Due: Thursday, March 20, 2014; 11am
1. What are the pros and cons of the U.S. being a low context culture? Which do you think is better low or high context culture?
2. As a college student, do you use monochromic time or polychronic time? Which do you think is more beneficial?
2. As a college student, do you use monochromic time or polychronic time? Which do you think is more beneficial?
1) The pros of being a low context culture is that there is usually not anything left unsaid and there is not anything that needs to be interpreted, so communication is very simple and usually lacks confusion. A con can be that some people take offense to things being stated so openly and outright, and not much is left unsaid in communication, which can lead to conflict. I think that it is better to be in the middle of high and low context because it allows for enough to be said for the communication to lack confusion, but it can make it so that communication is also partly implied by beliefs, values, and norms of the culture.
ReplyDelete2) I think that typically I am somewhere between monochronic and polychronic time. While it is important to have some structure and schedule in relationship to time, there are times when something comes up that is more important that what you have scheduled. Therefore, it is important to be adaptive and willing to adjust and reschedule when this more important things come up. However, I do not think that it is appropriate to schedule three appointments at a time as the book states is done in places like Spain, so using polychronic time too strictly can be dangerous.
1.) I guess the biggest pro for being a low context culture would be that not many things are misunderstood. I'm not saying that there aren't any misunderstandings, but in low context cultures things are pretty much plainly written out and there isn't any room for interpretations by individuals. Having a high context culture could result in more conflict because people can interpret things how they want and disagree more easily. In terms of cons I think that it might be hard for low context cultures to pick up on nonverbal cues, which could waste time with questions that would need to be asked in order to understand what that nonverbal code meant. I believe that it would be best to live in a culture where there is a mix of low and high contexts because this way people can still understand things that are spelled out for them and they would also understand nonverbal cues. This culture would have the perks of shared, communal meanings that don't need words and also the straight forward meanings that only involve one person to understand.
ReplyDelete2.) Although it would be nice if I was someone who used polychromic time efficiently because I would get more done, I think I am more of a monochromic time oriented person. I really like using lists and I like working on one thing at a time and them checking it off my list. I like to focus on one job or homework assignment at a time. Even though I use monochromatic time and not polychromic time, I still believe that monochromatic is the best way to get things done. When you have too many things going on at the same time, you could get really confused and things could get messy. It is probably safe to say that this would get very unorganized and you could end up forgetting to do things.
1) The pros of being a low context culture would be that there is little miscommunication, and if there is you're able to reference back to the document or context used for the situation. This is why the United States is so adamant about having contracts so that were able to reference back to it and there is little confusion on what is being asked. A con to this type of culture would be that we would be so used to things written down that we'd be unable to communicate effectively going to a a new culture. There would be lots of miscommunication because we'd be unable to pick up on nonverbal cues as well and that can cause conflict in the long run. I think that a low context society is better because then everyone around you is clear as to what is being said or asked. There will be less miscommunication amongst individuals and groups and things get done accurately and efficiently because what is being asked is to the point and concise.
ReplyDelete2) I think that I use both monochromic time and polychronic time. Studying for tests I would say that I use more monochromic time management so that I am focused on one task and solely that task. I believe that that is the best way for studying because chemically for our brains it is better to focus on one task. It isn't efficient to be polychronic because then we aren't as accurate and we make more mistakes. However, I do this while I do homework, or other such things that aren't as big of a deal. I think most college students tend to be more polychronic but we ought to be monochromic.
1.) The pros of the U.S being a low context culture are that there is little miscommunication because communication is very simple in low context cultures. Not many things are misunderstood, or left unsaid. Also, not much needs to be interpreted because it is very clear as to what is being said. The cons of the U.S being a low context culture are that it is harder to pick up on nonverbal cues, and sometimes people may take offense to things that are just said openly which then can lead to a bigger issue. Also, going to a new culture we would have a hard time because we are so used to having simple communication. I think that a low-context culture is better because it's easier to interpret things and more people are clear as to what is being said.
ReplyDelete2.) I think that i use monochromic time, and I also think that monochromic time is more beneficial. I like to focus on one task at a time and usually do the most important task first then go in order and doing the least important task last. I usually have a checklist of what I need to do for the week and which is the most important or due first and I work my way down. If I used polychronic time everything would be way too scattered and I wouldn't know what I had due when and what I needed to work on, I wouldn't get much accomplished because I need to be organized and prepared to get things done. I think that monochronic time is better also, especially for college students because it keeps you organized on one task at a time and helps to not stress you out by working on all kinds of different assignments at once.
1) The pros of being a low context culture is that there is little to no misunderstandings since every thing is precise and simple. It is also straightforward and to the point so the receiver knows exactly what the message is. Some of the cons of the U.S being a low context culture are that if someone were to use non-verbal cues it would be hard to pick up on what they meant. I think that it is better to be a low context culture because everything is explicit with no room for interpretation.
ReplyDelete2) I think being a college kid we use both monochromatic and polychromic time. We focus on one thing at a time and we schedules of the things we need to do. We also need to multitask in order to get things done on time. It can be hard to focus on one thing at a time with so much going on with classes and other activities. I think it would be most beneficial to have a monochromic time system. If you focus on one thing at a time, then you can focus all of your attention on it and it will be done to the best of your ability.
1) The con of being a low-context culture is that it can be easy to miscommunicate. Because communication is so open in low-context cultures, anything left unsaid can lead to confusion because nonverbal cues are not picked up on and it is easy for someone to take offense. A pro is that normally there is not much miscommunciation because there is little left unsaid. It is better to be a low-context culture because even though we may not always want to know everything someone has to say, at least we have all the parts.
ReplyDelete2) As a college student, I have to use both monochronic and polychronic time. All of my classes are set at a scheduled time, however the rest of my day is up to me on how I want to spend it. Sometimes I have scheduled events to attend to, and sometimes I just do whatever comes up. It is important to use monochronic time so that you get things done that are important. However it is also beneficial to be flexible and use polychronic time so that as more important events come up, you can tend to them and move the other things around.
1. The pros of the U.S being a low context culture is that people are more clear in what they are saying and there is less miscommunication. The cons of the U.S being a low context culture is that people sometimes have a hard time understanding what others are saying to them or asking of them. I believe it is better to have a mixture of both context cultures because it gives people a variety of ways to communicate. This would allow people to receive certain messages containing explicit codes and and also recieve certain messages containing little information.
ReplyDelete2. As a college student I feel that I use both polychromic and monochromic time. One day I can be constantly busy doing several things at a time, trying to get everything done. Another day I can be on a consistent schedule doing one thing at a time. It usually depends if I have a busy schedule or if I want to just focus on one thing. I believe using monochromic time is more beneficial because we should be focusing on one task at a time. I feel that even though it is good to be flexible, we should still value orderliness.
The cons of our low context culture can be simply seen in communication between elders and young people. The context in which both groups talk regularly is different so there is a surge in miscommunication between the two. In day to day life, though, our low context culture has a lot of pros, especially with how fast paced our lives our. With low context, there is low misinterpretation on most occasions. There are certainly times where the opposite happens, but when both parties are on the same page it can speed up communication and make it more effective. Our low context makes non verbal cues extremely important and this can lead to problems also.
ReplyDelete2. Personally, my brain works best on monochromic time. I have a schedule almost every day. This schedule usually plans out my day from when I wake till when I go to bed. On the weekends I am much more flexible, but during the week I have to utilize every minute - if not for studying, for a nap. I work best when I have a set amount of time to get something done and I make sure I have time for all of my activities. I think monochromatic time is more beneficial because when you are doing a task your whole mind is focused on that one thing, ideally. This makes for a more effective way of life.
1.) A pro to low context culture is that they rely on facts to communicate. They make sure that they have all the information and understand it correctly. There are some cons to low context culture such as it being informal and not using indirect messaging. I believe that both context cultures have pros and cons but I like the high context culture better just because it relies more on your gut feeling and uses indirect messaging.
ReplyDelete2.) I believe that in the educational side of my college life I use monochronic time because time is inflexible here and I have deadlines that can't be changed. I also keep my personal life outside of my life at class and keep my phone away while I'm in class or doing homework so I can concentrate. My social life is more polychronic because it can be flexible and times can change and I or my friends can be late and its acceptable. I think its more beneficial to have monochronic time because I like to be on time and focus on one thing at a time.
1. The pro of being a low context culture is that there is very little miscommunication and people are more clear in what they are saying. The cons of being a low context is that it may be harder to pick up on nonverbal cues. I think that it's better to have a mixture of both high and low context cultures because it gives you a variety of different ways to communicate.
ReplyDelete2. As a college student, I find myself using both a mixture between monochronic and polychronic time. It's important to have a schedule and structure for class and projects but it's also important to be able to multitask when you have to.
1. The pros of the U.S. being a low context culture is people have adapted to a more common communication system. People understand others cultures and try not to offend others. We are less likely to offend others by just going on about our day. The cons are that people cannot really express their culture. People had to drop their cultural norms and learn new ones that fit a combination of cultures in the U.S. I think it is better to have low context culture because we are less likely to offend one another.
ReplyDelete2. I think as a college student I use monochromic more because I want to put all my effort into one thing then move to the next and be able to focus on one thing at a time and get it right. I think the monochromic system is more important because then you take your time and give all effort into one thing at a time.
1. A pro to the U.S. being a low context culture would be that the U.S. is more accepting in the way that we communicate. A con with low context culture would be not being able to fluently understand non-verbal communication. I think that a low context culture is better because we are more understanding of other forms of communication and those cultures.
ReplyDelete2. Depending on the task, sometimes monochromic time would be better to use (if one task needs a lot of focus), but other times there are too many things to get done and multi tasking (polychronic) would be more beneficial.
1. I think that because the U.S. is a melting pot, being a low-context culture accommodates society very well. It is important in business situations and every day conversation that the meaning of whatever is said comes across clearly. Obviously language barriers and cultural barriers make this difficult. For example, if I go up to a fellow employee that is from another country and ask them for a favor, they may not be able to understand everything the favor involves because of the language barrier. This is where the cons to the U.S. being a low-context culture come in. In a high-context culture, social harmony is valued over clarity. This could be very useful in the U.S. If we focused more on all of the different cultures working well together, clarity might come along by itself. I think overall a low-context culture is better because clarity is a priority. I think that when clarity is a priority, it helps to prevent arguments, and misunderstandings.
ReplyDelete2. As a college student I see more monochromic time. It is important for me to schedule out my time. Since I have two jobs, 18 credits, and I'm involved in theatre, my days can get pretty busy. If I didn't focus on arranging and managing my time, I could get buried by work pretty easily. I think monochromic time is more beneficial overall. In polychromic time, several things can get done at once, but I feel like the no one thing ever gets much focus. Obviously, with polychromic time, time is not stressed. In monochromic time, you can divide up the things you need to achieve, schedule out your time, and take those specific times to focus on specific tasks.
1. A low context culture in the U.S. can be seen as positive because there are very few misunderstandings since we rely so much on computers and technology to retrieve most of our information. The con to this is inappropriate or miscommunication because we rely so much on these technonolgical, nonverbal interactions. I do believe, however, that low context culture is better because we are able to obtain more information through interactions with computers and there is less misunderstanding when speaking of technical terms. With this, I feel that a low context culture can be seen as more factually intelligent.
ReplyDelete2. As a college student, I would say I use both monochromic time and polychronic time. Each day is different for me, so either I have and extremely busy day with classes, studying, and practice that is specifically planned out or I have more relaxed days where I know what I need to accomplish but the order does not matter. I think it is important to be monochromic, however, because it gives more structure to your schedule and less chaos in your life. Whereas polychronic could cause confusion and stress if things are randomly thrown into your day.
1.) Being low-context seems fitting for our society as it allows us to adapt ways to communicate. When it comes to a language barrier, it can be difficult for those trying to speak to one another as they may not always find a common ground. I believe low-context culture is better as it does make us more accepting to differences.
ReplyDelete2.) I use polychronic time more than I use monochromic. At my job, I have to use polychronic time as I'm the manager. If I don't, things can get out of control. For instance, at work, often I'll have to count down a cash drawer while helping someone adjust their schedule while also keeping an eye out for customers or for issues that may arise. I prefer using polychronic time as it keeps me on my toes and allows me to get more things done in a shorter period of time.
1. A pro of the U.S. being a low context culture is that there is a clear understanding of what was being said. Since it is low context there are few misunderstandings among communication. Since we are so technology based we often rely on it for our communication. This can create a problem within the tone of the message, but it allows us to communicate across cultures so it is also a benefit. I think it is better to be a low context culture because messages are direct and explicit and there are few misinterpretations.
ReplyDelete2. I tend to be more monochromic time because I plan things out and when they should be done. If I did not plan time I would forget to do things and would get buried under all my work that needs to be done. I think it is more beneficial to monochromic that way each item gets its devoted time and focus. With polychronic, more tasks are being completed but probably none of them are all their full potential. Monochromic is a way to schedule things to work on specific tasks and have less confusion whereas polychronic is a way to multitask and get more tasks achieved but the quality is not the best.
1. The pros of living in a low context culture is that there are not a lot of miscommunication between people. There is nothing really unsaid. The cons of living in a low context culture would be that people would have a hard time getting used to a culture that is a high context.
ReplyDelete2. As a college student, I think I use both polychromic and monochromic time. My classes are scheduled at a certain time every day and I try to make sure to at least make a study schedule where I can make sure to have certain times to work on certain things. When my classes are done, however, the time is my own and I don't necessarily need to schedule out my time when I'm with my friends or just spontaneously make plans.
1. I think that the pros of living in a low context culture would be that we all are able to communicate pretty clearly non-verbally and verbally. However, a con would be that this might not apply as well to those that aren't completely comfortable with the U.S. culture or language, it's hard for everyone to always be on the same page.
ReplyDelete2. As a college student I believe that I can focus and accomplish more using monochromic time. I like being able to work on one task and complete it, and then being able to move on to the next. I don't think that this mindset is always the most beneficial one, because being able to kind've focus and have attention on multiple areas would probably be much easier when I find myself with a lot on my plate.
1. one pro of being a low context culture would be that everything is more clear and understandable, but a con would be that it is harder to communicate with a culture with high context culture and it would be more difficult to understand non verbal language.
ReplyDelete2. I think as a college student I am more monochromatic because I can only focus on one thing at a time. I have to list out everything I need done that day and lay it out almost like a time line. When I become stressed or think I don't have enough time in a day to complete everything I need to just sit down and figure out the first thing I need accomplished and which task is more important.