Content area
Full Text
Executive Overview
Much of our cross-cultural training and research occurs within the framework of bipolar cultural dimensions. While this sophisticated stereotyping is helpful to a certain degree, it does not convey the complexity found within cultures. People working across cultures are frequently surprised by cultural paradoxes that do not seem to fit the descriptions they have learned. The authors identify the sources of cultural paradoxes and introduce the idea of value trumping. In a specific context, certain cultural values take precedence over others. Thus, culture is embedded in the context and cannot be understood fully without taking context into consideration. To decipher cultural paradoxes. the authors propose a model of cultural sensemaking, linking schemas to contexts. They spell out the implications of this model for those who teach culture, for people working across cultures, and for multinational corporations.
If U.S. Americans are so individualistic and believe so deeply in self-reliance, why do they have the highest percentage of charitable giving in the world and readily volunteer their help to community projects and emergencies?
In a 1991 survey, many Costa Rican customers preferred automatic tellers over human tellers because "at least the machines are programmed to say 'good morning' and 'thank you.'"1 Why is it that so many Latin American cultures are noted for warm interpersonal relationships and a cultural script of simpatia (positive social behavior),2 while simultaneously exhibiting seeming indifference as service workers in both the private and public sectors?
Based on Hofstede's3 value dimension of Uncertainty Avoidance, the Japanese have a low tolerance for uncertainty while Americans have a high tolerance. Why then do the Japanese intentionally incorporate ambiguous clauses in their business contracts, which are unusually short, while Americans dot every i, cross every t, and painstakingly spell out every possible contingency?
Many people trained to work in these cultures found such situations to be paradoxical when they first encountered them. These examples often contradict and confound our attempts to neatly categorize cultures. They violate our conceptions of what we think particular cultures are like. Constrained, stereotypical thinking is not the only problem, however. The more exposure and understanding one gains about any culture, the more paradoxical it often becomes. For example, U.S. Americans are individualistic in some situations (e.g., "the most...