CULTURAL ADAPTATION THROUGH SENSITIVITY

TRAINING

Globalization and aggressive foreign direct investment, combined with domestic

restructuring, have dramatically changed the workforce of many companies. As

the world gets ``smaller'', more and more people are spending time living and

working away from their home country, giving rise to greater face-to-face contact

amongst people from different cultural backgrounds.

Globalization not only requires the adoption of a cross-cultural perspective in

order to successfully accomplish goals in the context of global economy but also

needs a new and higher standard of selection, training, and motivation of people.

As a result, cross-cultural training is fast becoming a recognizably important

component in the world of international business.

Cultural differences exist at home and abroad but, in many cases, international

interaction creates problems, since people are separated by barriers such as

time, language, geography, food, and climate. In addition, peoples' values,

beliefs, perceptions, and background can also be quite different. For instance, in

business scenarios, the expectations for success or failure may differ, which can

be very frustrating and confusing to sojourners and expatriates. Intercultural

differences influence international business in many ways. For example, consider

the matter of punctuality or the time factor. In some cultures, e.g. the Germans,

Swiss, and Austrians, punctuality is considered extremely important and lateness

is not tolerated. By contrast, in other European and Latin American countries

there is a different, somewhat ``looser'' approach to time with some degree of

tolerance for lateness. Sojourners or expatriates who lack sensitivity or

- 184 -

awareness of this ``time'' orientation can make severe interpersonal blunders,

and then need cross-cultural training to avoid culture shock.

THE NEED FOR CROSS-CULTURAL TRAINING

Chen and Starosta (1996) believe that people have to develop their intercultural

communication competence in order to live meaningfully and productively in the

global village. According to Landis and Brislin (1983), as the workforce in various

countries becomes more culturally diverse, it is necessary to train people to

become more competent and thus to deal effectively with the complexities of new

and different environments. Thus, the issue of cross-cultural training in

developing intercultural communication competence can no longer be neglected.

People who are sent abroad must develop such competence in order to be

successful. Cross-cultural training has long been advocated as a means of

facilitating effective cross-cultural interaction (Bochner, 1982; Harris and Moran,

1979; Landis and Brislin, 1983; Mendenhall and Oddou, 1986; Tung, 1981). The

importance of such training in preparing an individual for an intercultural work

assignment has become increasingly apparent (Baker, 1984; Lee, 1983;

Tung, 1981). As Bhagat and Prien (1996, p. 216) put it, ``as international

companies begin to compete with each other in the global market, the role of

cross-cultural training becomes increasingly important.'' A comprehensive

literature review by Black and Mendenhall (1990) found strong evidence for a

positive relationship between cross-cultural training and adjustment. In addition,

another survey revealed that 86 percent of Japanese multinationals report a

failure rate of less than 10 percent for their expatriates who have received

training (Hogan and Goodson, 1990). Numerous benefits can be achieved by

giving these expatriates cross-cultural training. It is seen as: -

- 185 -

· A distinct advantage for organizations;

· A means for conscious switching from an automatic, home-culture

international management mode to a culturally appropriate, adaptable and

acceptable one;

· an aid to improve coping with unexpected events or culture shock in a new

culture;

· A means of reducing the uncertainty of interactions with foreign nationals;

and

· A means of enhancing expatriates' coping ability to by reducing stress and

disorientation.

· It can reduce or prevent failure in expatriate assignments.

THE CROSS-CULTURAL CYCLE

- 186 -

The Cross-Cultural Cycle describes the concept of ‘cultural change’ which

represents a transition between one's own culture and a new culture. Cultural

change is part of a problem-solving process undergone by users. Here, the users

are identified as sojourners and expatriates who experience a new culture which

is unfamiliar and strange. In the initial stage of confrontation with the new culture,

the user experiences a culture shock. Then full or partial acculturation takes

place, depending on factors such as former experience, length of stay, cultural

distance between home and new culture, training, language competency among

other factors. The greater the users' ability to acculturate, the less the impact of

culture shock on them. The ability to acculturate and reduce the impact of the

culture shock can

- 187 -

be developed through an appropriate and effective cross-cultural training. Apart

from that, training can also help the users to develop intercultural communication

competence, which is needed to adapt better and perform well in the new

environment. As a result, once sojourners and expatriates have succeeded in

completing the cycle, they will be more familiar with it the next time they confront

a new culture. The change process will be improved and becomes less

complicated. However, the success or failure of the users to adjust and perform

depends on how they respond to the cycle.

Culture

Culture is the complex whole, which includes belief, knowledge, art, law, morals

and customs and any capabilities and habits acquired by a person as a member

of a society. According to Hall (1959), culture is communication and

communication is culture.

Acculturation

Acculturation is defined as, ``Changes that occur as a result of first-hand contact

between individuals of differing cultural origins'' (Redfield et al., 1936). It is a

process whereby an individual is socialized into an unfamiliar or new culture. In

short, it refers to the level of adoption of the predominant culture by an outsider

or minority group. According to Gordon, 1967; Garza and Gallegos, 1985;

Domino and Acosta, 1987; Marin and Marin, 1990; Negy and Woods, 1992, the

greater the acculturation, the more the language, customs, identity, attitudes and

behaviors of the predominant culture are adopted. However, many sojourners

and expatriates experience difficulty in fully acculturating, only adopting the

values and behaviors they find appropriate and acceptable to their existing

cultures. It is a question of willingness and readiness.

- 188 -

Culture shock

Many expatriates experience what is called ``culture shock'' when they first

confront or come into contact with a different culture. Adler (1997) defines this as

the frustration and confusion as a result of being bombarded by too many new

and un-interpretable cues. Culture shock is also the expatriate's reaction to a

new, unpredictable, and consequently uncertain environment (Black, 1990)

Cross-cultural training

Training in general can be defined as any intervention aimed at increasing the

knowledge or skills of the individual. This can help them cope better personally,

work more effectively with others, and perform better professionally. It is an

organized educational experience with the objective of helping expatriates learn

about, and therefore adjust to, their new home in a foreign land.

Cross-cultural training may be defined as any procedure used to increase an

individual's ability to cope with and work in a foreign environment. There are

many types of training that can be given to people to be sent abroad depending

upon their objectives, the nature of their responsibilities and duties, the length of

their stay, and their past experiences. As Kealey and Protheroe also point out,

``The effectiveness of the various types of training will naturally depend to some

extent on the time and resources available for undertaking them, the quality of

trainers, and the possibilities for in-country training'' (p. 149). Some of the types

of training available to expatriates are technical training, practical information,

area studies, cultural awareness, intercultural effectiveness skills, and

interpersonal sensitivity training.

Intercultural communication competence

- 189 -

Many theorists have wrestled with the exact nature of the definition of

``competence'' in the context of cross-cultural adaptation. However, one of its

most common definitions is ``effectiveness'' (Hawes, and Kealey, 1979; Abe and

Wiseman, 1983; Gudyskunst and Hammer, 1984). This effectiveness is generally

described in terms of skills, attitudes, or traits which the sojourner and expatriate

use to build a successful interaction (Ruben, 1976). Scholars have also argued

that the concept of communication competence can be broken down into three

broad sets of skills: affective, cognitive, and behavioral (Chen and Starosta,

1996). Wiseman and Koester (1993) examined the relationship between

intercultural communication competence, knowledge of the host culture, and

cross-cultural attitudes. As a result, they conceptualized intercultural

communication competence as:

· Culture-specific understanding of the other;

· Culture-general understanding; and

· Positive regard of the other.

SENSITIVITY TRAINING

Sensitivity training is about making people understand about themselves and

others reasonably, which is done by developing in them social sensitivity and

behavioral flexibility. Social sensitivity in one word is empathy. It is ability of an

individual to sense what others feel and think from their own point of view.

Behavioral flexibility is ability to behave suitably in light of understanding.

Sensitivity training is often offered by organizations and agencies as a way for

members of a given community to learn how to better understand and appreciate

the differences in other people. It asks training participants to put themselves into

another person's place in hopes that they will be able to better relate to others

who are different

- 190 -

than they are. Sensitivity training often specifically addresses concerns such as

gender sensitivity, multicultural sensitivity, and sensitivity toward those who are

disabled in some way. The goal in this type of training is more oriented toward

growth on an individual level. Sensitivity training can also be used to study and

enhance group relations, i.e., how groups are formed and how members interact

within those groups.

Sensitivity Training involves such groupings as T-Groups, encounter groups,

laboratory-training groups and human awareness groups.

Sensitivity training attempts to teach people about themselves and why and how

they relate to, interact with, impact on and are impacted upon by others.

HISTORY OF SENSITIVITY TRAINING

The origins of sensitivity training can be traced as far back as 1914, when J.L.

Moreno created "psychodrama," a forerunner of the group encounter (and

sensitivity-training) movement. This concept was expanded on later by Kurt

Lewin, a gestalt psychologist from central Europe, who is credited with organizing

and leading the first T-group (training group) in 1946. Lewin offered a summer

workshop in human relations in New Britain, Connecticut. The T-group itself was

formed quite by accident, when workshop participants were invited to attend a

staff-planning meeting and offer feedback. The results were fruitful in helping to

understand individual and group behavior.

Based on this success, Lewin and colleagues Ronald Lippitt, Leland Bradford,

and Kenneth D. Benne formed the National Training Laboratories in Bethel,

Maine, in 1947 and named the new process sensitivity training. Lewin's T-group

was the model on which most sensitivity training at the National Training

Laboratories (NTL) was based during the 1940s and early 1950s. The focus of

this first group

- 191 -

was on the way people interact as they are becoming a group. The NTL

founders' primary motivation was to help understand group processes and use

the new field of group dynamics, to teach people how to function better within

groups. By attending training at an offsite venue, the NTL provided a way for

people to remove themselves from their everyday existence and spend two to

three weeks undergoing training, thus minimizing the chances that they would

immediately fall into old habits before the training truly had time to benefit its

students. During this time, the NTL and other sensitivity-training programs were

new and experimental. Eventually, NTL became a nonprofit organization with

headquarters in Washington, D.C. and a network of several hundred

professionals across the globe, mostly based in universities.

During the mid-1950s and early 1960s, sensitivity training found a place for itself,

and the various methods of training were somewhat consolidated. The T-group

was firmly entrenched in the training process, variously referred to as encounter

groups, human relations training, or study groups. However, the approach to

sensitivity training during this time shifted from that of social psychology to

clinical psychology. Training began to focus more on inter-personal interaction

between individuals than on the organizational and community formation

process, and with this focus took on a more therapeutic quality. By the late

1950s, two distinct camps had been formed-those focusing on organizational

skills, and those focusing on personal growth. The latter was viewed more

skeptically by businesses, at least as far as profits were concerned, because it

constituted a significant investment in an individual without necessarily an eye

toward the good of the corporation. Thus, trainers who concentrated on

vocational and organizational skills were more likely to be courted by industry for

their services; sensitivity trainers more focused on personal growth were sought

by individuals looking for more meaningful and enriching lives.

- 192 -

During the 1960s, new people and organizations joined the movement, bringing

about change and expansion. The sensitivity-training movement had arrived as

more than just a human relations study, but as a cultural force, in part due to the

welcoming characteristics of 1960s society. This social phenomenon was able to

address the unfilled needs of many members in society, and thus gained force as

a social movement. The dichotomy between approaches, however, continued

into the 1960s, when the organizational approach to sensitivity training continued

to focus on the needs of corporate personnel.

The late 1960s and 1970s witnessed a decline in the use of sensitivity training

and encounters, which had been transformed from ends in themselves into

traditional therapy and training techniques, or simply phased out completely.

Though no longer a movement of the scale witnessed during the 1960s,

sensitivity-training programs are still used by organizations and agencies hoping

to enable members of diversified communities and workforces to better coexist

and relate to each other.

PROCEDURE OF SENSITIVITY TRAINING

Sensitivity Training Program requires three steps:

1. Unfreezing the old values –It requires that the trainees become aware of

the inadequacy of the old values. This can be done when the trainee faces

dilemma in which his old values is not able to provide proper guidance.

The first step consists of a small procedure:

a. An unstructured group of 10-15 people is formed.

b. Unstructured group without any objective looks to the trainer for its

guidance

- 193 -

c. But the trainer refuses to provide guidance and assume leadership

d. Soon, the trainees are motivated to resolve the uncertainty

e. Then, they try to form some hierarchy. Some try assume leadership

role which may not be liked by other trainees

f. Then, they started realizing that what they desire to do and realize

the alternative ways of dealing with the situation

2. Development of new values – With the trainer’s support, trainees begin to

examine their interpersonal behavior and giving each other feedback. The

reasoning of the feedbacks are discussed which motivates trainees to

experiment with range of new behaviors and values. This process

constitutes the second step in the change process of the development of

these values.

3. Refreezing the new ones – This step depends upon how much opportunity

the trainees get to practice their new behaviors and values at their work

place.

GOALS OF SENSITIVITY TRAINING

According to Kurt Back, "Sensitivity training started with the discovery that

intense, emotional interaction with strangers was possible. It was looked at, in its

early days, as a mechanism to help reintegrate the

- 194 -

individual man into the whole society through group development. It was caught

up in the basic conflict of America at mid-century: the question of extreme

freedom, release of human potential or rigid organization in the techniques

developed for large combines." The ultimate goal of the training is to have

intense experiences leading to life-changing insights, at least during the training

itself and briefly afterwards.

Sensitivity training was initially designed as a method for teaching more effective

work practices within groups and with other people, and focused on three

important elements: immediate feedback, here-and-now orientation, and focus on

the group process. Personal experience within the group was also important, and

sought to make people aware of themselves, how their actions affect others, and

how others affect them in turn. Trainers believed it was possible to greatly

decrease the number of fixed reactions that occur toward others and to achieve

greater social sensitivity. Sensitivity training focuses on being sensitive to and

aware of the feelings and attitudes of others.

By the late 1950s another branch of sensitivity training had been formed, placing

emphasis on personal relationships and remarks. Whether a training experience

will focus on group relationships or personal growth is defined by the parties

involved before training begins. Most individuals who volunteer to participate and

pay their own way seek more personal growth and interpersonal effectiveness.

Those who represent a company, community service program, or some other

organization are more likely ready to improve their functioning within a group

and/or the organization sponsoring the activity. Some training programs even

customize training experiences to meet the needs of specific companies.

The objectives of sensitivity training are: -

- 195 -

1. Increased understanding, insight, and self-awareness about one’s own

behavior and its impact on others, including the ways in which others

interpret one’s behavior.

2. Increased understanding and sensitivity about the behavior of others,

including better interpretation of both verbal and non-verbal clues, which

increases awareness and understanding of what the other person is

thinking and feeling.

3. Better understanding and awareness of group and inter-group processes,

both those that facilitate and those that inhibit group functioning.

4. Increased diagnostic skills in interpersonal and inter-group situations.

5. Improvement in individuals’ ability to analyze their own behavior, as well

as to learn how to help themselves and others with whom they come in

contact with to achieve more satisfying, rewarding and effective

interpersonal relationships.

CULTURAL SENSITIVITY

Extensive research across disciplines has investigated the question of how to

create culturally competent managers (e.g., Chen and Starosta, 1996; Hinckley

and Perl, 1996; Post, 1997; Shanahan, 1996; Spitzberg and Cupach, 1989).

From the numerous definitions of competence, one subsumes the ongoing

discussion quite well: competence may be described as (work-related)

knowledge, skills and aptitudes, which serve productive purposes in firms. It

distinguishes outstanding from average performers (Dalton, 1997; Kochanski,

1997; Nordhaug, 1998; Nordhaug, 1993). When operationalizing cultural

competence, previous

- 196 -

research has mostly focused on one of the following dimensions: the affective

(motivation), the cognitive (knowledge) or the conative (skills) dimension.

However as results have shown, this emphasis on just one dimension falls short

of depicting this complex construct. Therefore, more recent attempts to measure

cultural competence integrate all three dimensions. Among these holistic

approaches, the so-called “Third Culture Approach” by Gudykunst et al. (1977)

has found a particularly widespread reception in the field. Under the “Third-

Culture” approach, a manager displays cultural competence, when he/she

interprets and judges culturally overlapping situations neither from an

ethnocentric perspective, nor from an idealised host culture perspective, but

assumes a neutral position. To achieve this neutral position, Gudykunst et al.

(1977) stress the importance of the affective component of cultural competence,

which may be called cultural sensitivity. In their model, cultural sensitivity is a

prerequisite which instils the acquisition of knowledge (cognitive dimension) and

skills (conative dimension). Gudykunst et al. (1977) see cultural sensitivity as the

psychological link between home and host culture. This notion clearly contradicts

the current business practice mentioned earlier, where language or professional

knowledge and skills are deemed key prerequisites for successful foreign

assignments.

Cultural Sensitivity is the ability to be open to learning about and accepting of

different cultural groups. It leads to Cultural Competency. The following diagram

shows an individual’s path to cultural competency: -

- 197 -

Multiculturation

Selective Adoption

Appreciation/Valuing

Acceptance/Respect

Understanding

Awareness

Ethnocentricity

Individual’s Path to Cultural Competency

1. Ethnocentricity – This is a state of relying on our own, and only our

own, paradigms based on our cultural heritage. We view the world

through narrow filters, and we will only accept information that fits

our paradigms. We resist and/or discard others.

2. Awareness – This is the point at which we begin to realize that there

are things that exist which fall outside the realm of our cultural

paradigms.

3. Understanding- This is the point at which we are not only aware that

there are things that fall outside our cultural paradigms, but we see

the reason for their existence.

- 198 -

4. Acceptance/Respect - This is when we begin allowing those from other

cultures to just be who they are, and that it is OKAY for things to not

always fit into our paradigms.

5. Appreciation/Value- This is the point where we begin seeing the worth in

the things that fall outside our own cultural paradigms.

6. Selective Adoption - This is the point at which, we begin using things that

were initially outside our own cultural paradigms.

7. Multiculturation- This is when we have begun integrating our lives with our

experiences from a variety of cultural experiences.