Cross- cultural Communication This page intentionally left blank

Attitude to time
Lewis has similar views on cultural attitude to time as the Halls (see 
Chapter 2). He sees time from three different perspectives, which are summa-
rized below (Lewis, 2006: 57–60):
 Linear- active: time is money, something to be saved and not wasted, as is 
evident in American and German culture.
 Multi- active: time is more flexible. Punctuality is less important. This approach 
to time is seen, for example, in Arab, Italian and Latin American cultures.
Cyclic time: this view of time is apparent in some Eastern cultures. Here 
time is not a scarce commodity, as events and situations are seen as recur-
ring. Many Asians, for example, the Thais, deal with problems not in a 
sequential way, but circle around them for a while before committing 
themselves to make a decision to act. Time is seen as a pool around which 
they walk. The Chinese tend to do the same, but notably they also show 
respect for the value of time.
Milton Bennett
Milton Bennett, when Director of the
Cross- Cultural Institute in 
Portland, Oregon, explained his research in Basic Concepts of Intercultural 
Communication (1998). In this he explains the two concepts of ethnocen-
trism and ethnorelativism, which underpin his Developmental Model of 
Intercultural Sensitivity (DMIS). This provides an understanding of how 
people develop in their awareness of cultural differences. Bennett’s views 
are summarized below:
Ethnocentrism: we tend to judge other cultures according to the beliefs, 
values and traditions of our own group. Ethnocentrism may be said to be 
almost universal, as members of nearly all the world’s cultures regard their 
own way of life as superior to those of even closely related neighbours. 
In ethnocentrism, people unconsciously experience their own culture as 
their only reality. They therefore regard the idea of the existence of cultural 
differences as a threat to the reality of their own cultural experience and 
often denigrate other cultures when compared to their own.
•
•
•
•

---

Key Thinkers in Cross- Cultural Communication (2) 59
Ethnorelativism: this is the opposite and involves judging other cultures 
by the values of the people you are dealing with. It attempts to be non-
judgmental. Ethnorelativists recognize that all behaviour exists in a 
cultural context. They are prepared to attempt to understand other 
cultures as a means of enriching their own experience of reality.
Bennett’s DMIS parallels the experience of culture shock. This is a model of 
six stages from ethnocentrism to ethnorelativism which have many similari-
ties as regards the phenomenon of culture shock described by Oberg (1960) 
(see Chapter 6 below).
The stages are seen as a journey from ethnocentrism, being aware of one’s 
own culture as the centre, through the honeymoon phase, the denial phase, 
defence and possible confrontation, the minimization of cultural differences 
to ethnorelativism with acceptance of difference, adaptation and finally 
integration. The cross- cultural learning progresses along a continuum which 
runs from ethnocentrism to some form of adaptation or integration.
At the denial stage, people are unable to interpret cultural differences in 
complex ways. They see differences but do not attribute them to culture. 
They are most likely to live in relative isolation from people who are diffe-
rent, either by chance or by choice. For these people, the world as they know 
it is their only experience and they remain ignorant of cultural issues. They 
rely on wide categories, such as ‘foreigners’, and often resort to ascribing 
stereotypes, without much thought, imposing their value judgments on 
what they see as good or bad in other people. They can stay in the denial 
stage so long as they have little contact with cultural differences.
At the defence stage, people are more able to recognize cultural differences 
through their own experience or through the influence of the media, but 
may still perceive them as a threat to their own identity and self- esteem. 
They defend against the threat of change by denigrating others with nega-
tive stereotypes and by having a positive and often superior evaluation of 
their own culture. This is, in effect, a way of defending their own system of 
values, dividing the world into ‘us’ and ‘them’.
At the minimization stage, people try to
over- generalize similarities 
between their own and other cultures. Differences are decreased, are consid-
ered inconsequential and are not viewed as threatening. There is a basically 
naïve belief that deep down, all people are essentially the same, are ‘nice’ 
and ‘really very much like us’. They in fact lack cultural self- awareness and 
fail to realize that their perception of similarity is usually still based on their 
view of their own culture.
Ethnorelative stages
At the acceptance stage, people acknowledge that differences do indeed 
exist, are important and should be respected. This stage finally moves an 
individual from ethnocentrism to ethnorelativism. First comes a respect 
•

---

60 Cross-Cultural Communication
for cultural differences in behaviour, including an acceptance of verbal and 
non- verbal behaviour, and then a deeper respect for cultural differences in 
values, including an acceptance of various universal views that underlie 
most variations in behaviour. People begin to see their own behaviour in a 
cultural context with increased cross- cultural sensitivity.
At the adaptation stage, behavioural change is evident as people use their 
own knowledge of cultural differences to improve their relationships with 
people who are culturally different. They often choose to behave in a way 
that is more appropriate to cultures that differ from their own. They have 
by now acquired the ability to live and work effectively in the new cultural 
environment, to look at the world less judgmentally and have developed 
the ability and the skills to intentionally change their behaviour in order 
to communicate more effectively in another culture. They have become 
increasingly tolerant of the different views and values of other cultures, and 
begin to take an active interest in the benefits of cultural diversity.
At the integration stage, many people now see themselves as multicultura-
list in behaviour and outlook. They tend to associate with new cultures that 
are different from those with which they are familiar and feel culturally com-
petent in many different cultural environments. Organizations that have 
reached this stage are well able to succeed in a globalized environment.
Summary
This chapter outlines the main cross- cultural research of Trompenaars, 
Mole, Lewis and Bennett, which assists the understanding of the concept 
of culture. The researchers chosen have mainly used empirical studies in 
an attempt to identify the specific key trends that can be used to compare 
and contrast various cultures.
Trompenaars, like Hofstede, has concentrated on a ‘dimensional’ 
approach. Lewis has further examined the attitude of various cultures 
towards time, building on the research undertaken by the Halls.
Mole concentrates on the European cultures, emphasizing the values 
and attitudes relating to organizations and leadership, and attempts to 
explain the differences by means of a schema, the ‘Mole Map’.
Both Mole and Lewis also build on research by the Halls and Hofstede and 
provide an essentially practical guide to understanding different cultures.
Bennett compares and contrasts the two concepts of ethnocentrism and 
ethnorelativism. The various stages also have relevance to the under-
standing of culture shock (covered in Chapter 6).
All these writers shed light on the way in which cultures vary between 
countries. The difficulty arises when one has to look at regional and 
ethnic differences within and between countries.
Culture is undoubtedly a difficult concept to pin down. It is all too easy 
to deal in generalities and stereotypes, particularly in the modern world 
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

---

Key Thinkers in Cross- Cultural Communication (2) 61
of globalization, multiculturalism and the increased movement of people 
as a result of the growth of international trade and immigration.
Although there is no universal acceptance of all their theories, the 
research writers selected have been the catalyst for further research in 
the attempt to evaluate differences in culture and their effect on interna-
tional management.
The main research theories have been discussed in this book, but teachers, 
trainers and students should refer to the important work carried out by 
other researchers such as Adler, Handy, Kluckhohn, Oberg, Schein and 
many others.