Barriers to Cross-Cultural Communication and How to Overcome Them

This article discusses the barriers to effective cross-cultural communication and provides strategies to overcome them. It explores language barriers, cultural barriers, ethnocentrism, geographical distance, conflicting values, and presentation styles as obstacles to communication across cultures. The article also introduces two theories of cross-cultural communication, Face Negotiation Theory and Anxiety/Uncertainty Management (AUM) theory, and discusses their implications for international business organizations.

1
Cross-Cultural Communication
Institution
Student
Date

2
Cross-Cultural Communication
Introduction to Cross-Cultural Communication
Cross-cultural communication has become advantageously vital to business organizations owing
to the growth and development of the Internet, technology, and global business. Understanding
cross-cultural communication is very imperative for all corporations which have a diverse labor
force or plans of going global. This form of communication encompasses an understanding of
the way people from dissimilar cultures perceive the world around them, communicate, and
speak. Cross-cultural communication in a given firm deals with comprehending different
communication strategies, beliefs, and business customs. In the global business arena, cross-
cultural communication assumes an important role in effectively conducting business with
stakeholders and teams in other areas of the globe. When the communication is effective,
everybody benefits from institutional knowledge, competitive advantage, and increased
bandwidth.
What are the barriers to effective cross-cultural communication? How might these be
surmounted?
There are various barriers which hinder the effectiveness of cross-cultural effectiveness. They
include language barriers, cultural barriers, ethnocentrism, geographical distance, conflicting
values, and presentation styles.
Language barriers: language is among the commonest cross cultural barriers in business
communication. Whilst English is considered as the ordinary global language of business, it is
worth noting that not all businesses globally use English on a regular basis. Workers might have
more difficulties when communicating in English language something which may contribute to

3
misinterpretation of information whenever taking directions, understanding urgency levels and
communicating concerns or issues1. This barrier can be surmounted by adopting a mutual
language to be used by every participant in a global organizational setting.
Cultural barriers: Different cultures have different accepted behavior and decorum, business
ethics, sets of values, − even different gestures and facial expressions. When communicating
with professionals from other cultures, it is vital to comprehend these differences since it is a
show of authentic respect for other cultural conventions. For instance, in the US it is common for
a communicator to share personal stories to build a rapport with the audience, but in other
regions of the world this is perceived as a tedious practice. Humor may be particularly difficult
to incorporate; better to be straightforward instead of running the risk that the joke might
unintentionally humiliate or offense the listeners1. Cultural barriers can be surmounted by
initiating training programs to create aware on how to cope with cultural disparities which exist
among people from diverse cultural backgrounds.
Ethnocentrism: Every culture has a natural propensity to view other cultures through their own
lenses. Ethnocentrism takes place whenever people from a certain culture believe that their ways
of doing and seeing things are the correct and only ways. Therefore, they disapprovingly judge
behaviors that do not match their world visions. They perceive other culture’s behaviors as out of
the ordinary and inappropriate. Also, ethnocentrism leads to “us versus them” attitude that can be
harmful2. Organizations operating at the international scale can overcome the challenge of
1 Rosenthal, Bill. "Barriers to Cross-Cultural Business Communication." Communispond. June 29, 2016.
https://communispond.com/insights/blog/2016/06/29/82/barriers-to-cross-cultural-business-communication/ (accessed April 12,
2019).
2 Lai, Wen-Hsiang, and Ching-Wen Yang. "Barriers Expatriates Encounter During Cross-Cultural Interactions." Journal of
enterprising culture 25, no. 03 (2017): 239-261.

4
ethnocentrism by educating all their participants on the importance of appreciating people from
different cultural backgrounds as well as their behaviors.
Geographical distance: In international virtual teams, individuals do not get opportunities to
intermingle and set up rapports with one another as it was the case in the traditional office
environment3. And the less a person knows about people, the less he/she will share information
with them. Therefore, teamwork within virtual teams is more difficult. Employees who operate
outside headquarters can as well feel isolated. On the other hand, headquarter groups may think
that other employees are not contributing anything and that they are being overworked. Besides,
difference in time zones can is a challenging factor. Normally if an individual is not in the head
office, he/she is expected to cope with meeting timings that are less convenient. Multinational
corporations can engage in occasional teambuilding activities by bringing their teams together so
as to enhance communication.
Conflicting values: Mede, & Cansever, (2017) says that culture is like an iceberg. What one is
able to see are the behaviors, and those are affected by the unseen principles under the water
line4. Cultural conflicts occur whenever other people’s behaviour compromises other people
principles or values. Normally, when a person does not comprehend or does not agree with a
particular behaviour, it implies that there are clashing values under the water line. Some of the
common conflicting cultural values include direct vs. indirect communication, open subtle
disagreement, task oriented vs. relationship oriented, informality vs. formality, and structured vs.
3 Webb, Tom, Christopher RD Wagstaff, Mike Rayner, and Richard Thelwell. "Leading elite association football referees:
challenges in the cross-cultural organization of a geographically dispersed group." Managing Sport and Leisure 21, no. 3 (2016):
105-123.
4 Mede, Enisa, and Zeynep Mutlu Cansever. "Integrating Culture in Language Preparatory Programs: From the Perspectives of
Native and Non-native English Instructors in Turkey." In Intercultural Responsiveness in the Second Language Learning
Classroom, pp. 16-35.( IGI Global, 2017).

5
flexible scheduling. People can be enlightened on how to accommodate with cultural values of
others as an approach of surmounting this barrier to cross-cultural communication.
Presentation style: Culture affects the way people in different nations prefer to receive
information. For instance, how interactive one should make his/her presentation depends on the
culture to which he/she presents. In general, cultures which speak in English language like lively
and interactive presentations. Nonetheless, Eastern Europeans are comfortable with presentations
with few interruptions, and those which are high detailed and formal. All questions are answered
at the end of a presentation. Canadians, just like Americans, enjoy a brisk pace. Japanese
audiences expect more technical information. And Latin American audiences like speeches with
high levels of emotional appeals1. Adopting a common presentation style which encompasses the
preferences of every person can help surmount this barrier.
Identify at least 2 theories of cross-cultural communication that can shed light on your own
experiences of communicating across cultures. What do these theories explain? What do
they fail to explain?
A theory refers to a collection of ideas drawn from methodical study in order to give explanation
of a given observable fact. Hatch, (2018) described a theory as a group of ideas and concepts of
logical generalizations based on scientific observations (and) contributing to additional empirical
observations5. There are various theories of cross-cultural communication that shed light on my
own experiences of communicating across cultures but for now I am going to describe just two
of them:
 Face Negotiation Theory
5 Hatch, Mary Jo. Organization theory: Modern, symbolic, and postmodern perspectives. (Oxford university press, 2018).

6
 Anxiety Uncertainty Management (AUM) theory
Face Negotiation Theory
Face Negotiation Theory shades some light on my experiences of communicating across
cultures. As I associated with people from different cultural backgrounds, I always cared about
how they will perceive me. I worked at maintaining a public image in order to avoid losing a
face and perhaps suffer from embarrassment. I created a positive public image through ensuring
proper interpersonal communication with people from different cultures.
Face-Negotiation Theory was established by Stella Ting-Toomey (professor of human
communication at California State University) in 1985, to explain the way people from different
cultures or cultural backgrounds manage disagreements and rapport. Face Management theory
clearly states that people care about the way others perceive or think about them. It asserts that
individuals work towards safeguarding a public image and when they fail at maintaining that
appearance they "lose face" and might suffer some embarrassments. This theory posited self-
image or "face", when communicating with other people, as a universal observable fact that
spreads through cultures. In case of conflicts, an individual’s face is endangered; and hence
he/she tends to restore or save his or her face. According to the theory, this collection of
communicative behaviors is referred to as a "facework". Because individuals frame the
positioned connotation of "face" and ratify "facework" in a different way from one culture to the
next, this theory creates a cultural-general framework to examine facework negotiation. It is
imperative to note that the meaning of face differs depending on the people and their culture and
the same can be said for the proficiency of facework6.
6 Ting-Toomey, Stella. "Conflict face-negotiation theory: Tracking its evolutionary journey." In Conflict management and
intercultural communication, pp. 123-143. (Routledge, 2017).

7
Face Negotiation Theory recommends the following:
 Face is problematical when identities are at question.
 Individuals in all cultures attempt to keep up and negotiate face in every communication
situation
 Individual, cultural, and situational variables affect the selection of one set of face
concerns over another (that is: self-oriented versus other oriented face saving)
 Individualistic cultures have a preference for self oriented facework, and collectivistic
cultures have a preference for other oriented facework.
 Behavior is as well affected by situational, cultural variances, relational and individual
factors.
 Competence in intercultural communication is a zenith of mindfulness and knowledge
 Large power distance cultures prefer a hierarchical framework while small power
distance cultures prefer an “individuals are equal” framework.
Although an accepted theory, in Face Negotiation Stella Ting-Toomey fails to describe various
pertinent issues in cross-cultural communication. The theory, for instance does not explain the
issue of cultural differences which entails languages, practices, beliefs, and behaviors considered
unique to people of a certain race, ethnicity or national origin. For example, in her research,
Ting-Toomey noted some discrepancies whereby she discovered that Japanese respondents
displayed more concern for self-service than their counterparts, US respondents. In her theory,
however, she disregards the crucial issue of cultural differences between these two groups.

8
Anxiety/Uncertainty Management (AUM) theory
Introduced by William B. Gudykunst, Anxiety/Uncertainty Management (AUM) theory defines
the way people efficiently communicate based on their balance of uncertainty and anxiety in
various cultural situations. This theory also shades some light on my experiences of
communicating across cultures. I always experienced uncertainty and anxiousness whenever
communicating and mingling with people of diverse cultural backgrounds. I always assumed that
every individual within the intercultural encounter is a stranger hence the feelings of uncertainty
and anxiousness.
William B. Gudykunst came up with the Anxiety/Uncertainty Management (AUM) theory
comprising of two subtheories: a theory of strangers’ intercultural adjustment and a
corresponding subtheory of effective communication. The first subtheory was meant to elucidate
intercultural adjustment processes while the second one was meant to explain the processes
subserving effective communication. These two subtheories were tailored to enhance the quality
of their communication in intercultural communication settings. Generally, this theory was
introduced to describe how people successfully communicate based on their balance of feeling of
uncertainty and anxiety in various social situations. Whenever this particular balance is attained
at an individual level, then it emerges very possible to interrelate and cooperate with other people
and communicate concepts to them, in spite of the anxiety and uncertainty which comes with
stranger interactions the theorist argued that for an individual to efficiently communicate with
people from diverse cultural backgrounds he/she must reduce anxiety and/or his level of
uncertainty7.
7 Neuliep, James W. "Anxiety/Uncertainty Management (AUM) Theory." The International Encyclopedia of Intercultural
Communication (2017): 1-9.

9
Anxiety/Uncertainty Management theory, however, fails to explain various essential concepts in
cross-cultural communication. William B. Gudykunst has a limited focus on what is effective
communication. He deeply explained how to achieve effective intercultural communication but
disregarded to describe what it is and its goals. Communication as we have studied in this
particular course is the main thing in a global business organization. Nevertheless,
incomprehensible and disheveled communication fails to attain the most wanted results and
affect work environment in an organization. Unfortunately, Anxiety/Uncertainty Management
theory does not explore this crucial concept in cross-cultural communication especially in an
individual or organizational setting.
What are the implications of your insights for cross-cultural communication in
international business organizations?
The issue of cross-cultural communication has been a research topic of various disciplines for
quite some time. Globalization has led to a tremendous development and internationalization of
businesses, as a result resulting in necessity and practicality of studying cross-cultural
communication8. With the increasing number of global business opportunities, numerous
organizations have chosen to spread out their operations overseas often without recognizing that
the prospective financial opulence might turn out to be devastating situation owing to the
implications of cross-cultural communication with business partners outside of own culture.
A frequently held misapprehension amongst the managers of small organizations is that business
communication is thought to be universal and not impacted by cultural disparities. Nonetheless,
it is clear that people brought up in dissimilar cultural backgrounds think and conducts
8 Cross, Doris E. "Globalization and Media's Impact on Cross Cultural Communication: Managing Organizational Change."
In Organizational Culture and Behavior: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications, pp. 1078-1099. IGI Global, 2017.

10
themselves differently, even in business contexts. As Harris and Moran (2007) say in their work,
“Managing Cultural Differences,” “at the root of the issue, we are likely to find communication
failures and cultural misunderstandings”9.
Sorry to say, some organizations to date do not give enough emphasize on the subject of
effective cross-cultural communication for more well-organized business operations.
Particularly, medium and small firms which opt to go global for expansion and growth of
business, normally fall victims to cross-cultural communication barriers with international
distributors, customers, suppliers, retailers, and partners which, gradually, contributes to serious
communication misfortunes and mishaps and sometime might bring about termination of
business relationships.
Conclusion
Cross-cultural communication is a “sub-domain” of intercultural communication and mainly
addresses the comparison of the variety of ways humans communicate across cultures. Abrudan,
et al. (2011) defines cross-cultural communication as “The presence of at least two individuals
who are culturally different from each other on such important attributes as their value
orientations, preferred communication codes, role expectations, and perceived rules of social
relationship10” Communication ways amongst people are significantly impacted by one’s
perceptions of the world, norms, background, values, and culture. In businesses, cross-cultural
communication plays an important role in fruitfully doing business with stakeholders and teams
in other areas of the globe. However, cross-communication is prone to various barriers such as
Cultural Barriers, language barriers, presentation styles, and conflicting values which if not
9 Moran, R., Harris, P. and Moran, S. (2007) Managing Cultural Differences, Butterworth-Heinemann
10 Abrudan, Elena, Alina Babolea, Oana Barbu, and Claudiu Mesaroş. Knowledge communication : transparency, democracy,
global governance. (Timişoara : Editura Universităţii de Vest, 2011).

11
surmounted affect its effectiveness. What is more, there are various theories of cross-cultural
communication which most of them shed some light on my experiences with people from diverse
cultural backgrounds. Two of these theories are Face Negotiation Theory and Anxiety
Uncertainty Management (AUM) theory. Face Negotiation Theory is based on the underlying
assumption that, in spite of their cultures, individuals are all concerned with saving face. This
theory tries to explicate the reasons behind the dissimilar ways people from different cultures
handle conflict. Anxiety Uncertainty Management (AUM) theory on the other hand, defines how
people successfully communicate based on their balance of uncertainty and anxiety in diverse
cultural situations.

12
Bibliography
Abrudan, Elena, Alina Babolea, Oana Barbu, and Claudiu Mesaroş. Knowledge communication :
transparency, democracy, global governance. Timişoara : Editura Universităţii de Vest, 2011.
Cross, Doris E. "Globalization and Media's Impact on Cross Cultural Communication: Managing
Organizational Change." In Organizational Culture and Behavior: Concepts, Methodologies,
Tools, and Applications, pp. 1078-1099. IGI Global, 2017.
Hatch, Mary Jo. Organization theory: Modern, symbolic, and postmodern perspectives. Oxford
university press, 2018.
Lai, Wen-Hsiang, and Ching-Wen Yang. "Barriers Expatriates Encounter During Cross-Cultural
Interactions." Journal of enterprising culture 25, no. 03 (2017): 239-261.
Mede, Enisa, and Zeynep Mutlu Cansever. "Integrating Culture in Language Preparatory
Programs: From the Perspectives of Native and Non-native English Instructors in Turkey."
In Intercultural Responsiveness in the Second Language Learning Classroom, pp. 16-35. IGI
Global, 2017.
Moran, R., Harris, P. and Moran, S. (2007) Managing Cultural Differences, Butterworth-
Heinemann
Neuliep, James W. "Anxiety/Uncertainty Management (AUM) Theory." The International
Encyclopedia of Intercultural Communication (2017): 1-9.
Rosenthal, Bill. "Barriers to Cross-Cultural Business Communication." Communispond. June 29,
2016. https://communispond.com/insights/blog/2016/06/29/82/barriers-to-cross-cultural-
business-communication/ (accessed April 12, 2019).

13
Ting-Toomey, Stella. "Conflict face-negotiation theory: Tracking its evolutionary journey."
In Conflict management and intercultural communication, pp. 123-143. Routledge, 2017.
Webb, Tom, Christopher RD Wagstaff, Mike Rayner, and Richard Thelwell. "Leading elite
association football referees: challenges in the cross-cultural organization of a geographically
dispersed group." Managing Sport and Leisure 21, no. 3 (2016): 105-123.