One of my
dearest and closest friends from my Sierra college experience is of Filipino ancestry
and was raised in Hong
Kong . He is an amazing individual who recently
transferred to UCLA. We worked very
closely in leadership together on a number of on and off campus projects. We had to constantly learn how to adapt to
one another’s extremely opposite communication and leadership styles; mine
which is known to be more direct than most (male or female), and his which I
viewed as too passive for leadership. This seemed odd as I knew we both
possessed strong leadership abilities. I attributed our differences more to
personality differences than cultural since he seemed well integrated into
American society.
I have come to
realize after reading this week’s text that our communication style differences
have most likely had more to do with the fact that he originally comes from a
high-context culture and I come from a low-context culture.
He does not
have an automobile, and the Sacramento region is not known for its ease of
public transportation. Given my recent
understanding of high and low context cultures’ affect on communication, I now
understand why he never directly asked me for a ride somewhere, but would
indirectly mention his “working on transportation.” I often picked him up in my car, and would
sometimes be frustrated that he didn’t just come out and ask me to pick him up.
I mentioned to this to him many times, asking him to “just come out and ask
me.” I understand now that he was simply
doing what he felt was proper and respectful.
He was not being passive. He was
conducting himself according to his high-context, verbal-indirectness cultural
upbringing. I can’t wait to share this
new revelation and understanding with him when I visit him in southern California next month.
No comments:
Post a Comment