Cross-Cultural Relations

Above all else, cross-cultural relations foment understanding among varying groups and societies. As this paper will demonstrate, this comprehension can prove pivotal in the establishment of other forms of inter- and intrastate relationships, which can bring enormous benefits to both contributors.

Keywords Cold War; Cross-cultural; Engagement; Globalization; Intrastate

International Business > Cross-Cultural Relations

Overview

In 1961, President John F. Kennedy established the Peace Corps, a program in which college graduates would be sent abroad to apply their professional skills in impoverished and undeveloped countries. The stated purpose of the Peace Corps was threefold. The first of these mission statements was to help countries develop their own workforces through training, infrastructure-building, and consultative services. The latter two focused on more intangible goals. One was the projection of American culture abroad so that the values and principles on which this country is based are truly understood by other nations. The other was that the other cultures can be better understood by American society (Peace Corps, 2007). Since that day, the Peace Corps has sent more than 200,000 American men and women to almost 140 countries around the globe, and is actively recruiting more at the invitation of newly established and stabilizing nations.

In a world comprised of a multitude of languages, religions, political ideologies, ethnicities and races, it is a critical necessity for nations to establish relations between one another in order to better understand each other. The exchange of ideas, knowledge, and value systems rest at the core of cross-cultural relations. Cultural relationships, however, are different in many ways from political and economic relations, but form the foundation of these two arenas.

Of course, cross-cultural relations are not entirely established on an interstate basis. After all, nations and states are developed from the beliefs that preceded them — the people that comprise the country. Many of these individuals and groups come from distinct cultures, the aggregate of which form the populace of that country. The histories and value systems that gave rise to these cultures permeate all levels of a country's society. Therefore, cross-cultural relations are often intrastate as well.

Above all else, cross-cultural relations foment understanding among varying groups and societies. As this paper will demonstrate, this comprehension can prove pivotal in the establishment of other forms of inter- and intrastate relationships, which can bring enormous benefits to both contributors.

The Culture & the State

There is a common misconception that the term "cultural relations" refers to the interaction between two foreign countries. As suggested earlier in this paper, this view is not entirely accurate. While interstate relations do entail a bridging (or in some cases, a clash) of cultural gulfs, one does not necessarily need to move beyond borders in order to experience a cross-cultural situation.

The United States, for example, has sewn into the fabric of its society a myriad of subcultures. Many of them are carried over via immigration, others are based on religious tradition. While each of these subgroups of the American way of life are proud to be considered Americans, their cultural upbringing remains an important, if not unconscious and/or repressed, determinant of their beliefs, views, and actions.

In many ways, an individual's cultural heritage is a major contributor to the nation's identity. The Pilgrims, for example, sought freedom to express their religious heritage (which had both spiritual and mundane permutations), and sailed across the Atlantic. One of the most popular foods in Great Britain is of Indian origin, tracing its way back to the days of British rule in the subcontinent. In Japan, a country rich in its own historical development, one of the three forms of written language is not Japanese in origin, but Chinese. Meanwhile, in China, there are literally hundreds (if not thousands) of individual spoken dialects, each of which traces itself back to some cultural subgroup.

There are also countless indigenous cultural groups that, while often seen as a minority, play a significant role in a country's historical and modern society. In the United States, there are a multitude of Native American tribes. In Australia, the people to welcome the British Empire's exiled criminal element were the Aboriginal tribes. In South Africa, the indigenous people have long been the majority — millions of black South Africans, many of whom trace their lineage to Zulu and other indigenous tribes have, since the days of the British Empire's reign, lived under the rule of non-native, white-skinned Afrikaaners. As one observer puts it succinctly, "Without an indigenous modality we are in danger of losing a unified worldview of reality" (Marais, 2007).

While intrastate multiculturalism ideally works to the benefit of the state, it can also cause inadvertent tumult. There was a significant backlash against Irish immigrants in the US at the turn of the twentieth century, and throughout American history, African Americans have been treated with at best mixed levels of respect in integrated, white-dominated society. In twenty-first-century America, the rate of acceptance for various cultural groups has not completely changed.

The events of September 11, 2001, for example, represented a sea-change in the way Arab Americans were treated. The unexpected manner by which radical Islamic terrorists entered the country and surreptitiously enacted an elaborate scheme to kill thousands of Americans was only exacerbated in the public's eyes by the fact that they did so exploiting the country's stated heritage of serving as a "melting pot" of cultures. In the aftermath of that inhuman act, Americans began to show signs of distrust toward Arabs and Muslims (Mahajan, 2007).

This situation is not localized in the United States, either. As the European Union continues to gel, some questions have arisen regarding citizenship issues in an era in which state legitimacy is becoming somewhat clouded. The shroud of international terrorism in Europe, in light of this concern, adds intensified feelings of insecurity among residents and political leaders alike. Increased policing in areas particularly populated by those of Middle Eastern descent may be doing more to fan the flames of xenophobia than help it, as many in these areas of greater police scrutiny, according to one observer, "see themselves as mere objects or targets of propaganda. They do not feel like informed or active citizens. Muslim people especially feel the embrace of state authorities as menacing" (Hintjens, 2007).

Cultural relations, on both the intra- and interstate levels, have significant implications for society. Cultures, like the nations they comprise, are myriad in number and nature. As this paper will next illustrate, however, a greater understanding of culture can reap great rewards for all involved parties.

Laying the Groundwork for Political Accord

One cannot discount the significance of the Peace Corps, particularly when one considers the era in which it was introduced. After all, the late 1950s and early 1960s were years in which international mistrust abounded, with two dominant political forces (democracy and communism) building their assets in direct competition with each other. The development and strategic placement of nuclear weapons added fuel to the fire, as smaller, unaffiliated countries lived under an umbrella of fear of an impending third world war.

Then again, it was this ideological competition that gave rise to seemingly apolitical "missionary"-style cultural exchanges. Doctors, engineers, social workers, and others traveled to the developing world to help build roads, address public health issues, deliver food, reconstruct water supplies, train workers, and even foster political infrastructure-building. President Kennedy saw the Soviet Union implementing such philanthropic programs, and recognized that these thousands of emissaries were aiding in the development of these countries in the name of communism. The Peace Corps, despite its altruistic mission statement, was borne of this competitive endeavor to win the hearts and minds of neutral societies before the Russians could extend their influence in a similar vein.

As stated earlier, one of the mitigating factors in the development of the cultural exchange programs offered by the Peace Corps may have been an ideological rivalry, but this element does not diminish the contributions to cross-cultural relations that this program has offered in its decades of existence. Rather, the fact that multiple political entities embraced cross-cultural relations as their vehicle of choice underscores the invaluable nature of creating understanding of differing cultures.

In fact, the prevailing view of the international community during the 1950s and 1960s was that the way to avoid war and put in its place peaceful relationships was to exchange cultural values. In Asia, Africa, and even the volatile Middle East, Peace Corps volunteers were building the grounds for long-term peaceful relationships as well as trading cultures (Young, 2005). The United States was not the only western country to implement cross-cultural development programs in the face of the Cold War. During a seven-year period, seventeen other countries, including the tiny nation of Liechtenstein, enacted so-called "goodwill" volunteer programs (Cobbs, 1996).

Employing a realist perspective, cross-cultural relations does not just help developing countries build the wherewithal to become an international player. Such activities also help foster alliances. During the Cold War, such allies were pivotal in the ongoing Western effort to fortify defenses against the forces of the USSR, and vice versa. Fast-forward to the early twenty-first century, and the view remains the same. We shall now take a look at a similar situation in the global environment that succeeded the world of the Cold War.

Bringing Security to Chaotic Environments

In Iraq, in the years immediately following the fall of Saddam Hussein, the tight relationship between the US government and the interim Iraqi coalition government did relatively little to counteract the foreign-based anti-American insurgency outside of Baghdad. However, this statement in no way suggests that such solidarity is counterproductive — it was important for the US and Iraqi leadership to work together to ensure long-term development of that war-torn country. Still, the real "war" was a conflict for the approval (or at least noninterference) of the countless nongovernmental entities that still hold power beyond the city limits of Baghdad. Among these are the Kurdish and Sunni minorities, but also involved are innumerable clans and tribes, each of which holds some degree of power in their respective regions of post-Saddam Iraq.

The American effort was helped by addressing these cultural groups. Rather than unilaterally entering strongholds loyal to these tribes and clans and enforcing the American military will on residents, military personnel engaged these individuals in a spirit of cross-cultural exchange and understanding. American personnel met with leaders, speaking in Arabic and demonstrating the utmost respect for these senior individuals and groups. In exchange, the American military garnered important information about the activities of foreign-born insurgents. One commander observed that this tactic created a sense of mutual respect and forged long-term friendships that proved invaluable to fighting against al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations:

As the example above illustrates, the employment of cross-cultural relations has even found a home in military and security operations.

Of course, political stability and military security are not the only elements of society that stand to benefit from cross-cultural relationships. We shall next turn to the true driving force behind the global economy: international business.

Building Economic Relationships

Culture is often seen as a separate concept from business. Businesses, after all, tend to create their own individual cultures in terms of policy, protocols and even corporate philosophies. Ethnicity, religious affiliation, race, or the heritage that stems from such elements are usually expected to be overlooked in the face of individual productivity, personal conduct, and contributions to corporate performance and the bottom line.

However, in this era of globalization, wherein multinational corporations are prominent in every corner of the world, culture plays a role in business. After all, the above notion of individual philosophies as an afterthought to business productivity may hold true when the company in question is based within the culture from whence it was developed. If, however, a company seeks to expand into a foreign country, where values, philosophies, and other cultural traits are considerably different than those with which it is familiar, culture becomes a central factor in that business's growth.

In this vein, therefore, cross-cultural relationship-building is an element that cannot be underestimated. After all, most of the individuals that that company will hire to do work in the foreign country in question claim a local culture that may be significantly different from American or European culture. Without an understanding of the culture in which a company is about to be immersed, the corporation may not see much success. However, with an appreciation of the way of life from which their employees hail, strong business relationships may pave the way to strong productivity.

3M, the Minnesota-based diversified technology corporation, took this point to heart. When expanding operations into the newly capitalist economy of Russia, the company performed careful analysis of that country's cultural traits and customs. They did so primarily out of concern regarding Russia's increasingly unfavorable reputation as a place where corruption abounds and business is unconcerned with long-term investments (preferring instead the quick return). However, 3M saw double-digit sales growth in Russia, in large part due to the adoption of its employees' cultural attributes. Tapping into the people's attitude that favors a group mentality rather than individual practice, for example, 3M developed a cooperative team dynamic that plays on this cultural notion. Additionally, the Russian practice of local philanthropy has also become a 3M activity, as that company has donated reflective badges to schoolchildren and contributed heavily to the repair and reconstruction of local churches. The company has become a beacon of inspiration for many Russians, due in no small part to its careful examination of Russian cultural practices (Gratchev, 2001).

Indeed, in this era of globalization, it is likely that multinational corporations will need to understand the cultures from which they draw their international workforces. As the example of 3M demonstrates, cross-cultural relationship building can be an invaluable tool for twenty-first-century corporate success.

Conclusions

It can be said that, as international political relations are vital to maintaining connectivity between governmental entities, cross-cultural relations are important to establishing better lines of communication and understanding between the peoples who comprise those nations.

President Kennedy made this point clear when, in 1961, he challenged an audience at the University of Michigan to join his Peace Corps. This program has, since its inception, sent hundreds of thousands of Americans to developing countries for two purposes. The first of these goals is to help those nations build (or rebuild) a modern infrastructure capable of joining the international community. The second is to promote bilateral cultural understanding.

The Peace Corps's overwhelming success underscores the point that cross-cultural relations are essential in a global community. The vision of the leaders who, even before Kennedy's program, sent volunteers to engage other societies, reflects their recognition of the enormous potential benefits of such relationships.

The most interesting aspect of cross-cultural relations is the fact that such activities do not necessarily cross borders. Rather, they are the connections between the individual ideologies and groups that, in part or in full, comprise the populations of those states. In multicultural societies, such as the tapestry of cultures contained within the United States, this point means that the relationships that result from such endeavors are not always the same in scope. They are as myriad as the varying groups they involve.

Still, this specificity is all the more beneficial to the pursuit of connectivity. As the case in Iraq demonstrates, engagement with the plethora of tribes, clans, minorities, and disenfranchised subgroups of the post-Saddam regime has proven useful for American military personnel seeking to establish order and repel al-Qaeda-affiliated foreign insurgents in areas outside of Baghdad.

The benefits of cross-cultural relationship-building are plentiful. This paper has illustrated a few such positive outcomes in the establishment of such relationships. First, cross-cultural relationships can help foment long-term alliances. The case of the Peace Corps, for example is illustrative of the correctly perceived belief that such development and assistance programs can foster positive relationships that can lead to national-level political, security, trade and economic partnerships. Kennedy pointed out that the Soviet Union's goal in such endeavors gave Russia inroads to reap these benefits — the Peace Corps, however noble in substance, was also an offshoot of Cold War competition over the minds and hearts of potential allies to counter the communist threat.

Outside of the political arena, economics and business also stands to gain from the employment of cross-cultural relations. As shown in this essay, one multinational corporation took what many perceived as a risk — investment in a Russian environment that, while steeped in potential as a large and newly liberalized economy, was still mired in business corruption, organized crime, a poorly trained workforce, and unstable infrastructure. 3M, however, took account of the attitudes of the Russian worker, and used what it knew of the workforce's system of beliefs to modify its way of doing business. As shown by the marked profit margin during that short time, cross-cultural networking can pay off for multinational corporations.

Cross-cultural relationships operate within as well as beyond borders. In a way, such practices mirror a world in which borders are dissipating in the face of multinational economic and political networks. Cultures continuously evolve and, as such, are not easily quantified. Still, the very notion of linking cultures bilaterally (or multilaterally) can create strong potentials for profitability, stability, and peace in the twenty-first century.

Terms & Concepts

Cold War: Period that began in earnest after the Second World War, in which Western and Soviet governments acted as rivals for global pre-eminence.

Cross-Cultural: Concept in which connections are made between ethnicities, religious groups, and other subgroups within a society.

Engagement: Policy in which parties are drawn together for the purposes of exchanging ideas and conducting negotiations for mutual benefit.

Globalization: Trend in which business moves into interstate commerce as the dominant means of conducting operations.

Intrastate: Policies and happenings that occur within state borders.

Bibliography

Cobbs, E. A. (1996). Decolonization, the Cold War, and the foreign policy of the Peace Corps. Diplomatic History, 20, 79. Retrieved December 17, 2007, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=9602063010&site=ehost-live

Eisenstadt, M. (2007). Iraq. Military Review, 87, 16-31. Retrieved December 17, 2007, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=27186693&site=ehost-live

Gratchev, M. (2001). Making the most of cultural differences. Harvard Business Review, 79, 28-30. Retrieved December 18, 2007, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=5329056&site=bsi-live

Hintjens, H. M. (2007). Citizenship under siege in the brave new Europe. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 10, 409-414. Retrieved December 16, 2007, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=26668791&site=ehost-live

Lo, K. D. (2012). Chinese Guanxi and Anglo-American networking: A comparative investigation of cross-cultural interpersonal business relationships. Journal of International Management Studies (1993-1034), 7, 216-223. Retrieved November 26, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=87514176

Mahajan, G. (2007). Multiculturalism in the age of terror. Political Studies Review, 5, 317-336.

Marais, L., & Marais, L. C. (2007). Walking between worlds. International Social Work, 50, 809-820. Retrieved December 16, 2007, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=27588476&site=ehost-live

Nini, Y. (2013). Cross-cultural industrial relations in the context of socioeconomic changes: The West, the East, and the emerging markets. Journal of International Business Research, 12, 93-112. Retrieved November 26, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=87743121

Peace Corps. (2007). Retrieved December 16, 2007, from http://www.peacecorps.gov/index.cfm?shell=learn.whatispc.mission.

Young, Y. K. (2005). Inquiry in intercultural and development communication. Journal of Communication, 55, 554-577.

Zofi, Y. (2012). Why cross-cultural communication is critical to virtual teams and how to overcome the intercultural disconnect. People & Strategy, 35, 7-8. Retrieved November 26, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=84384537

Suggested Reading

Frase, M. (2007). Show all employees a wider world. HRMagazine, 52, 98-102. Retrieved December 20, 2007, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=25293588&site=bsi-live

Friedman, H., Glover, G., Sims, E., Culhane, E., Guest, M., & Van Driel, M. (2013). Cross-cultural competence: Performance-based assessment and training. Organization Development Journal, 31, 18-30. Retrieved November 26, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=89175974

Ragotte, J. (2007). International flair. Direct, 19, 22. Retrieved December 20, 2007, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=27106580&site=bsi-live

Scholtens, B., & Dam, L. (2007). Cultural values and international differences in business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 75, 273-284. Retrieved December 20, 2007, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=26618796&site=bsi-live

Wofford, H. (1985). The new work begins at home. Nation, 241, 577-579. Retrieved December 17, 2007, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=11024318&site=ehost-live