the French are predominantly polychronic and high-context. France
has absorbed, albeit gradually, thousands of people from North Africa and other
Mediterranean areas, which had a massive impact on its society. There are many
regional differences and distinct subcultures within France, each with its own
character and personality. In general, those people living in Paris and in the north,
are more like other northern Europeans ­ formal, with greater personal distance
­ than residents of southern France, who have mainly Mediterranean influences.
Again, these explanations underline the caution one should have by judging
about individuals. The United States and France are examples par excellence
how diverse cultures, even within a country, can be.
13
1.2.1 Context in the U.S. and France
The American LC culture is defined by the tendency to communicate explicitly
and directly. Society is task-centered (monochromic) and its primary purpose of
10
Adopted from Hall and Reed Hall (1990, p. 15)
11
Within the further explanations, the term American(s) will be used synonymously with U.S.-
citizens, to ensure a fluent reading.
12
Cf. Hall and Reed Hall (1990, pp. 139­140); Haller and Nägele (2013, pp. 125­129);
Rentzsch (1999, pp. 212­213)
13
Cf. Hall and Reed Hall (1990, pp. 87­92); WorldBusinessCulture.com ; eDiplomat (2015b);
Haller and Nägele (2013, pp. 94­99); Rentzsch (1999, p. 176)

14
communication is to exchange information, facts, and opinions. Straight talking
and directness are the norm. Arguments need to be supported with facts and
figures to aid the decision-making process. Logic and linear thinking is being
valued and people are expected to speak clearly in a straightforward manner.
Thinking tends to be analytical, concepts are abstracted quickly, and the
universal rule is preferred. Americans don't hesitate to criticize others in public.
Their direct style of speech may be interpreted by foreigners as rude and cause
embarrassment in other cultures. Especially people from HC cultures, as the
French, see the desire of Americans to debate issues directly as aggressive and
rude. In contrast, in the U.S., coded speech and verbosity is often seen as time
wasting. Americans don't feel comfortable with indirectness and tend to miss
nonverbal cues as a sign of a build-up tension in people. They are not ashamed
to admit what they don't know and will assume a person understands something,
if he or she doesn't tell the opposite. Thus, it is always proper for Americans to
ask questions. They are very open in conversations about private affairs and will
often ask personal questions, which may be perceived as intrusive by foreigners.
An American company is an entity and exists independently from its employees.
Hence, business relationships are formed between companies rather than
between people. A personal contact is usually no requirement for establishing a
long and successful business partnership. Having done so might not necessarily
secure a deal over a rival, as Americans tend to strive for the best deal possible.
Even the relationship between employer and employee is purely rational.
Accountability within the company tends to be vertical and easily observable, as
Americans like to know exactly what their responsibilities are and to whom they
report. Their management style can be described as individualistic in approach,
insofar as mangers are accountable for decisions made within their areas of
responsibility. Technology is increasingly relied on and email is the normal
methodology of communication. Email messages are expected to be short and
to the point. This is just a quick and efficient approach resulting out of the LC
Excerpt out of 55 pages

Details

Title
Hall's Model of Cultural Communication, Economy and Business in Turkey and the 7-D Model for analyzing Cultural Differences
College
University of Applied Sciences Riedlingen
Grade
1,0
Year
2017
Pages
55
Catalog Number
V376002
ISBN (eBook)
9783668533844
ISBN (Book)
9783668533851
File size
672 KB
Language
English
Tags
Regional Studies, Cross Cultural Management, Hall, Trompenaar, Turkey, Economy, Cultural Differences, Hampden-Turner, French, U.S., Business Culture, Context, Space, Time
Quote paper
Anonymous, 2017, Hall's Model of Cultural Communication, Economy and Business in Turkey and the 7-D Model for analyzing Cultural Differences, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/376002

Comments

  • No comments yet.
Read the ebook
Title: Hall's Model of Cultural Communication, Economy and Business in Turkey and the 7-D Model for analyzing Cultural Differences


Upload papers

Your term paper / thesis:

- Publication as eBook and book
- High royalties for the sales
- Completely free - with ISBN
- It only takes five minutes
- Every paper finds readers

Publish now - it's free