when you're a stranger

Wednesday, October 1 2008

Stereotypes Are Not Always a Bad Thing

By notafish on Wednesday, October 1 2008, 23:50

Anyone who has never seen in their mind's eye the chauvinistic Frenchman running around with his béret and his baguette (and the occasional stinky camembert and bottle of red wine) when they thought about the French and anyone who has never thought that the Germans are orderly and always on time please leave me a message.

While reading Nancy Adler's excellent International Dimensions of Organizational Behavior I came across this reflexion on stereotypes which made me rethink my first judgement, ie. stereotypes are bad™.

Stereotypes, like other forms of categories, can be helpful or harmful depending on how we use them. Effective stereotyping allows people to understand and act appropriately in new situations. A stereotype becomes helpful when it is:
*Consciously held. People should be aware they are describing a group norm rather than the characteristics of a specific individual.
*Descriptive rather than evaluative. The stereotype should describe what people from this group will probably be like and not evaluate the people as good or bad.
*Accurate. The stereotype should accurately describe the norm for the group to which the person belongs
*The first best guess about a group prior to acquiring information about the specific person or persons involved
*Modified, based on further observation and experience with the actual people and situations.^[1]

The interesting part about stereotypes in the end is that they can be used as a tool which provides us with the necessary caution or distance we might need to avoid culture schock. Knowing that the Germans are always on time might save the day when you show up at a business meeting, although of course, there are Germans who are constantly late. But trust me, not all French wear a béret, although many do like baguette.

I find that Nancy Adler's list above answers the question asked by Rashunda: On the other hand, is it possible to not discriminate if you stereotype? ^[2], It is possible, but it takes a lot of thinking about it, I guess. I particularly like the idea that stereotypes can be shaped with experience and observation, which in turn produce other stereotypes, just different. A never-ending learning process.

Notes

[1] Adler, N.J., 2001. International Dimensions of Organizational Behavior 4 ed., Cengage Learning Services. p.81

[2] In a comment to my previous post. Interestingly enough, I started writing this post before Rashunda ever left her comment. You know what they say... great minds and all.

one comment no trackback

Sunday, September 28 2008

She's not Swiss-Swiss

By notafish on Sunday, September 28 2008, 17:12

I came across a tweet by Rashunda today (and if you don't know Rashunda, run to her blog, it's very smart and witty) which rang a bell. I wrote a few days ago about our Culture Comfort Zone and Rashunda's words awoke more thought about this whole "noticing stuff".

The tweet said

the new miss switzerland is, well, i don't know what she is, but she's not swiss-swiss:-)...

Before I actually read the message, I had clicked to see the new Miss Switzerland, and frankly, I had thought, although not exactly consciously, the exact same thing. Not Swiss-Swiss. Which brings me to ask myself the question. What is it that makes us French-French, or American-American, or Mexican-Mexican?

Frankly, I don't know. I think we all have in us some kind of images of what it is to be Swiss, or French, or Chinese. Stereotypes that define our approach of other cultures. Whether the stereotypes are physical (Chinese people are small), or pertain to values (the French are chauvinistic) or behaviours (German people are always on time), is irrelevant. Those stereotypes, to some extent, shape our definition of the world and prompt our reactions when confronted with an unusual situation, a situation where the stereotype is not respected. A bit like thinking that Miss Switzerland is not "Swiss-Swiss".

The strange thing being, when it comes to Miss Switzerland, I am not sure I know what "Swiss-Swiss" would have been, although I am pretty sure I could have said of a Swiss-Swiss Miss Schweiz that she was really Swiss. Which comforts me in the idea that stereotypes are to some extent buried in our unconscious. A complicated thing really.

Not true now, I do know one thing that would have been Swiss-Swiss. And that is purple with a taste of chocolate.

5 comments no trackback

Tuesday, August 5 2008

Why Is Your French So Good?

By notafish on Tuesday, August 5 2008, 20:26

Now that is a question I was asked twice last week-end. People who heard me speaking French to my 6-month old daughter asked me how come I spoke so good French.

I am not sure what to think about the question, really. The proud side of me that loved to think that I am good at languages really appreciated the fact that anyone could, after speaking to me in German, think that I was German. The side of me that's French and proud to be didn't really like the fact that anyone could think that I was German.

Dilemma, if any. So many "expatriates" have a hard time knowing where they are really from, I guess it's a legitimate personal concern. But I am pretty sure I am French. And even surer I am not German. So the question really should be: Why is your German good enough that we could mistake you for a German?. Not that it is. But I like to think so. Sometimes.

2 comments no trackback

Saturday, July 26 2008

I Am Not One of Them

By notafish on Saturday, July 26 2008, 10:44

Via Olivier, in Ici & Ailleurs, I discovered La lanterne brisée some time ago. And the first post I read was one called Regards, which means Looks (as in gaze, not as in what you look like). I won't translate the whole cartoon, but know that basically, the main character (the author) is in Japan and wonders why everyone there looks at her in a funny way. Is it how tall she is? Or her clothes? Something else? That's for the French part, the rest is in English, you don't need me to translate).

This cartoon reminds me of a class I had ten and some years ago, for which we had to write an essay. The class was called "American Culture" and was taught by an American woman. She gave us, I found, a very interesting insight into American culture. I recall some speciific themes she tackled, such as her vision of the right to have a weapon on which she gave a historical explanation (a right entrenched in the Constitution). She was all in all a very interesting teacher. But poor her, she also was American. I say poor her although I must say that until she actually asked us to write this essay, everybody in the class had been rather nice and polite. Some debate had occurred, but nothing out of hand or out of place.

The essay she asked the class to write was rather straightforward. It went: "How has this class changed your vision of the United States". A bit dangerous I guess, but we were in post-graduate degree, so one could argue that we were smart enough to write some constructive criticism. As usual, I postponed my writing to the last minute, which gave me the opportunity to read a few of the others' essays. I was simply appalled at the tone in which some of these essays were written, basically saying that this class had not changed their mind about the United States (which is a legitimate point of view) but also basically saying that the US were a terrible country which deseved its sad fate of recrudescing violence and overwhelming Mc Donalds. In short, the essays were saying that not only the class had not helped, but that the US were beyond help. Although I personally did not agree with all of this teacher's ideas and explanations, I was at least convinced that her approach was the right one, trying to find explanations for cultural behaviours and tryign to share them with a class. She made lots of efforts and did bring some interesting lights on the US culture.

What shocked me most was the utter lack of respect of this process shown by my fellow classmates. To them, she seemed to be guilty of being an American and as such, guilty of trying to find an excuse for everything "we don't like about the US" under some sort of covert agenda destined to brainwash the masses into "America is beautiful". Well. I lived in the United States for 2 years and yes, beautiful things, as well as terrible things make that country and make it a rich and amazing country to observe and learn to know.

But I guess what I learned that was most important is that wherever you come from, trying to defend your own country is probably a mistake, as you will most of the times be taxed of controversial bias. It is easier for me to defend the United States, having lived there, having been there so many times, than it will ever be for an American, regardless of their travel and living history. I was ashamed of my French classmates and wrote a somewhat funky weird essay which tried to balance it all and which you can read here. It is very conceited (*I am different!*), but I think it still carries the point I want to make today, namely that ignorance is not the best companion for constructive criticism.

no comment no trackback

Friday, July 25 2008

Distance to Power, Somewhere in the Middle

By notafish on Friday, July 25 2008, 16:05

One of the book that sits on my night stand in the pile "to read" is a book by Geert Hofstede, called Cultures and Organizations, Intercultural Coorperation and its Importance for Survival. Hofstede is one of the most invoked gurus of intercultural communication, and although I yet have to read the book, I have already been in contact with his theory, one pillar of which is the subject of this post.

Hofstede measures differences in cultures using 4 different scales. Power Distance, Individualism, Masculinity and Uncertainty Avoidance. I had never until recently paid much atttention to those in my own backyard (it is always easier to point out these things in others) but the organisation of the Wikimania conference did bring me face to face with the very real differences in Power Distance in my work environment.

I work for an American-based organisation. Although it is not "per se" exclusively American, it draws most of its work structures from the American way of management, a structure where the distance to power is rather small. The wiki-culture which underlies some of the work behaviours in the organisation is also a very flat kind of structure, where people, regardless of their place in society, their educational background or their age are considered at the same level. As such, Wikimania (the International Wikimedia Conference) leaves a lot for volunteers of all horizons to organize, whether it is the program of the conference or various other aspects, such as promotional material or speakers invitations.

This year, Wikimania took place in Alexandria, Egypt, in partnership with the Library of Alexandria. And working with Egypt brought about a challenge that I did not expect, that of dealing with a very different structure of Power Distance. As mentionned, Wikimedia (the organisation) is a rather flat structure, it is easy for staff to talk to their bosses and vice-versa, and rapidity and rationality of communication often prevails over following tortuous (or even straight) hierarchical paths. The Egyptian culture, on the other hand, has a very big distance to power. Which means that people at the top of the hierarchy issue very clear directives, while people at the bottom of the hierarchical scale will not act without approval from "above". The French Power Distance index is somewhere in the middle, more distant than the US, but flatter than the Egyptian ^[1] .

This made for an extremely interesting constellation in exchanges between the wiki-based (and/or American) team, the local Egyptian team and myself. As a French, I was often torn between the understanding I had of the Egyptian need to refer to authority before making any kind of decision, while at the same time having to deal with the fact that Egyptians had trouble understanding why some people were empowered to make decisions without a title that would confer them this authority, or without any other mandate than the one they had given themselves. I realized how strongly my culture played a role in interacting with all parties.

After having analyzed both sides' expectations, it was rather easy for me to act with each side as they expected, but I found it extremely difficult to be the person in the middle, and to convey the culture differences which should have been respected. With Egyptians, it was very unnatural for me to try and flatten the relationships as would be expected in the culture of the organisation of Wikimania. With wiki-based and/or Americans, it was very unnatural for me to try and convey the existence of power distance necessary to understand relationships with the Egyptian locals.

Of course, this is a generalization of what happened in the organisation of this conference, as it is extremely difficult to put people in one or the other category, but it showed me how entrenched some of my cultural traits are, and how difficult it is, if you find yourself halfway between two diametrically opposed cultures, to try and bridge the gap, no matter how well you understand both cultures.

Notes

[1] See the different indexes on this table, where Arab countries have a Power Distance Index of 80, France of 68 and the US of 40

no comment no trackback

Ceci n'est pas une endive