But this is not just foreigners, it is also between Danish employees and employer. (C, min. 18:25) Foreigners are can not understand what they are told, they are focusing on the face, the eyes. (F, min. 18:51) I have choose to mention, several times in this thesis, some statements as C’s reply, mentioned above, to emphasize that the I-Thou approach to others” has dominated “the the focus group dialog. The consultants have searched permanently to equilibrate the discussion, to point out that the most communication issue applies also when native speak together. C’s statement above can also be interpreted as a result of a personal experience, when she faced some communication difficulties in the dialog between natives. Maybe if we were better to communicate with those around us, with family, friends, colleagues, then the intercultural communication would not have been such a sensitive issue. Even if the globalization has as result the homogenization of cultures, there are still some differences between those. As I have stressed several times in this thesis, in my opinion, the deterministic approach of multicultural phenomena shall be avoid, because it tend to amplify the differences, the distances and the tension between culture (Philips:2009). However, in my opinion, the nonverbal elements of communication implies maybe more difficulties than the use of language. My point of view is based on the fact that individual can guess the meaning of a word from the context, but when foreigner expect an enthusiastic reaction to what he thinks is a great result at job, and the leader’s face is not expressing any emotions, then he may be disorientated. All the research method used have emerged similar opinion regarding the fact that Danish are usually control” of the face expression, of mimic, opposite to the Eastern. “in
But this is not just foreigners, it is also between Danish employees and employer. (C, min. 18:25) Foreigners are can not understand what they are told, they are focusing on the face, the eyes. (F, min. 18:51) I have choose to mention, several times in this thesis, some statements as C’s reply, mentioned above, to emphasize that the I-Thou approach to “the others” has dominated the focus group dialog. The consultants have searched permanently to equilibrate the discussion, to point out that the most communication issue applies also when native speak together. C’s statement above can also be interpreted as a result of a personal experience, when she faced some communication difficulties in the dialog between natives. Maybe if we were better to communicate with those around us, with family, friends, colleagues, then the intercultural communication would not have been such a sensitive issue. Even if the globalization has as result the homogenization of cultures, there are still some differences between those. As I have stressed several times in this thesis, in my opinion, the deterministic approach of multicultural phenomena shall be avoid, because it tend to amplify the differences, the distances and the tension between culture (Philips:2009). However, in my opinion, the nonverbal elements of communication implies maybe more difficulties than the use of language. My point of view is based on the fact that individual can guess the meaning of a word from the context, but when foreigner expect an enthusiastic reaction to what he thinks is a great result at job, and the leader’s face is not expressing any emotions, then he may be disorientated. All the research method used have emerged similar opinion regarding the fact that Danish are usually “in control” of the face expression, of mimic, opposite to the Eastern.
specialle_culture.docx