The Culture Map

It is hard to predict just what my biggest "take aways" will be from this awesome experience I am about to embark on. However I have a feeling that learning how bridge cultural perspectives will be my biggest challenge.

How can I truly look from outside my own cultural lens?
Are there absolutes on child development and education?
Or are these principles only relative to the context?

These kinds of questions were central to my training as a psychologist. I published research with disadvantaged African American teenage girls on issues of identity and early pregnancy. I published research with Puerto Rican mothers on issues of acculturation and mother-infant attachment.  And I worked in several inner city schools in Baltimore.  I, myself, am bicultural and bilingual (Cuban and American).  However, during my last 10 years in Cape Elizabeth the opportunity to learn about cultural differences has not been as obvious.  But our Portland and our state are changing.  And our school's mission also challenges our students to be part of "global communities" and participate in a "dynamic and diverse world".

In The Culture Map by Erin Meyer issues of cross cultural interpersonal communication are thoughtfully laid out. (see CNN video clip)

There are eight dimensions she proposes:

• Communicating (low context vs. high context)
• Evaluating (direct vs. indirect feedback)
• Persuading (principals vs. applications)
• Leading (egalitarian vs. hierarchical)
• Deciding (consensual vs. top down)
• Trusting (task based vs. relationship based)
• Disagreeing (confrontational vs. avoiding confrontation)
• Scheduling (linear time vs. flexible time)

I will keep returning to these during my fellowship. But here are two -- Communicating and Evaluating -- that I think I will immediately put to use. 

Americans are low context communicators. We value explicit, simple and direct language.  We assume our listeners do not share the same context as ours, so we simplify.  When giving presentations the adage is: Tell them what you will say, say it, tell them what you said. As evidence for this English is one of the languages with the greatest number of words (more than 500,000 by some estimates), suggesting a high degree of specificity for each and every word. 

Indians, on the other hand, are high context communicators. Messages are nuanced and multi-layered. You listen as much to what as said as to what is not said. Inferencing and "reading between the lines" is critical. You must "listen to the air".  As evidence of this Hindi, one of the most common languages in India, has a high percentage of words that can be interpreted in multiple ways depending on the context.

From The Culture Map, by Erin Meyer

The other dimension is how negative feedback is given. In the US, negative feedback is typically sandwiched between positive feedback so as to soften the blow.  Across all countries we fall along the middle of the continuum, with Germans and Dutch on the very direct end of the continuum and Japanese on the indirect end.  In India, feedback is give more indirectly in general than the US, unless a superior is directing a subordinate.  Then feedback can be given in a very direct and seemingly harsh way (to the US observer). 

What does this mean for my first days at Taktse?

I will listen with all my senses taking into account the words spoken, not spoken, body language of the speaker, body language of the other listeners. I try to "see" the implicit assumptions and ask about them. I will try to listen to what is meant, as opposed to what is said. I will ask clarifying questions. Sometimes a "yes", may really mean "no". 

I will withhold judgements and feedback until fully immersing myself in the school culture, routines and instruction.  When I do offer feedback, I will offer it slowly over time and across meetings, not in quickly in a bulleted format in one sitting.  I may use "downgraders" (kind of, sort of, a bit, maybe). 

Phew!.... and if all else fails, Meyer recommends self-deprecating humor.