This post is in response to the article, Culture and Deception: Moral Transgression or Social Necessity? (2008) by K. Kam, M. and W. Sharkey. To view this brief article visit: www.natcom.org/communication-currents/culture-and-deception-moral-transgression-or-social-necessity
What is a cultural self-identity?
Not everyone is influenced by their culture in exactly the same way so individuals create for themselves a cultural self-identity. Cultural self-identity as defined by Kam, Kim and Sharkey (2008) is an identity that each person claims for him or herself that reflects more or less the values endorsed by the culture. One's cultural-identity then provides the lens through which a person thinks and behaves.
How do collectivist and individualist cultures differ:
There are many different types of cultures in our world today. Some place more value on individual welfare than others and these are known as individualist cultures. Members of these cultures tend to be more, "independent or self-promoting" (Kam, Kim, & Sharkey, 2008). Collectivist cultures place more, emphasize the importance of group-welfare over the needs and desires of the individual, thus producing a more interdependent self " (Kam, Kim, & Sharkey, 2008).
Ho do they differ in their willingness to use deception:
It has been found that willingness to use deception by individualist and collectivist cultures is quite the opposite of what one would initially expect. One would assume that those valuing their independence would not worry about deceiving others since they place themselves first. However, the study showed that it was collectivist cultures that had a greater overall motivation to avoid telling the truth. The individualist cultures had a much lower overall motivation to deceive. An individualist would likely never be motivated to lie to spare someone's feelings, protect them or avoid harm of another while those in a collectivist culture would. However, if the deception would prove beneficial for themselves they may be motivated to lie to gain advantage., whereas the collectivist would only lie if meant gaining advantage for the group.
How do these cultures rate each other on deceptiveness of others’ messages?
Individualist and Collectivist cultures are true opposites so it is no surprise that so far all the findings have demonstrated opposing polarity. So when members of each culture were asked to rate the deceptiveness of the other of course their ratings were opposites as well. "Highly independent people rated messages that departed from the truth as highly deceptive, while highly interdependent people viewed the exact same deceptive responses as not deceptive" (Kam, Kim & Sharkey, 2008).
How do these different cultures view the meaning of morality? How do these cultures differ on motivation for truth-telling?
Collectivist cultures tend to regard morality strictly as a social phenomenon that takes into account the needs and expectations of group members. These cultures tend to avoid conflict and thus find using deception as a moral method of avoiding the more painful situation of conflicts. "If avoiding the truth will serve to achieve this end, then telling a lie would be the most moral choice" (Kam, Kim & Sharkey, 2008). Individualist cultures see being a moral and ethical human being would require avoiding any type of communication that would jeopardize one's own personal integrity. Lying is a form of communication that could possibly compromise that integrity, and thus would be considered immoral (Kam, Kim & Sharkey, 2008).
Motivations for and perceptions that people hold about deception are greatly influenced by dominant cultural values. The individualist cultures values integrity and thus is motivated to tell the truth so others do not doubt their integrity. The collectivist cultures are motivated by protecting the group and thus are not guided by personal integrity in the same way. There motivation for truth telling is lowered when they feel deception would better serve the group and avoid conflict.
How do these general cultural norms apply to leaders?
Leaders will no doubt follow the cultural norms of their culture, with slight adaptations for their own personal cultural self-identity. It would be expected that in their leadership roles they would behaviour in a manner that reflects the values of their culture. However as Malcolm Gladwell explains in his book The Outliers: The Story of Success (2008) this can sometimes have devastating impacts on an organization, as was the case with Korean Airways. Korean Airways was very much a collectivist culture and their style of communication was indirect. This indirect form of communication was found to be the cause of several deadly crashes because the co-pilots often felt uncomfortable pointing out discrepancies, errors, or question the lead pilot. Thus mistakes, errors and problems were not addressed and in some cases this led the aircraft to actually crash. The co-pilots were not able to overcome the cultural norms of communication in those highly critical situations. This may be very difficult for people from more individualist cultures to understand. It may seem irrational that a co-pilot would not challenge and directly question a pilot when they feel they have made a gross error. These cultural differences are indeed complex and difficult to understand from the outside.
It is important for leaders to be aware of their own cultural norms as well as the cultural norms of those that they may deal with. These differences will affect how people within an organize perform and communicate. Leaders should have a clear understanding of this process and what the expectations will be from followers. If leaders can have greater awareness and thus greater cultural sensitivity then they will be able to adapt one's communication styles to the other. "The result is more effective intercultural interactions and more satisfying intercultural relationships. If we can exercise greater sensitivity to cultural differences we can begin to interpret communicative responses through the cultural lens of the other " (Kam, Kim & Sharkey, 2008).
How can leaders adapt their communication styles to another culture without compromising their authenticity?
When leaders are aware of the communication style, such as direct or indirect, they may feel that they are being asked to be deceptive or hurtful. This can be very uncomfortable. To make the process effective it is necessary for leaders to find a balance. For those used to a direct style of communication they will need to find a way to make their comments softer and approach conversations that might challenge the other person, such as an evaluation, in a well thought out and seemingly gentle manner, perhaps being careful to balance positives with negatives and shape negatives in the form of suggestions (i.e. next time I would like you to try....). Those used to a more indirect style may need to practice making more direct statements, slowly increasing their tolerance in confronting others by adding more detail to phrases they would normally say (i.e. Thanks for your help with the project, perhaps next time we could try....) . It is not an easy task to learn a new style of communication but if leaders want to be effective then it is essentially that they take the time to reflect and adjust their communication styles to a balance that suits their authenticity while not offending or causing miscommunication with others.
References:
Gladwell, M. (2008). Outliers: The story of success. Hachette UK.
Kam K., Kim, M. & Sharkey W. (2008, February 1). Culture and Deception: Moral Transgression or Social Necessity? Communication Currents. Vol. 3 (1). Retrieved from https://www.natcom.org/communication-currents/culture-and-deception-moral-transgression-or-social-necessity
Northouse, P. G. (2015). Leadership: Theory and practice. Sage publications.