FACTS:
HIGH & LOW CONTEXT COMMUNICATION
Example:
Let’s say you’re an American,
overhearing a conversation between two Saudi persons. They are from a HIGH-CONTEXT Culture. Even though you can clearly hear
them, the words passed between the two Saudis may lack clarity and definition.
You have no idea what's really being said. That’s because the Saudis usually
rely on long-term and underlying meanings known by both because of their shared
cultural background. They are also highly attuned to non-verbal communications
and derive meaning from the speaker's facial expressions and body language. The
Saudi person learns as much from the way you sit and whether or not you smile --
as from your words.
In contrast, conversations
between two businesspersons from a low-context culture will be direct and structured, specific. Shared background is not
assumed. The person from the low-context culture will place a much higher value
on the words spoken than on the non-verbal aspect of communications.
On the other hand, a Japanese,
French or Italian person would probably not have much trouble understanding
the behavior of and getting along well with an Arab, because the two cultures
share many similar factors – they are all high-context cultures.
DETAILS:
First used by author Edward Hall, the
expressions "high context" and "low context" are labels
denoting inherent cultural differences between societies. High-context and
low-context communication refers to how much speakers rely on things other than
words to convey meaning. Hall states that in communication, individuals face
many more sensory cues than they are able to fully process. In each culture,
members have been supplied with specific "filters" that allow them to
focus only on what society has deemed important. In general, cultures that
favor low-context communication will pay more attention to the literal meanings
of words than to the context surrounding them.
It is important to remember that every
individual uses both high-context and low context communication; it is not
simply a matter of choosing one over the other. Often, the types of
relationships we have with others and our circumstances will dictate the extent
to which we rely more on literal or implied meanings.
To better understand high-context and
low-context communication, ask the following:
·
Do I recognize implied messages from others, and am I
aware of the verbal and nonverbal cues that let me understand the
speaker's meaning? (High-Context)
·
Do I "let my words speak for themselves?" Do I
prefer to be more direct, relying on what is explicitly
stated in my speech? (Low-Context)
High-Context
Communication
·
Less is verbally explicit or written or formally expressed
·
Often used in long term, well-established relationships
·
Decisions and activities focus around personal face-to-face
communication, often around a central, authoritative figure
·
Strong awareness of who is accepted/belongs vs. "outsiders"
Association
·
Relationships depend on trust, build up slowly, and are stable.
·
How things get done depends on relationships with people and
attention to group process.
·
One's identity is rooted in groups (family, culture, work).
Interaction
·
High use of nonverbal elements; voice tone, facial expression,
gestures, and eye movement carry significant parts of conversation.
·
Verbal message is indirect; one talks around the point
and embellishes it.
·
Communication is seen as an art form-a way of engaging someone.
·
Disagreement is personalized. One is sensitive to conflict
expressed in another's nonverbal communication. Conflict either must be solved
before work can progress or must be avoided.
Low
Context Communication
Hall: "The mass of information is vested
in the explicit code [message]."
·
More knowledge is public, external, and accessible.
·
Shorter duration of communications
·
Knowledge is transferable
·
Task-centered. Decisions and activities focus around what needs
to be done and the division of responsibilities.
Association
·
Relationships begin and end quickly. Many people can be inside
one's circle; circle's boundary is not clear.
·
Things get done by following procedures and paying attention to
the goal.
·
One's identity is rooted in oneself and one's accomplishments.
·
Social structure is decentralized; responsibility goes further
down (is not concentrated at the top).
Interaction
·
Message is carried more by words than by nonverbal means.
·
Verbal message is direct; one spells things out exactly.
·
Communication is seen as a way of exchanging information, ideas,
and opinions.
·
Disagreement is depersonalized. One withdraws from conflict with
another and gets on with the task. Focus is on rational solutions, not personal
ones.