Intercultural Business Communication

Question: Discuss about the Intercultural Business Communication. Answer: Introduction Intercultural business communication is a form of organizational communication, where organizations share information across different social groups and different culture. This study will describe the cultural differences of Japan with Australia and New Zealand. Moreover, the study will provide effective communication method for a Japanese businessperson, who is coming out to manage the Australian and New Zealand branch office of his organization. Various intercultural models will also be described in this study. Discussion Hofstede Model defines the cultural differences among different countries. This model can best be used for identifying the differing culture between Australia and Japan. While considering Power Distance Index, Japan has high power index. Social hierarchy is established in the country and less powerful people except the unequal power distribution. On the other hand, Australia has low power index. The country has less social classification and people question about the authority and power distribution. In case of Individualism vs. collectivism, the people in the society or organization of Japan tend to stay together harmoniously. This tendency is also equal in Australia. People in the society and organization of Australia are extremely helping to each other. While considering uncertainty avoidance index, Japan has high index in this context. People in the society or organization of Japan believe in strict code of behavior, laws and guidelines. On the other hand, Australia has lox index in this context and People in the society and organization of Australia are more likely to accept differentiating ideas and thoughts and have fewer regulations. In the context of masculinity vs. femininity, Japan prefers masculine society and women are less likely to get priority. On the other hand, Australia prefers feminine society and women are given equal priority like men. In case of long-term orientation vs. short-term orientation, Japan has low degree in this index and people are restricted within their tradition. On the contrary, Australia has high degree in this context and people believe in views of adaption. They prefer to be circumstantial. While considering indulgence vs. restraint, the people in Japan believe in restrained society and believe that other factors dictate their emotions and life. On the other hand, the people in Australia believe in indulgence society and believe in enjoying life by controlling their own emotions and life. The above model highlights the differences between Japan and Australia. Based on those differences, followings communicative ways will be provided for the Japanese Businessperson in dealing with Australia. The businessperson of Japan should be highly concentrated on the work rather than making reliable relationship with the business partners of Australia. The people of Australia believe more in statistical facts than long relationship (Crossman and Noma 2013). Moreover, the businessperson should always use facts and statistics while discussing any project running in Australia. From the models discussed above, it has been found that Australians believe in simple words in conversation. Therefore, the Japanese businessperson should avoid any metaphor in the conversation while making conversation with the Australians in and outside of the workplace (Yoshida, Yashiro and Suzuki 2013). Too much self-promotional message is highly restricted in Australia. This approach can assumed to be misconstrued as bargaining and demonstrate negative response (Martin and Nakayama 2015). Therefore, the businessperson from Japan should avoid too much self-promotional message while making contract with Australian business partners. Australians like humor in their conversation, as they are outward. Humors seem to be persuasive in all business situation as well as public life of Australia. Therefore, the Japanese businessperson should be open in conversation and use humors in the speech both in and outside of the workplace (Daly et al. 2015). Employees should also be provided with higher value in their workplace. Hofstede model can also be used for indentifying the cultural differences between Japan and New Zealand. In case of power distance index, Japan has high power index. Less powerful people in society and organizations of Japan are likely to accept unequal power distribution. This index is low in New Zealand. Social stratification is there in New Zealand, but people tend to question unequal power distribution. Collectivism Index can be found in Japan and harmonious society and organizational cultural is reflected in Japan. Likewise, New Zealand has also collectivism index. They are helping and friendly to each other but they are not over-friendly. While considering uncertainty avoidance index, Japan has high index and businesspersons as well as normal people tend to rely on strict code of behavior, rules and regulations. On the contrary, New Zealand has low index in this context and they are more open to new set of ideas. Japan has Masculine society and people have high level of heroism and less consideration for women power (Mao and Hale 2015). On the other hand, New Zealand has feminine society and female participation in the work is increasing at greater rate. In case of long-term orientation vs. short-term orientation, Japan has low index and people are highly traditional, whereas, the people of New Zealand have high degree and they are highly circumstantial (Hua and Kramsch 2016). Japanese are restraint and other factors control their emotions and feelings, whereas, the people of New Zealand are indulgence and they have strict control on their own feelings and emotions. The above cultural model demonstrates the differences between Japan and New Zealand. Based on the differences following business communication can be adopted for mixing with people both in and outside of workplace in New Zealand. The people in New Zealand are friendly but they are not over-friendly. Mostly, they remain reserved at the initial stage of conversation with unknown people (Martin and Nakayama 2015). Therefore, the businessperson of Japan should take time in communication and be highly polite in mixing with the New Zealand Culture. Japan is not likely to distribute power to women. However, this practice is not accepted in New Zealand culture. In New Zealand culture, the businessperson of Japan should employ women at the top position of his office. It would demonstrate high value for the culture of New Zealand, which will enhance organizational reputation. The businessperson should take team approach in his New Zealand branch. The people in New Zealand are more comfortable with teamwork (Chvez 2013). Therefore, the initiation of team approach will keep the employees highly communicative with each other. The people in New Zealand are highly focused statistical data for relying on ant fact, which is unknown. They are highly serious on their work and want same loyalty from the person they are dealing with (Mao and Hale 2015). Therefore, the businessperson should demonstrate high level of seriousness and confidence in communicative with the people of New Zealand. Conclusion While concluding the study, it can be said that Australian are highly reliant on statistical data for believing in any business matter. The Japanese businessperson should highly concentrate on work than on making relationship. Moreover, Australians fever simple words in their communication. Therefore, the Japanese businesspersons should avoid any metaphor while communicating with the people in and outside of the workplace in Australia. On the other hand, the Japanese businessperson should be highly polite and take time to communicate with the people in New Zealand. Moreover, the businessperson should use team approach for the branch in New Zealand. Reference List Chvez, K.R., 2013. Pushing boundaries: Queer intercultural communication.Journal of International and Intercultural Communication,6(2), pp.83-95. Crossman, J. and Noma, H., 2013. Sunao as character: Its implications for trust and intercultural communication within subsidiaries of Japanese multinationals in Australia.Journal of business ethics,113(3), pp.543-555. Daly, A., Hoy, S., Hughes, M., Islam, J. and Mak, A.S., 2015. Using group work to develop intercultural skills in the accounting curriculum in Australia.Accounting Education,24(1), pp.27-40. Hua, Z. and Kramsch, C., 2016. Symbolic power and conversational inequality in intercultural communication: An Introduction.Applied Linguistics Review,7(4), pp.375-383. Mao, Y. and Hale, C.L., 2015. Relating Intercultural Communication Sensitivity to Conflict Management Styles, Technology Use, and Organizational Communication Satisfaction in Multinational Organizations in China.Journal of Intercultural Communication Research,44(2), pp.132-150. Martin, J.N. and Nakayama, T.K., 2015. Reconsidering intercultural (communication) competence in the workplace: A dialectical approach.Language and Intercultural Communication,15(1), pp.13-28. Martin, J.N. and Nakayama, T.K., 2015. Reconsidering intercultural (communication) competence in the workplace: A dialectical approach.Language and Intercultural Communication,15(1), pp.13-28. Yoshida, T., Yashiro, K. and Suzuki, Y., 2013. Intercultural communication skills: What Japanese businesses today need.International Journal of Intercultural Relations,37(1), pp.72-85.