Maastricht University

School of Business and Economics

Feedback and communication skills

in an international classroom

VERSION 1.1, October 2011

Wim Swaan,
Coordinator International Classroom Development SBE,
Department of Organisation and Strategy
w.swaan@maastrichtuniversity.nl

Jeannette Hommes,
Department of Educational Research and Development,
j.hommes@maastrichtuniversity.nl

Comments and feedback welcome.

1
Introduction
In this paper we discuss general principles of feedback, including some cultural elements. We will
both look at the perspective of the person receiving feedback and the person giving feedback. The
main focus is on feedback in an educational setting, in particular in the setting of Maastricht
University School of Business and Economics (SBE). In the educational system used at SBE, Problem
Based Learning (PBL), there is a relatively large role for peer feedback (that is, from other students),
larger than is usual in lecture based teaching, where feedback is frequently the privilege of the
teacher.

The paper has the following goals:

1. Understanding the main principles of feedback;
2. Understanding the cultural background of feedback;
3. Understanding the challenge of applying cultural knowledge to communication in day-to-day
situations;
4. Understanding the challenge of effective communication on cultural differences.
While the former two goals form our original goals, the latter two goals are indispensible when
engaging in learning about cultural differences and communication across cultures. This also serves
as a basis for learning on cooperation across cultural boundaries in later courses.

The paper aims at students in year 1 of the Bachelors. In period 1 during the course “Management of
organizations and marketing” you learned and worked with the first principles of feedback giving and
receiving. In period 2 during the course “Accounting”, you will further develop the skill of giving and
receiving feedback. In addition, you will start developing your skills in understanding and accepting
cultural differences in communication styles, as this might have an impact on the process of giving
and receiving feedback.

Both in your studies and in your career there will be various situations where you will provide or
receive feedback. As a student you receive feedback from your tutor and your peers. This happens in
class, when working in teams or when writing papers and submitting assignments. In the context of
the course 1.2 Accounting you will receive feedback in class on your role as discussion leader.
Feedback will be given both by students and by the tutor. Later on in year 1, you will receive
feedback on presentations (in period 4) and give mutual feedback to each other while working in
teams (in period 5).

In your career too, you will be repeatedly in situations in which you provide and receive feedback, to
or from superiors, peers, subordinates, customers and suppliers. For instance, you set up a company
together with a friend with whom you studied together. After a promising start, friction might
appear, for instance, you believe you put much more energy in the company or you attract much
more contracts than your friend. How do you discuss this kind of thing? This requires the skill of
giving effective feedback.

Definition and purpose of feedback

According to Hattie & Timperley (2007, p.86) feedback can be defined as “a response given to
another person about his performance, behavior or communication. Feedback enhances learning
because one of the main objectives is to diminish discrepancies between current understandings and

2
performance and goal.” Following this definition of feedback two perspectives of feedback can be
distinguished: receiving feedback and providing feedback. Both perspectives will be described below.

Receiving feedback: three major questions

For a person receiving feedback three levels of questions are relevant (following Hattie & Timperley
2007, p.88-90). These questions can be asked to peers, superiors, and teachers. Actually, the value of
feedback is greatly enhanced if people receiving feedback first ask the questions to themselves.

1. Where am I going? What are the goals? What do I want to know or what skills do I want to
acquire? This corresponds to the planning of a task. The following questions can be asked:
- How do I want to work on this task?
- How do I know if I did the task correct?
- Do I like the new task?
- Where and when do I want to work on the new task?

2. How am I going? What progress is being made toward the goal? The following questions can
be asked:
- What went well?
- How do I know that I master the task?
- What is difficult? And why is that?
- What do I do when I get stuck?
- Do I think I can manage?

3. Where to next? What activities need to be undertaken to make better progress? This
corresponds to feed forward. The following questions can be asked:
- What would I do different next time?
- What do I need to accomplish the task?
- What is the first step?
- Who can support me?

Asking yourself these questions when you are preparing and working on the task is helpful to assess
yourself on how you are doing and supports you to formulate questions for your peers and teachers
to give feedback on. Formulating for yourself on what you would like to have feedback on helps you
in your learning process.

Receiving feedback gives the opportunity to learn. It gives information on how your behavior is
perceived by the other person. It is important to keep in mind that feedback is not equal to criticism
or a personal attack. Feedback is the perception of another person about your behavior and this is
NOT equal to a perception of how you are as a person. Feedback tells at least as much about the
person giving feedback as about the person who receives feedback. Different persons might give
different feedback about the same situation.

3
Your learning opportunities can be improved if you take the following suggestions into account:
- Identify for yourself on what aspects you would like to receive feedback, e.g. in your role as a
discussion leader or as member of the tutorial group. Communicate this to the fellow group
members;
- Ask for clarification when you do not understand the given feedback;
- Check if others have the same perception or do have another impression;
- Do NOT defend when the feedback giver is critical and gives suggestions for improvement;
- Take the feedback seriously and consider if you want to change your behavior.

Providing feedback: basic principles

Effective feedback satisfies the principles you learned in the course “Management of Organisations
and Marketing” in the “feedback task” in session 3 in period 1. The principles are the following:
- Give feedback on what went well and not only on what can be improved
- Feedback has to do with observable behavior and not with the personality of the person;
- Feedback has to be descriptive and not interpretative or a value judgment;
- Feedback needs to be specific, not general or global. Describe concrete, specific and
observable behavior;
- Feedback needs to be formulated in such a way that the receiver feels invited to react;
- Give feedback in the I format. It is your observation and perception and this is subjective;
- Feedback also includes suggestions for improvement.

Although there are always natural born talents, for most people it will require some practice to
master these principles. Some examples of challenging issues:
- Especially when feedback is potentially confronting, it could be quite challenging to formulate
the feedback in such a way that the receiver feels invited to follow up on your feedback. The
more you succeed in being descriptive and the more you are able to speak from your personal
experience, the easier it will be to listen to you and act upon your feedback. Sometimes the
person receiving feedback also needs some time to process the information.
- It can be quite challenging to be purely descriptive, without any interpretations. The human mind
is prone to make interpretations and act upon them. This has been very helpful in human
evolution, especially in complex situations and situation requiring immediate action. For
instance, when faced with a truck approaching you unexpectedly at high speed, interpretations
and instinctive response function as a useful, life saving shortcut. If you’d first describe and
analyze the situation, you’d be too late.
Even for experienced practitioners, it might take time and continued practice to be as descriptive
as possible. Some degree of interpretation or value judgment is unavoidable.
- Sometimes, it is hard to avoid interpretations and value judgments as part of the process of
feedback. In those cases, it is useful to make it explicit, and connect it as much as possible to
observations. For instance: “the way you sit, bending backward, your legs to the side and your
arms folded, gives me the impression that you are not really present as a discussion leader”.
(interpretation based on observation, from I-perspective). This is very different from just saying
“You were not really involved as a discussion leader”.

4
Feedback can be focused on four levels (following Hattie & Timperley, 2007, p.90-97).

A. Feedback on task level

Feedback on task level is focusing on the quality of the content. This can be about the content of the
discussion of a learning objective in the post-discussion. The feedback can indicate if the content
was correct or incorrect. It also may include directions to acquire more or better information, such
as “You need to include the calculations of…” In the accounting course this might be feedback on
how well the calculations are done, or on the quality of the post discussion of a task.

B. Feedback on process level

The feedback on process level is focusing on the process or strategy to complete a task. This kind of
feedback is more related to the quality on how a task is completed. For example a peer may say to a
fellow student “This part of the presentation makes more sense if you used the techniques we
learned earlier”. Due to feedback on process level students acquire insight in effective and less
effective strategies to fulfill a task. Another example is feedback on the performance of the
discussion leader in the tutorial group. For example the following suggestion for improvement can
be given: “By stimulating the use of the whiteboard the discussion will be more focused and easier to
follow for everyone”.

C. Feedback on the level of self regulation

The purpose of feedback on this level is meant to develop competences of self evaluation or
confidence to engage further on a task. Such feedback can have major influences on the self efficacy
(belief in your own strength), self regulation and self beliefs about yourself as learner, such as that
you are encouraged or informed how to continue better on the task. The following example is an
illustration: “You already learned how to make an Excel sheet of the calculations, check for the new
assignment what similarities and/or differences there might be in making the Excel sheet”.

D. Feedback on the personal level

This feedback is directed to the person, which is often unrelated to performance on the task.
Examples of such feedback are “You are a great discussion leader” or “You are an intelligent
student”. This feedback at the self or personal level (usually praise) is rarely effective because it is not
related to task, process or self regulation level

Hattie & Timperley (2007) state that feedback on the level of process and self regulation is the most
effective for deep learning and task mastering. Too much feedback only on the task level may
encourage students to focus on the immediate goal and the correct answers and not the strategies to
attain the goal. The advice is to focus the feedback as well on task, process as self regulation level.

Feedback in tutorial groups

Feedback on the performance in the tutorial group as a discussion leader, on the quality of the
participation by group members, the quality of a presentation, or the quality of a written assignment
is given in the group. The purpose of giving feedback to an individual student in the group is meant as
a learning situation for all the students in that group. Giving each other constructive feedback and
hearing the feedback of other students and the tutors gives everyone the opportunity to learn. It is
very important to communicate openly with others, because this will create a positive and

5
constructive learning environment. However, it is clear that providing and seeking feedback requires
much practice by students. The tutorial group meetings give the opportunities to develop this skill.

Feedback in intercultural settings

in intercultural settings, giving and receiving feedback might be more challenging than in
monocultural settings. Communication styles differ a lot across cultures. Although the purpose of this
paper is not to provide a comprehensive discussion of culture, it might still be useful to provide a
description of what we understand by culture. Kramer (2009, p.30), for instance, gives the following
definition: “Culture is a complex framework that gives shape and meaning to our material and
mental worlds. This framework consists of patterns of traditions, convictions and meanings that are
learned, shared and passed on in various degrees by members of a group to other members of a
group”. In other words, cultures are not just seen as a collection of practices and behaviours, but are
first of all systems providing meaning.
Cultural differences can have quite some impact on the desired styles of giving feedback. As was
explained above, persons receiving feedback should feel invited to listen to feedback and act upon it.
In other words, feedback has to both clear and respectful in order to be effective. The challenge is
that what is considered clear and respectful depends strongly on cultural norms and values and the
meaning attached to this. What is clear in one culture could be vague or irrelevant in another culture,
and hence not understood or even ignored. On the other hand, what is normal discourse in one
cultural context, could be considered excessively rude in another cultural context.

De Luque & Sommer (2000) provide an overview of the impact of culture on feedback-seeking
behaviour. Among others, they identify the following potential influences:
- Tolerance for ambiguity
The less people are open to ambiguous situations, the more they might seek feedback,
and the more structure and rules are provided for feedback.
- Role of status
The degree of status differential and the importance attached to status differential may
have an impact on the direction of feedback; for instance the degree to which peer
feedback is customary.
- Individualism versus collectivism
Among other things, this may have an impact on whether feedback is directed at
individuals or rather at groups.
- High context versus low context.
The degree to which meaning is derived from the context has an impact on the way
feedback is expressed.

From these we will investigate one as an example: high-context versus low-context communication.

High-context and low-context communication

The conceptual distinction between low-context and high-context communication was introduced by
Hall (1976). A useful summary with lots of examples is provided by Ting-Toomey (1999, p.100-113;
this is assigned reading in the course 1.2 Accounting). In cultures preferring high-context
communication, meaning is derived from the context: the way things are said, the nonverbal
communication accompanying it. Messages are often conveyed indirectly, for instance through

6
stories or metaphors. In other words, indirect communication is preferred. This is usually coupled
with a high preference for harmony and face-saving, certainly within the in-group. In high-context
communication there is usually a strong group orientation, which is coupled with speaking (and
thinking) from a we-perspective.
Low-context communication, on the other hand, focuses on the content of the message. It focuses
on text, instead of context. Low context communication is much more explicit, more verbose and
favors more direct communication. In low context cultures, the speaker is responsible for the clarity
of the message. This is different from high context cultures, where the listener is responsible for
successfully decoding the message.
For persons used to low context communication, it is often difficult to understand how people in high
context cultures can understand each other. Acknowledging differences across high-context cultures,
some general answers can be given though. Most important perhaps is that in high-context cultures a
lot of time is spend on getting to know each other, especially with (potential) members of the in-
group. This creates a joint context and enables communicators to become familiar with the various
expressions of each other, which helps them in decoding subtle differences in for instance non-
verbals when they occur. This does not mean that people in high-context cultures do not
misunderstand each other: they do sometimes (just as people in low-context cultures do). The
difference is on how to act upon this feeling or experience of misunderstanding. In high-context
communication, this is likely to be dealt with in indirect ways, for instance by asking a third person,
or by asking implicit questions. Although this might seem cumbersome for people familiar with low
context communication, well-functioning communities or companies in high-context cultures can
adapt very fast to changing circumstances. Both systems of communication have their own internal
consistency and can be very effective.

The use of cultural dimensions in day-to-day situations

Before turning to the question of how the cultural dimension of high-context versus low-context
communication has an impact on preferences for feedback, first some general remarks are in order
about the use of cultural dimensions in day-to-day situations. The relation between the two is far
from straightforward. Cultural dimensions operate on a collective level, of very large groups (for
instance, on the level of a nation; but they could also operate on other levels, like ethnicity, gender,
social class, etc.). In day-to-day situations you are communicating with individuals or with small
groups of people. It would be simply erroneous to apply knowledge of cultural dimensions directly to
these individuals. There is no one-on-one relation between the two. In day-to-day situations you
don’t meet cultures. You meet people whose behaviour is embedded in particular cultural
backgrounds and who see the world through particular cultural lenses.

We will address the following issues:

- Individual variation within cultures
- Variations of dimensions across cultures
- Communicating about cultural differences: do’s and don’ts
- Talking about cultural dimensions: challenges and pitfalls
This is also meant to put the assigned reading of Ting-Toomey (1999, p.100-113) into context, in line
with the earlier chapters of her book.

7
Cultural dimensions and variation within cultures
Although some kinds of cultural standards definitely exist, it is important to emphasize that
behaviour in any particular culture is characterized by high variation. Actually, within-culture
variation can well be bigger than between-culture variations.

Most people are all too aware of variation within cultures when considering behaviour from
individuals and groups from their own culture. However, when faced with the uncertainty and
anxiety of meeting large groups from another culture, this is often forgotten and people are
intuitively looking for general principles to understand the foreign culture.

The foregoing also holds for direct and indirect communication. Within any given culture, there
might be huge variations, partly influenced by subcultural backgrounds, such as gender, region, social
class, ethnicity – and also by personality. For instance, if you grow up in a country favoring direct
communication, it could well be that you yourself favor indirect communication. None the less, the
fact you grew up in an environment favouring direct communication, means that you are probably
more familiar with situations or “scripts” of direct communication, even if this is not your own
favorite style. It is therefore important to be aware of both: your individual preference and the
cultural background you are from.

Cultural dimensions and variation across cultures

Another important qualification is that cultural dimensions are fairly abstract concepts, which might
get different shapes across countries – even if they are very similar on a general, abstract level. For
instance, both the United States and Germany are generally considered to be typical examples of
countries characterized by low-context communication and direct communication, while Japan and
Vietnam are typical examples of high-context communication and indirect communication. Yet,
communication patterns can vary a lot between the countries in each of the two pairs, even on this
particular dimension.

In addition, communication styles strongly depend upon the particular situation: e.g. a conversation
within the family, at a job interview, a funeral, a dance party, with a professor, or at the grocery store
all may require different approaches with different ranges of acceptable behaviour in any particular
culture. The relationship you have with a person might also play a role. For example, talking to a
sibling might differ from the way you express yourself to your father or mother. You might talk in a
different way to fellow students than to your tutor. In other words, knowing that a particular culture
is considered to be high context or low context does not provide you with an unequivocal description
of behaviour for all kinds of situations.

Furthermore, like many other cultural dimensions, the concept of high context versus low context
communication is a composite construct: it is composed of and related to a whole group of other
concepts. Ting-Toomey (1999, p.100-113) has given an overview of the various elements of high
context and low context communication. Accordingly, cultures may score high on one indicator and
low on and another. For instance, research comparing communication in Egypt with the US has
shown similarities regarding directness, at least for Egyptian man, which is an indication of low
context communication. At the same time, communication in Egypt was characterized by the use of
metaphors which is considered as typical for high context communication (Smith et al. 2006, p.155).

8
In varying ways, similar combinations can be found in other countries around the Mediterranean. In
other words, you cannot project knowledge of certain elements of high and low context
communication on particular countries, let alone on particular individuals.

Communicating about cultural differences: do’s and don’ts

Given all the qualifications put forward above, the question might pop up, what use do cultural
dimensions have from the perspective of effective communication (the perspective of this paper).
How to translate this to day-to-day situations?

Knowledge of cultural dimensions (such as high-context versus low context communication) is first of
all useful as background knowledge in intercultural communication. If somebody shows behaviour
that falls outside the range of what you consider “normal”, “professional” or “effective” and that
person is from another culture, knowledge of cultural dimensions might give you a broader
perspective. Knowledge of cultural dimensions is useful as background knowledge in the following
ways:
1. It makes you aware of potential sources of differences.
2. It may make you aware of your preferred styles of communication and how they are
embedded in your cultural background.
3. It may make you aware of the cultural lenses through which you see the world; this may help
you in staying with observations without jumping to premature interpretations.
4. It may make you aware of the cultural lenses through which others might interpret your
behaviour.
In other words: cultural awareness is at least as much about becoming aware of your own
background and preferences as about getting to know the cultural backgrounds of other people you
are meeting. Given the high variation in individual characteristics, it is not useful to project particular
characteristics on individuals or groups originating from a particular culture, let alone from an entire
continent (as sometimes happens with Asia: cultural differences within Asia are huge).

In day-to-day situations it could actually be very risky to communicate cultural interpretations to

people you are meeting, saying things like: “Oh, you are from The Netherlands, so you must be very
direct.” or “I find you very indirect. I guess this is because you are from Japan.” Of course, if you like
the topic, it could be fun to talk with friends about how you experience cultural differences.
However, if a conflict is imminent or if you feel emotionally charged about a particular situation, it is
generally better not to make explicit how you think this relates this to the cultural background of
other persons.

Stay with your observations and communicate them as far as relevant, in line with the principles of
feedback sketched above. People can understand your feelings and experiences, they might be able
and willing to adapt their behaviour, but they are not able to change their cultural background.

Talking about cultural dimensions: challenges and pitfalls

As part of the process of creating cultural awareness it is useful to discuss cultural dimensions, for
instance as part of the programme Intercultural Classroom. In line with the recommendations given
above, it is important to become aware of the way you are influenced by your cultural background,
and how other people, from other cultures, might have different preferences.

9
Talking about cultural dimensions can also be challenging. People might not recognize themselves in
the characteristics given of the culture they are from, they might perceive negative value judgments
in the way their culture is described, or they might feel excluded in a group, if their cultural
background is singled out as “different”. To avoid these pitfalls, it could be helpful to keep the
following recommendations:
- Do not identify people with cultures. Don’t say “Dutch are…”, “Germans are…”etc. Instead
say “In Dutch culture …. communication is preferred” or “In German culture there is a
preference for …” When addressed in this way, listeners from the cultures concerned feel
more freedom to differ from the perceived average cultural standard, while still being able to
identify with their cultural background.
- Try to avoid value judgments as much as possible. Don’t say, for instance, “People from … are
arrogant” or “People from … are not be trusted”. If value judgments about a cultural group
are strong you might say for instance “In country X, people from country Y are often
perceived as arrogant.” This creates distance and allows people to disagree with the
perceptions. Avoiding value judgments can sometimes be challenging, because what seems
to be neutral for one person, can imply a value judgment for another.
- Avoid using the word “they” repeatedly when referring to foreign cultures or countries. This
might give people of the culture concerned the feeling to be excluded. Similarly, the
repeated use of “we” can imply exclusion, especially if the persons using it are part of a
majority in a group.
- If you make general remarks about other cultures you may add qualifications like “In my
perception…” or “From the stories I have been hearing I get the impression…”
- When comparing your culture with other cultures, give examples, if possible from your own
experience. Explain the context of the example.
Awareness of these challenges could give people the idea to avoid the topic of cultural differences, or
even worse, it could give people the idea that one should not talk about negative experiences with
people from a different cultural background. This is absolutely not helpful. Instead of avoiding topics
that are probably related to cultural differences, it is much better to learn to discuss it in a way that is
productive. This includes the skills of knowing when it is useful to explicitly refer to cultural
differences and when not.

Of course, the idea is to maintain a spontaneous, lively conversation. The ultimate goal is not to keep
to certain rules, but to create an environment where an open exchange about the perception of
cultural differences is possible, while including and respecting the cultural identities of all people
present.

Having discussed the challenging relation between cultural differences and day-to-day situations, let
us now return to the impact of culture on preferred feedback styles.

Feedback in educational settings: the impact of cultural differences

To the best of our knowledge no comprehensive empirical research exist with regard to cultural
differences in prevailing feedback styles in educational settings. Hence we have to confine ourselves
to some general remarks, which are based on general intercultural knowledge, our own experience
and extensive interaction with academic staff teaching at University Maastricht.

10
To begin with, it might have become clear to the reader that the principles of feedback outlined in
the first part of this paper reflect a cultural background of fairly low-context conversation. In SBE,
direct feedback styles are encouraged; students and staff providing feedback are encouraged to be
as concrete as possible. This reflects the fact that SBE is rooted in The Netherlands, a culture which is
characterized by a relatively direct style of communication (see for instance Vossestein 2010 who
gives some juicy anecdotes how foreigners experience Dutch people in this respect). In addition, the
social sciences in The Netherlands (including prevailing views about effective feedback) are strongly
influenced by models originating from the United States and other Anglo-Saxon countries. On a
global scale these are also considered to be low-context in varying degrees (The United States is
widely considered as the textbook example of low context culture; The United Kingdom somewhat
less as it traditionally allows for some patterns of more indirect communication; but even then it is
fairly direct in global comparison).
Another typical characteristic of Problem Based Learning as practised at SBE (and UM in general), is
the role of peer feedback in class. In many cultures this is very unusual: feedback is restricted to the
teacher. In addition, in most cultures it is part of student culture not to provide feedback to peers
and certainly not to be critical of peers in front of the teacher. The core of the very system of
Problem Based Learning as practised at UM, with students doing most of the conversation and the
role of the tutor rather being a coach than an instructor, therefore has a strong cultural component.
In many cultures, students are only supposed to speak upon invitation by the teacher and are only
supposed to speak when they know the correct answer. A core element of PBL is exactly that
students learn from their mistakes and learn most in a joint conversation.
Again, these characteristics of Problem Based Learning as practised at UM are mirrored in the culture
of The Netherlands, which is characterized by a relatively lower degree of status differential in
hierarchies, at least in global comparison (see Hofstede 1980, Vossestein 2010).

This being said, experience shows that most students originating from higher context cultures or high
power distance cultures are pretty well able to get used to the system of direct peer feedback in
class. For some it might, however, take a little more time to get used to it and the style of feedback
might have a higher flavour of high context communication. It should be emphasized that this is
absolutely no problem. Similarly, you might notice that tutors too have different styles of feedback
depending upon their personality, cultural background and experience. For instance, in high context
communication a preference is given for qualifying statements: “it seems to me”, “it might be useful
to”. In line with the principles of effective feedback given above, these kind of statements might
actually increase the probability that the receiver feel invited to follow up on the feedback, as it
offers more space and freedom to follow up. This of course also depends on the abilities of the
listener: if it would not be clear, or if the listener might not be sure, follow up questions could be
useful.
Another typical approach in high context communication is to formulate observations and
descriptions not explicitly from an I-perspective, but rather as a general statement, sometimes
referring (implicitly) to a joint experience. This can be equally effective as long as the listener is
aware of this approach; as long as the remarks are clear enough to be understood and to invite
follow up. Then, the attentive listener will understand from the context and the situation what is
meant. Again, follow up questions could be useful if things aren’t fully clear.

11
For students it is important to be open to these potential variations in feedback behaviour, implying
that one is open for an explorative dialogue: willing to ask for clarification when necessary and
express difficulties when they are experienced.

Communication skills and cultural skills as a developmental process

We would like to end this paper by reflecting on the difference between the development of
behavioural skills and cognitive skills. Most university courses focus on cognitive skills, such as
accounting, statistics, marketing, to mention just some examples. This paper, and the tasks related to
it, focus on behavioural skills. For successful cooperation in the classroom, and later in your career,
behavioural skills are just as important as cognitive skills.

The process of acquiring behavioural skills can be divided into four levels: Knowledge, Awareness &
Reflection, Attitude and Behaviour. They are not necessarily sequential or chronological. Rather, they
operate in a synchronic manner, mutually reinforcing each other. Deepening and developing your
skills will involve all levels in a cyclical way. Following Ramsey’s and Latting’s (2005) division of
intergroup competencies into Reflection and Action gives us table 1.

The difference between knowledge, awareness and behaviour is important. Knowing about cultural
differences is one thing, it is quite another thing to recognizing in practice (awareness) and even
more to be able to adapt one’s behaviour.

TABLE 1: The four elements of intercultural competencies

Examples
Knowledge of (subtle) cultural differences & useful communication
1. Knowledge
techniques
Sensitivity to communication styles and cultural differences
Link knowledge to your own experience (and vice versa)
Reflection Awareness of your own cultural background
2. Awareness &
Awareness of your values and drivers and the extent to which they
Reflection
are influenced by your cultural backgrounds
Awareness of your interaction with people from other cultures
(“dissimilar others”)
In developing more effective behaviour, the underlying attitude is
crucial (openness; willingness to listen etc.).
3. Attitude
Adapting your communication style is not merely a matter of “tips
and tricks”; there is no universal method.
Action Develop your ability to express yourself in ways that are culturally
appropriate
4. Behaviour Expand your repertoire of communication styles
Real behavioural development only takes place over longer
periods of time

For the moment, you are encouraged to develop the following skills:
1. Knowledge of the variety of communication styles.
2. Awareness of potential different meanings attached to particular communication styles and
behaviours, especially of meanings prevailing outside one's familiar cultural background.

12
 3. Ability to reflect upon one's own behaviour and communication styles and the impact this might
have on others.
4. Recognizing communication styles in practice and ability to decode the meaning attached to
this.
5. Ability to accept (very) different communication styles than one's own, without yet changing
one's own style.

Later on, in your studies and career, you can develop the following skills:
6. Ability to gradually expand one's repertoire of communication styles
• Beginning with patterns and styles that do not affect your core values
• Gradually moving to more challenging communication styles.
7. Ability to switch between styles.
8. Ability to bridge between different styles (being an intermediary between people).
9. Ability to manage a group of people with different communication styles and value orientations.
10. Ability to transfer skills to colleagues and subordinates.

CONCLUSION
This paper has given an overview of the principles of giving and receiving feedback, and how these
might be influenced by cultural preferences. One element was highlighted: the dimension of high
context versus low context communication. This was followed by an extensive discussion on variation
within cultures and between cultures and effective ways of communicating about cultural
differences. This also serves as the basis for an effective discussion in class about cultural differences.

REFERENCES
Hall, E. (1976). Beyond culture, New York: Doubleday.
Hattie, J. - Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of educational research, 77(1), 81-
112.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Kramer, J. (2009). Managing cultural dynamics. Utrecht: HumanDimensions Publications.
De Luque, M. - Sommer, S. (2000). The impact of culture on feedback-seeking behaviour: an
integrated model and propositions, Academy of Management Review 25(4), p.829-849.
Ramsey, V. – Latting, J. (2005). A Typology of Intergroup Competencies, The Journal of Applied
Behavioral Science 41(3), September, p.265-284.
Smith, P., Bond M., Kağıtçıbaşı, Ç. (2006). Understanding Social Psychology Across Cultures. Living
and Working in a Changing World. London: Sage.
Ting-Toomey, S. (1999). Communicating across cultures. New York: The Guilford Press.
Vossestein, J. (2010). Dealing with the Dutch. Amsterdam: KIT publishers.

13