The reading tried to make a spectrum with two extremes for the four cultural concepts, but I think one culture can't be just leaning towards one or the other. Everyone has both extremes used in different situations. In my opinion, everyone is an individualist to some degree. However, they are also able to excel in group settings and can have a larger meaning in a group. In addition, I have a different interpretation on the topic about time being monochronic and polychronic. Time definitely is finite for everyone and wise usage is encouraged. People always adjust schedules, but efficiency is not defined by the ability to do one thing at a time. Instead it is the ability to maximize work done towards a goal in a finite time whether it may be one or multiple, it is what defines efficiency. Interruptions aren't a nuisance but just a change in course towards a goal and adjustments are made to make wise usage of time. For the discussion of internal versus external, it is true that there are circumstances that are set. But, change in one's life is still possible. There are things out of our control like luck, however, it should not determine the outcome. The outcome depends on how well an individual maximizes the effect of good luck and minimizes the effect of bad luck. Finally, direct and indirect communications is used all the time and it is hard to distinguish whether a culture is more direct or indirect than the other.
One thing I could relate to my own native culture is the reading on nonverbal communication. In Korean culture, the act of eye-contact is considered disrespectful whereas in the American culture it is good to make eye contact while having a conversation. After immigrating to United States, I have several miscommunication experiences due to the difference in cultural meaning. I think it is very important to be aware of the difference in meaning of various behaviors so that you are able to express your true intention.
Comments