Sociology and psychology are two of my favorite subjects because they both relate to how the human brain processes the environment around us and how we respond to it, which I find fascinating. Throughout my undergrad program I’ve been regularly surprised by how easily the human mind can change and be influenced, without it being aware of that change or the faulty thought processes it acquires. Culture is but one of the many environmental aspects that influence our thinking and behavior, but in my experience and knowledge, it appears to be the most subtle. Most of us pay no attention to our culture and the things we learn from it, good or bad, and assume much of what we learn from it as “given”.
Culture, as defined by Hofstede (2001) and Hughes, Ginnett, and Curphy (2012) is the “learned behaviors characterizing the total way of life of members within any given society.” The most important word in this definition is learned. Culture is not a given, we are not born with it, and it is not determined by genetics or some law of nature. Culture develops and redevelops over time and we simply absorb it as we grow and interact with our environment. Our values, religious beliefs, language, entertainment, behaviors, and much more are derived from what we are taught by our culture. As a simple example, certain colors are associated with the female sex while others are associated with the male sex in Western cultures, whereas completely different colors (even vice versa) can be used in Eastern cultures. There is nothing dictating the association of those colors with certain sexes, but we take them as givens in our respective cultures and even shun people for not following these cultural codes. Consider how men who wear pink are viewed in the US, while men wearing pink in various Asian cultures is not associated with being feminine whatsoever.
It comes as no surprise, then, that culture also influences how we interpret good and bad leadership. Interestingly, however, is the fact that there are seven main dilemmas that people of all cultures face (Hughes, Ginnett, & Curphy, 2012). What differs is how each culture deals with those dilemmas. One of those seven dilemmas is Goals and Means of Achievement (Hughes, Ginnett, and Curphy, 2012). This is, essentially, how success and its achievement is defined or respected in a given culture, such as material wealth or spiritual satisfaction, or being tough or tender (Hughes, Ginnett, and Curphy, 2012).
My girlfriend, a Vietnamese immigrant, and I have been together for over six years and this is one area her and I have discovered great differences in between our cultures. The Vietnamese culture, and many other Asian cultures, hold spiritual satisfaction with very high regard, with a healthy mixture of toughness or tenderness, depending on the specific circumstance. For example, in Vietnamese schools, bullies are not dealt with by the faculty. Instead, this type of behavior is left to be corrected by other students as a sort of life lesson for the bully and the victim. Children are taught, and expected, to stand up for themselves and fight back, giving victims the opportunity to build themselves up, and bullies the opportunity to learn the wrong of their ways. In this way, both individuals grow spiritually, through toughness.
My girlfriend was appalled to find out that American schools punish children for standing up for themselves through suspension, expulsion, and even criminal charges, even if the child was defending themselves. She cannot fathom that the teachers of such a great country, known for its power and authority, teach children to fear the punishment of standing up for themselves more than being a victim, or that standing up for yourself is punished at all. Yet, paradoxically, as soon as a person becomes a legal adult, self-defense is a Constitutionally protected right, even if the person defending themselves kills the offender. How can such diametrically opposed teachings exist in the same culture? Such is the dilemma of Goals and Means of Achievement.
These beliefs and attitudes towards those who abuse authority, such as a bully, and those who use their authority responsibility and honorably, such as teachers in Vietnam, translate over into leadership in Vietnamese culture. Strong, powerful people who aren’t easily pushed around, but are also capable of immense kindness and respect towards others, are the most sought after in Vietnam, and this type of behavior is valued from childhood, where children who are pushed around are expected to learn both how to stand up for themselves and how not to treat others, and vice versa for the bullies. Yet, in America, we teach our kids not to have conflict to settle differences, and that standing up for yourself will result in punishment, often at school and at home, and then expect them to be self-sufficient, tough adults who stand up for themselves and treat others with respect. Both Vietnamese and American culture have the same end-goal of tough, but compassionate adults and leaders, but entirely opposing methods of achieving those goals.
Understanding differences like this, regardless of the rightness or wrongness of either culture, is extremely important for successful leadership when working with various cultures. Having knowledge of the ways in which a culture you are interacting with handles the seven common dilemmas of all cultures, as well as any similarities, such as the universality of leadership attributes, can give a leader great advantages in leading (and following) individuals from other cultures (Hughes, Ginnett, and Curphy, 2012).
References
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Hughes, R. L., Ginnett, R. C., & Curphy, G. J. (2012). Leadership: Enhancing the lessons of experience. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Companies.
cdl5 says
In a course I took last semester on Multicultural Psychology, we watched a series of videos on how different cultures view conflict. In the Asian cultures, children were left to their own devices when it came to defending themselves in conflicts, while in the Western cultures, the teachers would intervene and settle disputes. Conflict resolution is certainly an area where cultures differ in methods, but as you mentioned, are in pursuit of the same goals: to raise tough yet compassionate leaders.
According to Soto (2017), there are three keys to building multicultural competence: an awareness and understanding of our own cultural attitudes and beliefs, awareness and understanding of other worldviews, and the development of culturally appropriate interpersonal skills. The last key is not always easy to attain, especially when there are stark differences in methods such as the aforementioned. However, there are many steps that individuals can take to develop these multicultural skills, such as traveling, speaking up for oneself, speaking up for others, having an attitude of discovery and change, through education and training, and through experience and practice (Soto, 2017).
This example that you used of conflict between children has implications for how global leaders view conflict resolution. Although Western cultures are well-known for being direct and competitive in their conflict styles, Asian cultures may be adept at managing conflict based on past experiences rooted in childhood. This is why leadership training is so important: because there are different understandings on what it means to be a good leader. “Different cultures have different ideas about what they want from their leaders. These findings help our leaders adapt their style to be more effective in different cultural settings” (Northouse, 2016, p. 451).
References:
Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
Soto, J. (2017). Building multicultural competence. Lecture presented at Pennsylvania State University, Univeristy Park, PA.