Why Do Some Cultures Prefer Indirect Communication?
In my last blog, I shared about differences and confusions between cultures that communicate directly versus indirectly. Many of us have recognized these differences but have not understood them. One of my teammates at MRN, who is stationed in a Muslim Majority country and has worked for over a dozen years in a Sub-Saharan African country, suggested that we need to help people understand not just that there are difference, but why they exist. I asked him to write a guest blog under a pseudonym to help us understand the background and nuances of these cultural differences further.
We Americans come from a culture that communicates directly. This just makes sense to us, and we struggle to understand why other cultures aren’t like ours. Why wouldn’t you want to communicate directly?
Fifteen years ago, when I first moved to serve in a Sub-Saharan African country, I was young and bold; and like many, I was motivated by a strong sense of call and desire to help. Little did I know that I had landed in a world governed by the ‘face’ saving dynamics of indirect communication. I made friends, started doing ministry with them, and quickly gave myself to the problems they were encountering. I had what I thought were marvelous ideas, and I freely shared them in the face of the myriad issues that faced us. To my surprise, I would almost always be received with eager acceptance…and would only later discover that they didn’t think my ideas were that great or helpful after all.
For example, at one point, I had the brilliant idea of helping my local friends start a business to help sustain some of their ministry efforts. I presented the idea and received a smiling agreement. Feeling flattered, I spent several months presenting my ideas to donors Stateside, raising funds and, by default, expectations. After some time, all the hard work came to fruition in launching the business.
Unfortunately, it didn’t take long for me to realize that the energy that went into beginning the business was met with lackluster interest and motivation once the business opened. I was shocked one day when my friends sat me down to ask why I had started the business. I had thought that ‘we’ were doing this together, that the vision was ours, not mine; I had sacrificed much and had been frustrated at the lack of support for the business. And then they broke it to me - this idea was your idea, not ours, and we did not think it was a good idea from the beginning.
I believed that I had asked them their opinion and received an affirmation; however, they maintained that the way I presented the idea had left no room for them to disagree. At first, it felt like dishonesty until I learned that we had been playing two fundamentally different games when it came to communication. In their mind, their agreement to my direct presentation of my good idea was a gesture of honor and respect, not approval. They had tried to communicate indirectly to mitigate causing shame; however, I did not have the skills necessary to understand the new rules of communication I was encountering. My direct communication had made it practically impossible for my local friends to disagree in a culturally appropriate way. Communicating directly had become an obstacle to “truth” rather than a vehicle for it like my Western worldview had taught me! Let that last statement sink in for a minute.
Through the years, I have heard many of my global brothers and sisters express their frustration when working with our American culture's direct and driven nature. In the West, we understand the primary goal of communication as the transfer of information. I never had to stop and think about this; I just assumed that this is communication's sole or primary function. I had to learn that in some cultures, people use communication primarily to maintain and manage relationships. As Jayson Georges helpfully points out,
Some cultures see truth in communication as defined relationally, not just logically. Words are for the purpose of managing relationships and social identities, not just presenting information. Being truthful means being loyal in your relationships, respecting others and helping preserve face. A person who “cuts to the chase” or “gets to the point” runs the risk of offending others so it is preferable to “beat around the bush” in honor-shame contexts. Western communication is like a download that efficiently transfers information; Majority World communication is more of a dance where you avoid stepping on toes.”1
Because of my status, for my friends to communicate a direct disagreement with an idea I had so fervently presented would have been culturally interpreted as a lapse of loyalty to our friendship. It took me several years to fully appreciate the subtlety and nuance of communicating indirectly. With my growing understanding, I often favor the clever parables, proverbs, and stories that are hallmarks of indirect communication.
Culture is a tricky thing. It permeates all aspects of life, and yet it consists in those things that are so obvious that they are unnoticeable, things we know but don’t always consider. It takes disorienting cross-cultural encounters to get us to begin thinking about why we do and think the way we do. Rather than judge others based upon the precepts of our culture, we must first be willing to “remove the outer cloak” of our culture and assumptions and take the posture of a servant.
- Kamel B
The problem…
When we
with wealth and resources
education and status
and a passport
which is power
Are so direct
and so driven
by our sense of call
our goals
by us predetermined
for others
yet covertly…
for ourselves,
In directness
communicating information
accomplishing ‘ends’
and they
in honor and loyalty
preserving the richness of community,
through patience
and longsuffering
smile to match our requests with the
pacifying debt of loyalty we have demanded
When we do this,
Lord have mercy on us,
lest we meet the wealth of the poor
and mistake it for poverty
1Georges, J., & Baker, M. D. (2016). Ministering in honor-shame cultures: Biblical foundations and practical essentials. IVP Academic, 53.