communication style at the vietnamese and american workplace = phong cách giao tiếp công sở ở việt nam và mỹ

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES & INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST - GRADUATE STUDIES
****************

PHẠM THANH HUYỀN



COMMUNICATION STYLE
AT THE VIETNAMESE AND AMERICAN WORKPLACE


PHONG CÁCH GIAO TIẾP CÔNG SỞ Ở VIỆT NAM VÀ MỸ
M.A. Minor Thesis

Field: English Linguistics
Code: 60 22 15


Hanoi – 2012





VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI

UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES & INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST - GRADUATE STUDIES
****************


PHẠM THANH HUYỀN


COMMUNICATION STYLE
AT THE VIETNAMESE AND AMERICAN WORKPLACE

PHONG CÁCH GIAO TIẾP CÔNG SỞ Ở VIỆT NAM VÀ MỸ

M.A. Minor Thesis

Field: English Linguistics
Code: 60 22 15
Supervisor: PHAN THỊ VÂN QUYÊN, M.A

Hanoi – 2012

- 1 -

- 1 -




TABLE OF CONTENTS
Certificate of originality of project report

Acknowledgements
Abstract
List of figures and tables
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION - 1 -
1.1. Rationale - 1 -
1.2. Objectives of the study - 2 -
1.3. Significance of the study - 2 -
1.4. The scope of the study - 3 -
1.5. Methods of the study - 3 -
1.6. Design of the study - 3 -
CHAPTER 2: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND - 5 -
2.1. Culture - 5 -
2.2. Communication - 6 -
2.3. Intercultural communication - 9 -
2.3.1. Definition of intercultural communication - 9 -
2.3.2. Hofstede’s and Hall’s cultural dimensions - 10 -
2.3.2.1. Hofstede’s cultural dimensions - 10 -
2.3.2.2. Hall’s cultural dimensions - 13 -
2.4. Communication style at the workplace - 15 -
2.4.1. Organizational culture - 15 -
2.4.2. Some potential problems in multicultural working environment - 18 -
2.5. Previous studies - 20 -
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY - 22 -
3.1. Selection of participants - 22 -
3.2. Data collection instruments - 22 -
3.3. Methods of data analysis - 24 -


- 2 -

- 2 -




CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION - 25 -
4.1. Working experience - 25 -
4.2. Self – evaluation of the effectiveness of the intercultural communication at
the workplace - 26 -
4.3. Punctuality - 27 -
4.4. Attitude towards team work - 28 -
4.5. Decision-making style - 31 -
4.6. Expressing oneself - 32 -
4.7. Conflict resolution - 36 -
4.8. Individual vs. Collective responsibility - 37 -
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION - 40 -
5.1. Conclusion - 40 -
5.2. Implications for people working in intercultural working environment - 41 -
5.2.1.Implications for people working in intercultural working environment - 41 -
5.2.2. Implications for Americans working with Vietnamese - 43 -
5.3. Limitation of the study - 44 -
5.4. Suggestions for further study - 45 -

REFERENCES
APPENDICES

- 3 -

- 3 -




LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1: Definition of Culture by Ferrando. G.
Figure 2.2: Definition of Culture by Levine and Adelman.
Figure 2.3: Definition of Culture by Nguyen Quang.
Figure 2.4: Definition of Communication by Nguyen Quang.

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Vietnamese and American working experience
Table 2: Vietnamese and American working experience with Americans/ Vietnamese
Table 3: Vietnamese and American self-evaluation on the intercultural
communication effectiveness
Table 4: Vietnamese and American punctuality
Table 5: Vietnamese and American preference towards individual work and team
work
Table 6: Vietnamese and American priority in team work
Table 7: Vietnamese and American decision-making style
Table 8: Vietnamese and American reaction when assigned a too difficult task
Table 9: Vietnamese and American way of presenting new ideas
Table 10: Vietnamese and American way of conflict resolving
Table 11: The Vietnamese and American evaluation of personal contribution to the
team project‟s success

Table 12: Individual and collective responsibility for the team project‟s failure




- 1 -




CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1. Rationale
Globalisation, internationalization, trans-border trade and cross cultural business
are all terms that have been coined over the past decade(s) to reflect the reality of the world
economy. Growth and success in today’s global economy depend on being able to work
internationally. In this era of globalization, multinational organizations are dominating the
world economy (Shuter & Wiseman, 1994). In recent years many researchers in applied
linguistics and professionals working for an international company have emphasised the
importance of knowledge of different cultures and they agree that globalisation has brought
about the growing trend to communicate with people from different cultural backgrounds
(Borgulya, 2007; Bakacsi et. al, 2002). One of the central challenges faced by
multinational organizations is to manage a workforce composed of people from different
cultures (Joshi, Labianca, & Caligiuri, 2002; Shenkar & Zeira, 1987). Because employees
from different cultural backgrounds often have different values, beliefs, and assumptions
concerning various issues, misunderstanding or conflict could easily occur during
intercultural interaction (Earley & Mosakowski, 2000; Ting-Toomey, 1999). As a matter of
fact, problems relating to inadequate intercultural understanding have undermined
international organizational effectiveness (Lindsley, 1999). On the contrary, effective
intercultural communication contributes to a healthy working environment and productive
collaboration among culturally diverse staff (Tokarek, 2006). Therefore, it is necessary to

study intercultural communication in a multicultural and multilingual workplace. Although
there is extensive literature on intercultural communication, existing intercultural
communication theories still have limited direct application to communication in a
business setting (Beamer & Varner, 2008).
With the increasing importance of the Vietnam market in the world economy, many
international companies rushed and planned to enter Vietnam to explore business
opportunities. International working teams in Vietnam are quite common these days. This
has spurred the need for cross-cultural research in Vietnam. It was reported that the great
barriers caused by cultural differences like difficulty of communication, different
objectives and means of cooperation and operating methods, have led to the failure in
people’s communication at the multicultural workplace. This includes the communication
between employer - employee and employee - employee in the same working environment.
- 2 -




Although in this context it mainly includes opportunities and challenges of developing
global society, the cooperation advantageous for the partners involved may change into
mutual competition. The question like "how to understand Vietnamese/ American people
so as to work with them effectively" has occupied the minds of people who are planning to
work or have already worked in a multicultural organization. That is why the author of this
study decided to do a research on this field in order to investigate the need to manage
problems of controlling and communication in the cross-cultural environment of
companies.
1.2. Objectives of the study
The objectives of this research are as follows:
- To investigate the typical characteristics in Vietnamese and American
communication at the workplace.
- To identify the potential problems in Vietnamese and American cross-

cultural communication.
The specific research questions are addressed as follows:
- What is the Vietnamese communication style at the workplace?
- What is the American communication style at the workplace?
- What are the similarities and differences in the communication style at
the Vietnamese and American workplace?
1.3. Significance of the study

It is hoped that this study will be of great use in helping people, especially those
who intend to apply for a job or are working in a multi-cultural working environment, have
an overview of possible problems occurring when Vietnamese and American staff
communicate with each other. As a result, they can have deeper understanding of the two
cultures and avoid misunderstandings when communicating with each other. In addition, in
the age of globalization when intercultural communication is common nowadays, this
study hopes to contribute to the worldwide research on cross-cultural communication.


- 3 -




1.4. The scope of the study

The study focuses on investigating Vietnamese and American communication style
at the workplace in some areas such as punctuality, group work, decision-making process,
reaction to leaders’ command, presentation of new ideas, personal contribution and
responsibility in teamwork results. Other areas should be beyond the scope of this study.

1.5. Methods of the study

All the supervisor’s guidance, other teachers’ ideas and opinions, and relevant
items have been selected, studied, analyzed, synthesized and paraphrased. The survey has
been done by distributing a questionnaire to 30 Vietnamese and 30 American people who
have experience in intercultural communication in different workplaces. In addition,
informal interviews with the Vietnamese and American staff have been conducted to have
a deeper view of the problems. All collected data and information have been analyzed by
using quantitative and qualitative methods.

1.6. Design of the study

The study consists of 5 chapters:
Chapter 1: Introduction presents the rationale, the objectives, the scope, the
significance, the methods and the design of the study.
Chapter 2: Theoretical background starts with the definitions of culture,
communication and intercultural communication. Then, Hofstede’s and Hall’s cultural
dimensions are presented and discussed. After that the communication style at the
workplace are taken into consideration as well as some potential problems in multicultural
working environment are identified. Finally, the previous studies is mentioned and
evaluated.
Chapter 3: Methodology presents the methodology used in this study. This part
consists of 3 parts: the selection of participants in which the author gives some reasons for
the selection and the description of the participants; the data collection instruments in
which the instrument and procedure of data analysis are discussed; methods of data
collection in which the methods and procedure of data collection are identified.
- 4 -

Chapter 4: Findings and discussion introduces the results of the survey which
describe the differences between Vietnamese and American communication style, which
leads to problems occurring when Vietnamese and American people communicate at the
workplace. Then, the findings are analyzed and discussed.
Chapter 5: Conclusion presents the conclusion, implication for people working in
intercultural working environment, the limitations of the study in which the author states
the reasons for the study’s limitations, and suggestions for further study.

- 5 -




CHAPTER 2: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

2.1. Culture
There have been a great number of discussions and conceptualizations of culture.
However, the definitions of culture might fall into two following categories:
+Definitions of culture based on the emphasis of one or more constituents.
One of these is the definition by Garry Ferrando. He states: “culture is what people have,
think and do as a member in a society” (cited in Nguyễn Quang [2007, p.16]). This can be
illustrated as in figure 2.1.


Material
objects

(HAVE)

Ideas,values,
attiudes

(THINK)

Behavior
pattern

(DO)

CULTURE

Figure 2.1: Definition of Culture by Ferrando. G.
Levine and Adelman (1993, p.17) hold that: “Culture is a shared background (For
example, national, ethnic, religious) resulting from a common language and
communication style, customs, beliefs, attitudes and values.” They take culture as an
iceberg, with one-fourth floating and three-fourths sinking as in figure 2.2.










Figure 2.2: Definition of Culture by Levine and Adelman.


FOOD

APPEARANCE

LANGUAGE

VALUES

BELIFES

PERCEPTIONS
ATTITUDES

COMMUNICATION STYLE



LEVINE & ADELMAN (1993)
- 6 -




The small floating part presents the tangibility of culture (language, food,
appearance); the large one sinking in the water expresses the intangibility (beliefs, values,
attitudes, perceptions and communicative styles). According to Levine and Adelman (1993,
p.17), people are hardly able to see the influences of culture to an individual. The floating
part of culture itself does not usually cause the difficulties in cross-cultural communication,
but the sinking part with its components significantly influences on people’s behavior and
in interaction.
+Definitions of culture based on the contrast between nature and culture. Those
who support this view believe that culture is non-natural. They put nature in opposition to
culture. The way they see it, what belongs to nature does not belong to culture and vice
versa. Some other authors associate culture-nature with human- beings. They hold that the
extension of ―Human‖ makes ―Culture‖ and that of ―Being‖ makes ―Nature‖. They co-
exist in harmony. This view can be illustrated by Nguyen Quang’s chart as figure 2.3.

CULTURE

NATURE

Human
Being

Figure 2.3: Definition of Culture by Nguyen Quang.
2.2. Communication
The term communication can be defined in many ways. Myron W. Lustig and
Jolene Koester (1996, p.29) defined communication as ―a symbolic process in which
people create shared meanings‖. A symbol in this definition refers to a word, action or
object that represents a meaning. Meaning, then, is a perception, thought or feeling
experienced and communicated by a person. Meaning can be a personal experience which
cannot be shared with others as such but needs to be interpreted as a message. A message,
in turn, is a set of symbols used to create shared meanings. (Lustig and Koester, 1996.
p.29) For example, the words in this text are symbols that form the message that is
communicated. Symbolical interpretations are often attached to certain behaviour. For
- 7 -




example, blushing can be interpreted as a feeling of embarrassment, at least in some
cultures.
According to Larry A. Samovar and Richard E. Porter (1991, p.8) communication
is ―a dynamic transactional behavior-affecting process in which people behave
intentionally in order to induce or elicit a particular response from another person‖. In
addition to the previous definition, they add the proponents of a channel, through which

the communication takes place; a responder, who observe the communicative behaviour;
encoding and decoding, i.e. the processes of producing and interpreting information; and
feedback, which refers to the information available to a source that permits him or her to
make qualitative judgements about communication effectiveness. As Samovar and Porter
put it ―communication is complete only when the intended behavior is observed by the
intended receiver and that person responds to and is affected by the behavior‖. Thus their
definition is largely based on intentional communication.
In sum, communication has been long studied by philosophers, logicians, linguists,
etc; and understood as a process in which the exchange of idea, information, feeling and
attitude between two or more people take place. An interaction is successful if not only the
speaker well performs illocutionary acts but also the listener ensures that the information is
understood in the way it is intended by the sender.
It is evidently accepted that communication consists of two common categories:
verbal and non-verbal as Tosh says:
“Communication can take play in many different ways. Generally speaking, two
categories of communication can be identified. The first is verbal communication, that is
communication using language and speech to share or exchange information. The second
is non-verbal communication; that is communication without the use of language but
depending rather on other channels such as body language, eye contact, physical
appearance, attitude distance and physical contact.”(cited in Nguyen Quang Ngoan, [2004,
p.2])
The definition above is supported and diagrammatized by Nguyen Quang as in
figure 2.4.
- 8 -




COMMUNICATION

Verbal communication

Nonverbal communication

Intralanguage

Paralanguage

Extralanguage

- lexicon
- Rules of grammar
- Rules of phonetics and
phonology
- Rules of languages
- ….

- Vocal chracteristics
+ Pitch
+ Volumn
+ Rate
+ Vocal quality
- Types of vocal flow
- Vocal interferences
- Silence/Pause
- …

Body language
( Action language/Kinesics)
Object language

( Artifacts)
Enviromental language

v Eye contact
v Facial expressions
v Physical characteristics
v Gestures
v Postures
v Body movements
v Touch/Haptics/Tactile
v …….
v Clothing
v Jewellery/Acessories
v Make-up
v Perfumery/Artificial scents
v Flowers
v Gifts
v …
v Setting
v Conversational
v distance/Proxemics
v Time/Chronemics
v Lighting system
v Colours
v Heat
v …
[ CCC-Nguyen Quang]

Figure 2.4: Definition of Communication by Nguyen Quang.
Nguyen Quang (2007) argues that the factor of ―participants‖ plays an extremely

important role, especially in the culture that is in favor of collectivism and hierarchy.
Therefore, Nguyen Quang (2007, p.44) proposes the following components of
communication:
-Addressor-addressee‟s parameters:
-age
-gender
-occupation
-education
-foreign language acquisition/acculturation
-marital status
- 9 -




-residence
-Participants‟ relationship:-blood relationship
-kin relationship
-acquaintance
-Addressor‟s power -gender power
over addressee -educational/qualification power
-economic power
-physical power
-Participants‟ mood -addressor’s mood
when communicating -addressee’s mood
-Participants‟ -addressor’s temperament
temperament -addressee’s temperament
-Participants‟ feeling -addressor’s feelings
-addressee’s feelings
-Participants‟s attitudes -addressor’s attitude

-addressee’s attitude
-Purpose
-Topic
-Form -code
-channel
-Content
-Setting
-Time avalability
2.3. Intercultural communication
2.3.1. Definition of intercultural communication
Intercultural communication is regarded as interaction between people who live in
different countries and come from different cultural backgrounds. It is, according to
Richards & Platt (1992, p.92), “an exchange of ideas, information etc. between persons
from different cultural backgrounds”. In other words, according to Samovar and Porter
(1991, p.10) intercultural communication occurs whenever a message is produced by a
member of one culture for consumption by a member of another culture, a message must
be understood. It plays such an important role that Deborah Tannen (1986, p.30) states:
“The fate of the earth depends on cross-cultural communication” (cited in Wierzbicka, A.
[2003]). In addition, Wierzbicka asserts “different cultures, different languages, different
- 10 -




speech acts” (2003, p.25). These differences certainly lead to the great potential for
misunderstanding or misinterpretations in cross-cultural interaction. It is easy to recognize
that cultural hiddens and the components of the four layers of reference interact and
influence each other in not only intracultural communication, but also cross-cultural
communication. Therefore, it is important to raise cross-cultural awareness for avoidance
culture shock and communication breakdown.

2.3.2. Hofstede’s and Hall’s cultural dimensions
2.3.2.1. Hofstede’s cultural dimensions
Hofstede (1980) argues that there are four dimensions of national culture: low vs.
high power distance; individualism vs. collectivism; masculinity vs. femininity; and
uncertainty avoidance. The fifth dimension was found by Harris Bond, which was called
Confucian dynamism (Bond & Hofstede, 1988). Subsequently, Hofstede takes it into his
framework in terms of long vs. short term orientation.
Low vs. High Power Distance
Power distance is “the extent to which the less powerful members of institutions
and organizations within a country expect and accept that power is distributed” (Hofstede,
1997, p. 28). Power distance describes how a society deals with the inequalities in power
that exist among people.
In low power distance countries, the authority is distributed within the organization.
Superiors are dependent on subordinates as consultation on a limited extent. Therefore the
emotional distance between them is relatively small: it is quite easy and pleasant for
subordinates to approach and contact their superiors. For instance, in Scandinavian
countries such as Denmark and Sweden, governments institute tax and social welfare
systems that ensure their nationals are relatively equal in terms of income and power. The
United States scores relatively low on power distance.
However, in high power distance countries, power is always centralized within the
organization. Only a considerable dependence exists from subordinators to superiors.
―Subordinates respond by either preferring such dependence, or rejecting it entirely, which
in psychology is known as “counterdependence”: that is dependence, but in a negative
sign‖ (ibid, p.27). High power distance countries thus show a pattern of polarization
between dependence and counterdenpendence (ibid). There are substantial gaps between
the powerful and the weak. Guatemala, Malaysia, the Philippines, and several Middle East
countries are examples of countries that exhibit high power distance.
- 11 -

In companies, the degree of centralization of authority and autocratic leadership
determines power distance. In high power-distance firms, autocratic management styles
focus power at the top and grant little autonomy to lower-level employees. In low power-
distance firms, by contrast, managers and subordinates are more equal and cooperate more
to achieve organizational goals
Individualism vs. Collectivism
“Individualism pertains to societies in which the ties between individuals are loose:
everyone is expected to look after himself or herself and his or her immediate family.
Collectivism as its opposite pertains to societies in which people from birth onwards are
integrated into strong, cohesive ingroups, which throughout people‟s lifetime continue to
protect them in exchange for unquestioning loyalty”(Hofstede, 1997, p. 51).
This dimension refers to whether a person functions primarily as an individual or
within a group. In individualistic societies, ties among people are relatively loose, and each
person tends to focus on his or her own self-interest. These societies prefer individualism
over group conformity. Competition for resources is the norm, and those who compete best
are rewarded financially. Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States
tend to be strongly individualistic societies. In collectivist societies, by contrast, ties among
individuals are more important than individualism. Business is conducted in the context of
a group in which others’ views are strongly considered. The group is all important, as life
is fundamentally a cooperative experience. Conformity and compromise help maintain
group harmony. China, Panama, and South Korea are examples of strongly collectivist
societies.
The two dimensions (power distance and individualism) tend to be negatively
correlated: larger power distance countries are also likely to be more collectivist; small
power distance countries are more individualist. When the authority is distributed, people
are likely to be individualist. When the authority is centralized people are likely to be
collectivist.
Masculinity vs. Femininity

Masculinity and femininity means the extent of how the society views the role of
male and female. In ―masculinity‖ society, people are more competitive, assertive, and
ambitious. Moreover, accumulated wealth and material possessions are always valued
(Usunier & Lee, 2005). People in this society focus on career and earning money, and may
care little for others. Typical examples include Australia and Japan. The United States is a
moderately masculine society. Hispanic cultures are relatively masculine and display a zest
- 12 -




for action, daring, and competitiveness. In business, the masculinity dimension manifests
as self-confidence, proactiveness, and leadership. Managers in masculine cultures are
assertive decision-makers. They believe in facts rather than group discussions (Newman &
Nollen, 1996).
Conversely, in feminine cultures, such as the Scandinavian countries, both men and
women emphasize nurturing roles, interdependence among people, and caring for less
fortunate people; relationships and quality of life are more valuable (ibid). Sweden is
considered by Hofstede (1997) to be the most ―feminine‖ country. Feminine managers are
―intuitive rather than decisive for consensus‖ and they listen to the suggestions of the
groups (Hofstede, 1997, p. 94-96).
In feminine cultures welfare of the society is valued: people are caring for others,
sympathy for the weak and pay more attention to the quality of life; while, in masculine
cultures power and material progress are valued: gender roles are clearly distinct, people
respect for the strong and pay more attention to competition and performance (ibid).
Uncertainty Avoidance
Uncertainty avoidance is defined as ―the extent to which the members of a culture
feel threatened by uncertain or unknown situations‖ (Hofstede, 1991). This represents the
extent to which people accept or avoid feelings of uncertainty. People in societies with
high uncertainty avoidance create institutions that minimize risk and ensure financial

security. They want predictable and definite futures. Companies emphasize stable careers
and produce many rules to regulate worker actions and minimize ambiguity. Managers
may be slow to make decisions before they investigate the nature and potential outcomes
of several options. Belgium, France, and Japan are said to possess people who are
motivated to avoid uncertainty in their worklines.
Societies that score low on uncertainty avoidance socialize their members to accept
and become accustomed to uncertainty. For example, some people thrive on the excitement
and stimulation they experience from the prospect of challenges and new opportunities.
Managers are entrepreneurial and relatively comfortable about taking risks, and make
decisions relatively quickly. People accept each day as it comes and take their jobs in stride
because they are less concerned about ensuring their future. They tend to tolerate behavior
and opinions different from their own because they do not feel threatened by them. India,
Ireland, Jamaica, and the United States are leading examples of countries with low
uncertainty avoidance.