A focus on cultural competency among Foreign Service members can prevent misunderstandings that have the potential to trigger broader conflicts.

BY CHARLES MORRILL

The Minister Counselor took a deep breath, leaned back in his chair, and said in a Southern drawl, “I do not like it when I am inter-rupted.”

“The pause was so long I thought you had passed out,” muttered his subordinate, a fast-talking New Yorker, under his breath.

Everyone filters messages through the lens of their own culture as they interpret the paralinguistic cues and prosodic features, including contextualization, that help them infer meaning. Even between people who share the same ethnicity, race, class, and gender, there are abundant opportunities for misunderstanding. What one person perceives as a normal give-and-take in a conversation, the other may interpret as rudeness or disrespect.

As the Foreign Service becomes more inclusive, there will inevitably be greater opportunity for cross-cultural misunderstandings. And, of course, the very nature of diplomacy requires near-constant communication with people of very different backgrounds and with different goals for the conversation.

In her book Get Along, Get It Done, Get Ahead: Interpersonal Communication in the Diverse Workplace, Geraldine Hynes argues that managers need to develop what she refers to as “cultural competence.” After diversity and inclusion, Hynes notes that cultural competency is the third attribute that organizations need to take into consideration when recruiting and promoting effective leaders. Nowhere is this more true than in a global, multicultural setting such as an embassy.

Listenership, Intonation, and Indirectness

Another communication expert, Georgetown University professor Deborah Tannen, writes in “That’s Not What I Meant!” that cross-cultural communication is not only about “pacing and pausing” but also about when to talk, what to say, and how we say it. Body language and eye contact are nonverbal, paralinguistic cues that often convey more powerful messages than the actual words spoken.

For many Americans, looking directly at your interlocutor when listening conveys listenership, indicating that you are engaged, paying attention, and that you respect the speaker. A typical American speaker will scan their listeners, seeking nonverbal cues, particularly through the eyes, that the message is being received. If the eyes are averted, this feedback confirmation is missing.

In many cultures, however, it is considered disrespectful to look directly at a person of authority. Before they even utter their first word, their culture has molded them to do the exact opposite of what an American might do: to convey respect by looking away when being spoken to.

Studies have shown that for those from cultures in which directed gaze conveys listenership, the lack of gaze when looking away conveys that the person is not paying attention. Not understanding this cue, an American speaker might repeat their words, often louder and in simpler terms, which could come across as angry, condescending, or perhaps even bigoted. When roles are reversed, many Americans bristle if a speaker stares at them intently, perceiving them as domineering, pompous, and overbearing.

Listenership is important, but so is intonation—the differences in pitch, volume, and rhythm that convey special meaning beyond the words themselves. Even when ostensibly speaking the same language, people differ dramatically in how they subtly use intonation to convey meaning and emotion. John Gumperz, a pioneer in the field of sociolinguistics, provides the well-known example of South Asian cafeteria workers who asked customers if they wanted gravy with their meal using a falling intonation, which was perceived by British customers as meaning, “This is gravy; take it or leave it”—a rude commentary, rather than a simple question.

Indirectness in speech is also a major cultural attribute of language that can contribute to a breakdown in communication.

Indirectness in speech is also a major cultural attribute of language that can contribute to a breakdown in communication. Tannen says indirectness is linked to a need to foster rapport while ensuring defensiveness. Rapport is the ability to be understood without explaining oneself fully, or to get what one wants without specifically asking for it. Defensiveness is the ability to save face by reneging if the message is not received well, to say “that is not what I meant” or “you misunderstood.”

For many, indirect speech is strongly associated with tact, which is at the very heart of diplomatic speech. As Winston Churchill quipped, “Tact is the ability to tell someone to go to hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip.” Indirect speech fosters good rapport, even if the underlying message may be offensive.

Build Your Cultural Intelligence

The bedrock of cultural competency is cultural intelligence: the ability to understand and interpret cultural differences. But it does not suffice to be knowledgeable about differences in cultures and comfortable working with colleagues from diverse backgrounds. Cultural competency is about being self-aware, empathetic, and emotionally intelligent. So, what are some ways we can improve our cultural competency?

Improve your cultural understanding. Educate yourself on the cultures of those around you, be it your fellow Americans or the local staff at an overseas mission. Specifically, find out about the general speech patterns: Do they avert their gaze when a superior speaks? Are they known for indirect speech? Do they raise their voice when signaling a desire to speak?

Improving your cultural intelligence does not just require learning about others; it requires learning about yourself. All humans are predisposed to their own culture, which manifests itself as a bias. If you are aware of your own biases, you will be less likely to project them negatively onto innocent bystanders.

Practice active listening. Body language, gaze, and other nonverbal cues can convey a wealth of meaning beyond the actual words spoken. If we are culturally intelligent, however, we are aware that the paralinguistic cues can easily be misread or misinterpreted. Use the “ACE” formula to better ensure no miscommunications:

• Affirm what you hear the other person say by paraphrasing; then
• Comment on this by saying if you agree or disagree; then
• Expand by adding your perspective.

Finally, breakdowns in communication can inevitably happen even between those with a high degree of cultural intelligence and self-awareness. While we can minimize misunderstandings through active listening, they cannot be avoided entirely. When they happen, we can engender goodwill by not laying blame on others. Assume instead that you are at least half of the problem; after all, communication goes both ways.

Use your empathy and emotional intelligence to suppress frustration, understand your own feelings, and manage how you respond. A humble and good-natured response can defuse conflict, whereas anger and scolding can exacerbate the situation and lead to irreparable damage to the relationship in the long term.

EEO complaints can sometimes be traced to a simple lack of cultural competency on the part of one or both parties in the complaint. Unchecked, perceived slights fester and grow as communications and relationships break down. In a global and increasingly diverse Foreign Service, leaders and managers must develop their cultural competency by actively learning about cultural speech patterns of their co-workers and contacts, become more self-aware of the cultural biases that we all possess, and exhibit greater empathy and emotional intelligence to defuse misunderstandings before they lead to a breakdown in relationships.

As New York Times columnist and Columbia University professor John McWhorter, author of numerous works on the unique speech patterns of African American English, puts it: “Language is a powerful form of social identity, as it connects our communities and helps us express our unique experiences.” Regardless of race, gender, or ethnicity, the way an individual speaks is part of their social and cultural identity, and Foreign Service members need to understand and embrace these differences to create connections.

Charles Morrill is a Foreign Service officer currently serving as the deputy management counselor at U.S. Embassy New Delhi. He holds a PhD in linguistics from Indiana University and an MBA from Boston University.

Read More...

• “A Case for Dialogue” by Sigmund Cohen, Jr., The Foreign Service Journal, November 1969
• “Two Ears, One Mouth, Two Hands: Diplomacy 101” by Jason Criss, Howk, The Foreign Service Journal, June 2018