What is a low context society?

When I was at Aerials last week there was a question from the audience (from Boris actually) to the panel referencing the idea of high and low context cultures, derived originally from Edward Halls's book Beyond Culture. We were discussing organisational culture and change, and Boris's question related to the differences that might need to be considered not just from the culture within an organisation, but that inherent to the society in which the organisation is operating. Briefly, the concept of high and low context cultures is used to describe broad cultural differences in societies. Quoting from this source (which is about the most succint definition I could find):

High context refers to societies or groups where people have close connections over a long period of time. Many aspects of cultural behavior are not made explicit because most members know what to do and what to think from years of interaction with each other. Your family is probably an example of a high context environment.

Low context refers to societies where people tend to have many connections but of shorter duration or for some specific reason. In these societies, cultural behavior and beliefs may need to be spelled out explicitly so that those coming into the cultural environment know how to behave.

So high context is all about contextual elements that help people understand the rules, less verbally explicit communication, more internalised understanding, more situational or relational knowledge, multiple cross-ties and intersections with others, more networked. Low context is rule oriented, little taken for granted, overt and explicit messages, task centred, highly organised time, interpersonal connections of a shorter duration.

The question related to the potential influence of societal cultures that are either largely high or low context (the Wikipedia entry has a list) on organisational culture and change, which is a really interesting thought. But as the definition that I quoted from states:

'While these terms are sometimes useful in describing some aspects of a culture, one can never say a culture is "high" or "low" because societies all contain both modes. "High" and "low" are therefore less relevant as a description of a whole people, and more useful to describe and understand particular situations and environments.'

And I think this is true as well in the context of organisational culture, and the context of our discussion at the event about how you change aspects of organisational culture. I'd talked in my presentation a lot about what autonomy, mastery and purpose might mean in relation to creating the kind of organisational culture that thrives in a digitally-empowered world.

Some of these elements feel more at home in a high context environment, some in low. The role of a strong purpose and vision in shaping implicit behaviours, expectations and reducing unnecessary process, for example, feels very high context. As does a personal acceptance of failure. More knowledge being external, public and accessible on the other hand, feels very low context. I'm not sure I have any answers about understanding how you might categorise or measure different aspects of organisational culture in this way, but I think there's something in that thought about how one situation might contain an 'inner high context core and an outer low context ring' for those who are less involved, and also in considering the influence of the societal culture in which the company is operating.

After completing this chapter, you will be able to:

  • Define cultural context (Guffey et al., 2013, p. 64)
  • Contrast communicate styles for low-context and high-context cultures (Meyer, 2017, p. 59)
  • Explain how cultural differences can affect workplace communication (Meyer, 2014)

Now that we know, broadly, what culture is, let’s discuss some ways to categorize aspects of different cultures. As we discuss culture, we are making generalizations to create cultural prototypes. Remember that culture is dynamic, and that every individual within a culture is unique and may not conform exactly to the general characteristics of that culture. Also remember that although cultures are different from one another, no culture or cultural characteristic is better or worse than any other.

Watch this video from international business expert Erin Meyer .

Guffey et al. (2013) explain the concept of cultural context:

Cultural context is a concept developed by cultural anthropologist Edward T. Hall. In his model, context refers to the stimuli, environment, or ambiance surrounding an event.

Communicators in low-context cultures (such as those in North America, Scandinavia, and Germany) depend little on the context of a situation to convey their meaning. They assume that listeners know very little and must be told practically everything. Low-context cultures tend to be logical, analytical, action-oriented, and concerned with the individual.

In high-context cultures (such as those in Japan, China, and Arab countries), the listener is already “contexted” and does not need to be given much background information. High-context cultures are more likely to be intuitive, contemplative, and concerned with the collective. Communicators in high-context cultures pay attention to more than the words spoken – they also pay attention to interpersonal relationships, nonverbal expressions, physical settings, and social settings. In high-context cultures, communication cues are transmitted by posture, voice inflection, gestures, and facial expression. Establishing relationships is an important part of communicating and interacting. Unlike the linear communication style preferred in low-context cultures, high-context communicators may use spiral logic, circling around a topic indirectly and looking at it from many tangential or divergent viewpoints. A conclusion may be implied but not argued directly.

Low-context cultures (such as those in North America and Western Europe) depend less on the environment of a situation to convey meaning than do high-context cultures (such as those in Japan, China, and Arab countries).

Carolyn Meyer (2017) discusses the prototypes for communication in low-context and high-context cultures:

Low-Context Cultures 

Communicators in low-context cultures (such as those in Germany, Scandinavia, and North America) convey their meaning exclusive of the context of a situation. Meaning depends on what is said- the literal content of the message- rather than how it is said. Information has to be explicit and detailed for the message to be conveyed without distortion.

Low-context communicators don’t need to be provided with much background information, but they do expect messages to be professional, efficient, and linear in their logic. Conclusions are explicitly stated. Effectively communicating within this culture, therefore, requires messaging that is perceived as objective, professional, and efficient.

High-Context Cultures

In high-context cultures (such as those in Japan, China, Korea, and Arab countries), communication relies heavily on non-verbal, contextual, and shared cultural meanings. In other words, high-context communicators attach great importance to everything that surrounds the explicit message, including interpersonal relationships, non-verbal cues, and physical and social settings. Information is transmitted not through words alone but also through non-verbal cues such as gestures, voice inflection, and facial expression, which can have different meanings in different cultures. Eye contact, for example, which is encouraged in North America, may have ambiguous meaning or be considered disrespectful in certain high-context cultures. Meaning is determined not by what is said but by how it is said and by how social implications such as the communicator’s status and position come into play.

For high-context cultures, language is a kind of social lubricant, easing and harmonizing relations that are defined according to a group or collectivist orientation where “we” rather than “I” is the key to identity. Because directness may be thought of as disrespectful, discussions in high-context cultures can be circuitous, circling key issues rather than addressing them head-on. Communicating with high-context cultures can require you to focus on politeness strategies that demonstrate your respect for readers and listeners.

Low Context High Context
Tend to prefer direct verbal interaction Tend to prefer indirect verbal interaction
Tend to understand meaning at one level only Tend to understand meanings embedded at many sociocultural levels
Are generally less proficient in reading nonverbal cues Are generally more proficient in reading nonverbal cues
Value individualism Value group membership
Rely more on logic Rely more on context and feeling
Employ linear logic Employ spiral logic
Say ‘no’ directly Talk around point; avoid saying no
Communication in highly structured messages, provide details, stress literal meaning Communication is simple, sometimes ambiguous, messages; understand visual messages readily

Note: Comparison of low- and high-context cultures reprinted from Business communication: Process & product (p. 64) by M.E. Guffey, D. Lowey, K. Rhodes, K., & P. Rogin.

Listen to business speaker Erin Meyer explain how cultural differences can affect communication. How does her experience in Japan demonstrate what you’ve learned so far about the different dimensions of culture?