A couple of months ago, a former colleague, whom I'll call Prof.
Kawata, invited me out to dinner as a way of thanking me for a favor I
had done for him. We had a bit of back-and-forth with e-mails to figure
out an evening that was good for both of our schedules, the type of
cuisine we might enjoy, and to relay that his wife, whom I was also
acquainted with, would join us. Then the day before we were to meet,
Prof. Kawata sent me the final confirmation. In a list in Japanese he
wrote the following items with the relevant details added: participants,
date and time, venue, address, telephone number.
It was convenient to have all the pertinent information summed up
succinctly, but to me the format also seemed a bit strange for a social
occasion, particularly the participants' field, when there were only
three of us and we all knew each other pretty well. On the other hand,
it could be argued that this was the most vital point of all to confirm.
Undoubtedly many people have had the experience of showing up for an
event and being startled to find fewer, or more--or simply
different--faces than anticipated. Prof. Kawata's minimal yet thorough
notification left no risk of such an unsettling surprise.
With due discretion I investigated other people's reactions to this
style of invitation. Most of the Japanese acquaintances I asked found
the way of writing a bit formal or businesslike for the small social
gathering, but they tended to shrug and point out that it was practical.
Many of the Americans I asked judged it a tad uncouth and somewhat
off-putting, feeling it would be friendlier and more natural to abandon
the point-by-point communicative form in favor of some connected
sentences, like, "The dinner will be the three of us--you, me, and my
wife. We'll meet at...." For them, generally speaking, amiability
trumped expediency.
It was one of those little, quirky things, certainly not a big deal
in any way. But what I found most interesting was my own contemplation
of the tersely formulated dinner confirmation, when I became aware that
in my mind I was reflexively linking it to "uncertainty avoidance." And
then wondering whether that was precisely what I ought to be doing or
not.
Uncertainty avoidance, or UA, is one of five cultural values and
behaviors identified by the well-known organizational anthropologist
Geert Hofstede, based primarily on data obtained through more than
116,000 questionnaires completed by IBM employees from 72 countries in
20 languages. Hofstede suggests "Ways of coping with uncertainty belong
to the cultural heritage of societies, and they are transferred and
reinforced through basic institutions such as the family, the school,
and the state." Among 50 countries and three regions, Hoftstede's
uncertainty avoidance index ranks Japan seventh, with an actual score of
92, and the United States ranks 43rd, with a score of 46. Citizens of
countries with high UA rankings are characterized as relying heavily on
rules and rituals, following well-defined and strictly upheld ways of
doing things. People of cultures with low UA rankings, on the other
hand, are flexible, content with unstructured and ad hoc approaches and
procedures.
In subsequent studies by various researchers, the uncertainty
avoidance rankings have been linked to tourist behavior, product
development, accounting systems, and many similar customs and practices.
Other researchers have replicated Hofstede's study in organizations
other than IBM. On the other hand, 25 years after Hofstede collected his
data, intercultural management researcher Denise Rotondo Fernandez and
her colleagues set out to see whether the rankings still held true, and
found that Japan had shifted substantially to weak uncertainty
avoidance, while the United States had become a strong UA country. The
researchers suggest that political, economic and social change may
contribute to such attitudinal modification.
Once exposed to the concept of uncertainty avoidance, and to the
notion that Japan has a high ranking in this cultural dimension, it can
be easy to unconsciously view various types of divergent behavior
through this filter. Perhaps Prof. Kawata likes to avoid uncertainty,
and for this reason he favors an explicit invitation confirmation
format, or perhaps at the end of a long day he was in his business
communication mode and dashed off the e-mail without much concern for
uncertainty avoidance, simply attempting to get the task accomplished
swiftly and efficiently.
Recent Comments