1

WhatdoTechnicalCommunicatorsNeedtoKnowaboutWorkingin

InternationalEnvironments?

ByKirkSt.Amant,EastCarolinaUniversity

SUMMARY

Today,manytechnicalcommunicatorsworkaspartofagreaterinternationalbusinessprocess.

Insomecases,theydesignWebinterfacesordeveloponlinecontentforawiderangeofglobalusers.In

othercases,theydraftdocumentsthatwillbetranslatedforreleaseintointernationalmarkets.Andin

yetotherinstances,technicalcommunicatorsusedifferentmediatointeractwithoverseascolleaguesin

ordertoproduceinformationalproducts.Asaresult,today’stechnicalcommunicatorneedsto

understandhowtoworkeffectivelyinarangeofinternationalenvironments.

Forthisreason,technicalcommunicatorsmustdevelopnewskillsandknowledgebasesto

participateeffectivelyinsuchcontexts.Workingsuccessfullyininternationalenvironments,however,

ofteninvolvesonecentralfactor–credibility.Thatis,effectiveinternationalcommunicationfocuseson

creatingmaterialsmembersofothercultureswillconsidercredible,orworthusing.Thus,workingin

internationalenvironmentsisgenerallyamatterofrhetoric–orknowinghowtopresentinformationin

awaythatdifferentculturalaudienceswillconsidercredible.Asaresult,technicalcommunicatorsmust

understandhowculturalrhetoricalexpectationscanaffecttheperceivedcredibility(andusability)of

informationalorinstructionalmaterialsiftheywishtosucceedintheinternationalcontextsofmodern

businesspractices.

INTRODUCTION:WHATWENTWRONGWITHTHISINTERNATIONALPROJECT?

2

PatistheleadtechnicalcommunicatoratAllianceX–acompanythatdevelopseconomical

accountingsoftwareforsmallbusinesses.Recently,thecompanyhaswonalucrativecontractto

providesoftwaretotheMinistryofEducationinthenationofRiendutoutwhereEnglishistheofficial

language.PathasbeenaskedtoleadtheinitiativetodevelopanonlinehelpWebsitethatwillprovide

technicalsupporttoclientsinboththeU.S.andRiendutout.Itisamajorproject,andifsuccessful,it

couldleadtocontractswithothergovernmentagenciesinReindutout.

Fortheproject,Pat’sinitialthoughtistodevelopahelpsitethatconsistsoftwoparts.Onepart

ofthehelpsitewouldbestatic,orsimplydisplayinformation.ThestaticpartwouldconsistofaFAQ

(FrequentlyAskedQuestions)Webpage.Thispagewouldprovideclientswithsolutionstoproblems

thatcommonlyarisewhenusingthesoftwareforthefirsttime(e.g.,settingorre-settingthesoftware’s

preferencestoworkonaPCoraMacplatform).Theotherportionofthesitewouldbeinteractive,or

dynamic.Forthissection,Patwantstomakeuseofacurrenttrendinsocialmediaandcreateanonline

bulletinboardthatallowsproductownerstopostquestionstheymighthaveorproblemstheymight

encounter.Otherclients,inturn,couldpostresponsesandsolutionsbasedontheirownexperiences

withthesoftware.Onceortwiceaweek,companytechnicianswouldcheckthebulletinboardandpost

theirownanswerstoitemsfoundonthesite.

Throughsuchanapproach,thedynamicpartofthesitebuildsacommunityofproductusers

whowouldremaininterestedinthesite,thecompany,andthecompany’sproducts.Theuseofsucha

dynamicsitewouldalsoreducethetimeandenergythecompany’stechnicalsupportstaffspends

answering“simpleandeasy”questionsnotcoveredinthestaticFAQpartofthesite.Thesetechnicians

couldthenfocustheirtimeandattentiononmorecomplexissuesencounteredbyusers.

PatpresentsthisplantothemanagementofAllianceX,andreceivesapprovaltobeginworkon

thetwo-parthelpsite.Injustoveramonth,thesiteiscompleted,andaweeklateritgoeslive.Both

3

PatandthemanagementteamatAllianceXareconfidentthattheirworkonthisprojectwillleadto

futuresuccessfulventureswithagenciesinRiendutout.

However,aweekafterthesitegoesliveinRiendutout,Patreceivesatroublingphonecallfrom

hissupervisoratAllianceX.Inthelastsevendays,theMinistryofEducationinRiendutouthasbeen

bombardedwithcomplaintsandnotificationsfromconcernedcitizens.Manyoftheseindividualshave

contactedtheMinistrytonotifyofficialsthattheMinistry’shelpsitehasbeenhackedandimpostersare

dispensingsuspectinformationandsuggestions.Manyothercitizenshavecontactedvarious

RiendutoutauthoritiestomaketheseagenciesawareofascamhelpWebsitetryingtopresentitselfas

anextensionoftheMinistryofEducation.

Uponcloserinspection,representativesofRiendutout’sMinistryofEducationhavedetermined

thatthedynamiccommunicationpartofthehelpsite–whereaverageconsumersvs.technicalexperts

withAllianceX–provideadviceconstitutesanactofbadfaithonthepartofAllianceX.Forthisreason,

theMinistryhastakenthesiteofflineandisconsideringfilingalegalclaimagainstAllianceX.Inshort,

thehelpsiteisadisaster–onefromwhichAllianceXmightnotbeabletorecover.AllianceXnow

wantsPattoproduceafullreportonthesituation–andtodosointhenext24hours–inorderto

mitigatethesituationasquicklyaspossible.

Afterthephonecall,Patsatinstunnedsilenceforseveralminutesandtriedtodeterminewhat

hadhappened.Thesitewasnotbasedonanynewconcepts,approaches,ortechnologies.Infact,it

wasanapproachthathadbeenusedsuccessfullywithanumberofotherU.S.-basedprojectswitha

rangeofclients.AndmanagementhadreviewedandapprovedtheideabeforePatbegantheproject.

Whathadgonewrong?

Inthiscase,Patfailedtoconsideroneall-importantfactor–thatofculture–andhowthat

factormightaffecttheexpectations,perceptions,andusesofaninformationalproduct.Thatoversight,

4

however,costAllianceXdearly.YetthisproblematicsituationcouldhavebeenavoidedifPathadmade

cultureoneofthecentralconsiderationsforthisproject.

Thischapterexamineshowanunderstandingofrhetoricalfactorscanhelpyoucreatecredible

materialsforinternationalaudiences.Insodoing,thechapteroverviewshowculturalexpectationsof

rhetoricandcredibilitycanaffectperceptionsofandreactionstomessagesandproducts.Thechapter’s

literaturereview,forexample,examineshowvaryingcommunicationexpectationscanariseindifferent

cultures.Thissectionalsoexplainshowsuchdifferencesinfluencepreferredculturalapproachesto

presentinginformation(rhetoric)andexpectationsofwhatconstitutesacrediblewaytoshareideasina

givenculture.Theseideasofrhetoricandcredibilitythenbecomethefoundationforaheuristic

frameworkforunderstanding,anticipating,andaddressingculturalrhetoricaldifferencesinorderto

workmoreeffectivelyininternationalcontexts.Thisheuristicusesrhetoricalconceptssuchasthe

forumandthespecialtopicstoprovidetechnicalcommunicatorswithamechanismforexamining

centralissuesrelatedtocreatingcrediblemessagesininternationalcontexts.Thechapterthen

concludeswithanextendedexamplethatrevealshowtechnicalcommunicatorscanusethisrhetorical

frameworktoparticipatemoreeffectivelyininternationalprojects.Thisextendedexampleillustrates

howarhetoric-basedheuristiccouldbeappliedtothecaseofAllianceXtoavoidtheproblems

encounteredwiththeonlinehelpsite.Thisapplicationoftheheuristicexemplifieshowthisapproach

canprovideyouwiththefoundationalknowledgeneededtoparticipatemoreeffectivelyintoday’s

globalworkenvironment.

LITERATUREREVIEW:WHATISCULTURE,ANDHOWDOESITAFFECTCOMMUNICATION?

Effectiveinternationalcommunicationinvolvesunderstandinghowaspectsofcultureaffect

behaviorsandexpectations.Withinthiscontext,perhapsthebestwaytothinkofcultureisasan

organizationalsystem,oraworldview,youusetoidentifyandranktheimportanceofdifferentitemsin

5

yourenvironment(Neuliep2000,14-16;VarnerandBeamer1995,2-7).Actionsthatsupportwhatis

importanttoyourculture’sworldviewareconsidered“acceptable”bythemembersofyourculture.

Actionsthatdonotrespectthisworldviewconstitute“unacceptable”behaviortothemembersofyour

culture(Neuliep2000,18-21;Berryetal.2002,29-33).

Totheworldviewofsomecultures,forexample,status–andstatusdifferences–arevery

important,andcommunicationbehaviormustreflectthisimportance(e.g.,theuseofformaltitleswhen

addressingsomeone)(HofstedeandHofstede2005,39-40).Totheworldviewofadifferentculture,

however,statusmightnotbeconsideredasimportant,anddifferentcommunicationbehaviors(e.g.,

callingone’ssuperiorbyhisorhergivenname)mightbeconsideredacceptable.Thus,aculture’sworld

viewaffectstherhetoric–orthecommunicationpracticesandstyles–itsmembersusewhen

interacting.

Whatisessentialtotheserhetoricaldifferencesisthatnocultureis“correct”or“incorrect”

whencomparedtoanother.Rather,eachculturehasitsown,internalrulesfordeterminingwhatisan

appropriateandexpected–orcredible–waytodothingsaccordingtothesharedworldviewofthe

membersofthatculture(Berryetal.2002,29-33;Neuliep2000,18-21;VarnerandBeamer1995,2-7).

Behaviorthatcontradictssuchculturalexpectationsof“appropriate”isgenerallyconsidered“not

acceptable”and“notcredible”bymostmembersofthatculture.

Fromaninternationalbusinessperspective,suchculturaldifferences–andafailuretorecognize

them–canbeproblematic.Insomecases,theseculturaldisconnectscanresultinconsumersina

prospectivemarketviewingaparticularproductnegativelyorwithskepticism.Thepracticeofcritiquing

acompetitor’sproducts(e.g.,CokecritiquingPepsi),forexample,iscommoninU.S.advertising,butis

generallyconsideredinappropriateinIndia(Kamath2000,10-11).Inothercases,suchdifferencescan

resultinconfusionandmiscommunicationthatleadtolosttimeandmoneywhenco-workersfromtwo

differentculturescollaborateonprojects(AngandInkpen2008,339-340).Thus,effectiveparticipation

6

intheglobalmarketplacerequiresorganizationstounderstandandaddresssuchdifferencesbefore

theycancauseproblems.

Toworkeffectivelyininternationalenvironments,technicalcommunicatorsmustbeawareof

suchculturalrhetoricaldifferences.Becauseaninformationalorinstructionalitemistheproductofthe

culturethatcreatedit,thatitemcontainsimbeddedrhetoricalfactorsspecifictotheculturethat

producedit(Esselink,2000,27-28;Yunker2003,16-20).Forexample,asEnglish-speakingculturesread

fromlefttoright,themembersoftheseculturesoftencreateWebsiteswithmenubarslocatedonthe

left-handsideofaWebpage.IsraeliWebsitesinHebrew,however,havemenubarsontherightsideof

aWebpage,forreadersofHebrewreadfromrighttoleft.Inthesecases,differingculturalexpectations

ofreadingdirectionpromptthemembersoftheseculturestodesigntheirWebsitesintwodifferent

ways.

Fortechnicalcommunicators,successfulinterculturalcommunicationinvolvesidentifyingand

addressingculture-specificrhetoricalfactorsthatcouldcauseproblemswhenusedininternational

contexts.Onceidentified,theserhetoricalaspectsneedtoberemovedorrevisedtomakeaproduct

morecredibleandacceptabletoawider,internationalaudience(BarnumandLi2006,150-158;McCool

2006,178-181).InthecaseofWebsitemenubars,forexample,thischangecouldinvolvelocatingsuch

afeaturetoaccountforthereadingexpectationsofthelargestpossiblegroupofinternationalusers

(e.g.,usingacenteredmenubarlocatedatthetopofpagesonaninternationalWebsite).

Theprocessofrevisingmaterialstomeettheexpectationsofawiderangeofculturalgroupsis

knownasinternationalization(Esselink2000,2-3;Yunker2003,19-20),anditcantakeapre-emptiveor

arevisionistapproach.Inapre-emptiveapproach,youidentifytherhetoricalfactorsofyourculture

thatmightcausecredibilityproblemswhenusedwithagreaterinternationalaudience.Youthencreate

materialsthatavoidtheserhetoricalproblemareas.Thispre-emptiveapproachcanbeseeninwriting

accordingtostandardglobalEnglish–oracontrolledEnglish–thatavoidsculturalrhetoricalfactorsthat

7

couldcauseconfusion(e.g.,passivevoice)(Kohl2008,41-44).Theobjectiveistoproducedocuments

thatcanberead–andbeseenascredible–byawiderangeofinternationalEnglish-speaking

audiences.Suchpre-emptiveapproachesareoftenmoretimeandcostintensiveinitially.However,the

resultingmaterialscanquicklyandeffectivelygofromafinaldrafttoaglobalaudience,andthusreduce

thetimeandmoneyanorganizationmightneedtospendlateronaddressingproblemsrelatedto

rhetoricandculture.

Intherevisionistapproachtointernationalization,youcreatematerialsaccordingtothe

rhetoricalexpectationsofyournativeculture.Anexpertininternationalizationthenrevisesthese

materialstoremoveproblematicitemstomaketheproductmorerhetoricallyacceptabletoagreater

internationalaudience.Theediting-for-translationprocessisonesuchrevisionistapproachto

internationalization.Itinvolvescreatingdocumentsaccordingtotherhetoricalexpectationsofyour

cultureandhavingatrainededitorreviseorremoveproblematicrhetoricalelementstocreateamore

culturallyneutraltext(Rude1998,247-249).Suchtextsareofteneasierfortranslatorstoconvertfrom

onelanguagetoanotherandcansaveontranslationcostsforaproduct.Inthisprocess,creating

originaldocumentstakeslesstimeandcostslessinitially,butthelatereditingincreasesthetimeand

costtotheoverallprocess.

Insomesituations,organizationsmightwishtorevisematerialstomeettherhetorical

expectationsofaspecificculturevs.createproductsforageneralinternationalaudience.Thisprocess

ofrevisingmaterialstomeettheexpectationsofaspecificcultureisknownaslocalization,anditoften

requiresacertaindegreeofflexibilityinproductdesign(Esselink2000,3-5;Yunker2003,16-19).If,for

example,youdesignaWebsiteonlyformembersofyournativeculture,itmightbedifficulttorevise

theplacementoffeaturessuchasmenubarswithoutmakingtheoverallsitelookoddtomembersof

thecultureforwhichthatsiteisbeinglocalized.However,ifyouknowwhatculturalaspectsofsite

designcanberhetoricallyproblematicandavoidusingthem,youmakeiteasiertore-configure/localize

8

thatsiteforothercultures.(Placingamenubarhorizontallyacrossthetopofapageavoidshavingto

re-designthatpagetoshiftaleft-sidemenubartotherightsideofthepage.)Inothercases,youcan

creatematerialsinawaythatwouldmakethemeasytolocalize(e.g.,insertingimagesinawaythat

allowsthemtoberemovedwithoutcausingamajorshiftintheflowoftextonaWebpage).

Intheseinstances,whatisimportantisthatyouknowwhatrhetoricalaspectscancausecross-

culturalcommunicationproblems.Basedonthisknowledge,youcaneitheravoidusingsuchelements

orusetheminawaythatallowsforeasyrevision/localizationorinternationalization.Engaging

effectivelyininternationaltechnicalcommunicationpractices,therefore,meansyoumustunderstanda

numberofcentralrhetoricalfactorsyoucanusetoguideyourprofessionalactivitiesininternational

contexts.

Fromarhetoricalperspective,credibilitybeginswithoneall-importantfactor:audience.The

groupofindividuals–ortheaudience–towhichyoupresentinformationhasexpectationsofhowto

conveyideasappropriately,orcredibly.Theseexpectations,however,arenotrandom,norarethey

uniformacrossallsituations.Rather,audienceexpectationsofcredibilityareoftencloselylinkedtothe

context,setting,orgenreinwhichinformationispresented(St.Amant2006,56-57).Inrhetoricalterms,

thiscontext/genreiscalledtheforum,ortheplacetowhichindividualscometofindspecificinformation

relatedtoachievingaparticularobjective.

Theideaworksasfollows:Iaminterestedingaininginformationonifaparticularfilmisworth

seeing.Myculturehasidentifiedaspecificforum/genre–themoviereview–asamechanismIcanuse

tofindinformationrelatedtoachievingthisobjective.So,whenIreadamoviereview,I’mlookingfor

theauthortomentionanumberofspecificinformationalareas(e.g.,plot,runtime,cast,goodacting,

goodediting,etc.)Ineedtoknowaboutinordertoachievemyobjectiveforreadingthisreview.Ifthe

authorofthatreviewmeetsmyforumexpectationsandmypurposeforreadingthereview,I’lllikely

considerthereviewtobecredibleandworthmyconsideration.If,however,theauthoruseshis/her

9

moviereviewtoexplainwhyIshouldpurchaseaparticularcarandfailstomentionanythingabout

movies,I’lllikelydiscountthecredibilityofwhattheauthorsays.Infact,Imightbeannoyedwiththat

authorforwastingmytimebyhavingmereadsomethingcompletelyunrelatedtomyobjectivefor

consultingthisreview.So,bynotmeetingaudience’sexpectationofthepurposeforusingagiven

forum,anauthorcanfailtoestablishthecredibilityneededforthataudiencetoconsiderhisorher

ideasworthwhile.

Withinthecontextofthefilmreview,Iwaslookingformentionofcertaintopics,orkindsof

information–plot,runtime,cast,goodacting,goodediting,etc.–essentialtoachievingmypurposefor

readingamoviereview.Becausethesetopicshelpmeachievemyforum-relatedpurpose,Itendto

viewthemasmarkersthatindicatethecredibilityoftherelatedreview.So,ifthesetopicsarepresent,

I’lllikelyconsiderareviewtobeacredibleone.Iftheyaremissing,I’lllikelyconsiderthereviewtobe

non-credible.

Fromarhetoricalperspective,theseforum-specificitemsareknownasspecialtopics,andthey

aresomeofthemostimportantfactorsassociatedwithcreatingcredibilityinaspecificforum(Miller

andSelzer1985,324-325).Campbell(1998),moreover,noteshowspecialtopicsareimportantfactors

affectingcredibilityincross-culturalexchanges(39).So,whencreatingcrediblemessages–betheyfor

yourowncultureoranotherculture–youneedtoknowtwokeythingsaboutyouraudience:

• Whatpurpose/objectiveyouraudienceassociateswithaspecificforum;

• Whatspecialtopics–orkinds/categoriesofinformation–youraudienceconsidersessentialto

achievingthepurpose/objectiveassociatedwiththatforum.

Becausetheserhetoricalaspectscanvaryfromculturetoculture,theyareoftenthecentralfactors

contributingtocross-culturalmiscommunication(Kaplan2001,ix-xiv;Panetta2001,4-6).Theyarealso

thefactorstobeawareofwhenworkingininternationalenvironments.

10

Oneclassicexampleusedtoillustratetheseculturalandrhetoricalideasistheforumofa

businessletter.Whatisthepurposeofthisparticularforum?IfyouareanAnglo-American,you

generallyviewthisforumasamechanismforpresentingfactsrelatedtoaparticularbusinesssituation

(Campbell1998,35-36;St.Amant2006,56-57).Forthisreason,thetopicsoneneedstoaddressto

achievethisobjective(andviewthepresentationascredible)wouldinvolvefacts,dates,andother

informationrelatedtoaspecificbusinesssituation.Ifthewriterfailstomentionsuchtopics,oraddress

topicsunconnectedtothereader’spurposeforusingthisforum(e.g.,questionsaboutthereader’s

regionorfamily),thataudience/readerwilllikelyviewtheletterasinappropriateandnotcredible.So

howisthisexamplerelatedtoworkingininternationalenvironments?

Researchindicatesotherculturestendtoassociateadifferentpurposewiththeforumofa

businessletter(Campbell1998,39;Tebeaux1999,53-56).Infact,foranumberofcultures,thepurpose

ofabusinessletterisnottoconveythefactsofagivenbusinesssituation.Rather,theletterisa

mechanismindividualsusetoinitiateortomaintainalong-termrelationshipessentialtothefuture

successofboththeletter’ssenderanditsreceiver(Campbell1998,39;Tebeaux1999,62).This

differenceinpurposemeansreadersfromsuchcultureswillexpectanauthortomentiondifferentkinds

oftopics–thoseassociatedwithestablishingormaintainingsuchrelationships–inordertocreatea

crediblepresentationsinthatforum.

AsCampbell(1998)explains,formanyJapanesebusinesspersons,businesslettersareabout

creatingormaintainingrelationships(36-41).Forthisreason,itisnotuncommonforaninitialletterto

aprospectiveJapanesepartnertomentionsomefactabouttherecipient’snationorculture.Inone

study,forexample,CampbellreportsonhowaChineseauthorwritingtoaprospectiveJapaneseclient

makesmentionofcertainaspectsofJapanesegeographyinaninitialbusinessletter.Whywasthis

informationimportant?Inmentioningsuchgeographicdetails,theletter’sauthorrevealsheorshe

tookthetimetodoinitialresearchonthereader’scultureinordertomakementionofitintheletter.

11

Suchanactionindicatestheauthor’sdesiretoengageinalong-termrelationshipwiththeletter’s

reader,foronewouldnotexpendtheefforttolearnsuchinformationifthatpersonwerenotinterested

inhavingmorethananinitialexchangewiththeletter’srecipient.Thus,adifferentkindofspecialtopic

–informationrevealingthesender’sknowledgeoftherecipient–isconnectedtoJapaneseexpectations

ofcreatingcredibilityinthisforum.Withinsuchcontexts,thefocusforthetechnicalcommunicatoristo

identifyandtoaddresssuchrhetoricaldifferencessoinformationcanbeeffectivelyexchangedacross

cultures.

Forthetechnicalcommunicator,workingeffectivelyininternationalenvironmentsinvolves

knowingofsuchdifferencesinadvanceandaddressingthem.Sucharhetoric-basedapproachcanallow

interactionsbetweenthesetwoculturalgroupstobebothmoresuccessfulandmoreproductive.To

achievethisgoal,youcanusearhetoricalframework–oraheuristic–toaskimportantquestionsthat

canguidetheinternationalcommunicationprocess.

HEURISTIC:HOWCANYOUUSEAKNOWLEDGEOFRHETORICTOCOMMUNICATEEFFECTIVELYIN

INTERNATIONALENVIRONMENTS?

Thekeytoworkingeffectivelyininternationalenvironmentsisdoingresearchontherhetorical

expectationsofothercultures.Suchresearch,however,mustbedirectedbyaparticularmechanismor

approachtobesuccessful.Rhetoricalconceptsconnectedtocredibilitycanprovidethefocusneededto

conducteffectiveresearchrelatedtocross-culturalcommunication.Theideaistousecertain

fundamentalrhetoricalconceptsassociatedwithcredibilityinafocusedwaytoidentifycertain

credibilityexpectationsculturesassociatewithdifferentcommunicationcontexts.Theseconceptsare

quitefoundationalandinvolveknowingtheforum,orsetting/context,inwhichinformationispresented

andidentifyingthespecificsubjectsortopicsindividualsexpecttoencounterinthatforum.

12

Understandingandaddressingculturalexpectationsforaforum,itspurpose,andthespecialtopics

culturesassociatewiththatforumisessentialtocreatingcrediblemessagesininternationalcontexts.

Theserhetoricalconceptscan,inturn,serveasavaluableguideforconductingeffective

researchonculture,communication,andcredibility,fortheyletyouknowwhatspecificitemstolook

fororexaminewhendoinginitialresearchoncultureandcommunication.Byusingtheconceptsofthe

forumandthespecialtopicsastheyrelatetocredibility,youcaneffectivelyanalyzematerialsproduced

byindividualsfromothercultures.Thisanalysiscanprovideyouwithamodelofwhatthemembersofa

specificcultureassociatewithcrediblepresentationsinagivenforum/genre.

Toengageinsuchresearch,youcouldlocateandreviewmultipleexamplesofthesamekindof

documentproducedbynativesofthetargetculture(theculturalaudienceforwhichyouwilldesign

materials).Suchananalysiswouldfocusonidentifyingwhatappeartobetheculture-specificcredibility

expectationsassociatedwiththatforum.Youcouldalsointerviewthemembersofaparticularculture

aboutcredibilityexpectationsforagivenforum–includingthepurposeoftheforumandthekindsof

specialtopicsexpectedinthatforum.Youcanthenusetheresultsofthisresearchtodevelop

guidelinesforhowtomeetthecredibilityexpectationsoftherelatedculturalaudience.

Forthisresearchprocesstobesuccessful,youneedtoaskcertainquestionsconnectedto

rhetoricandcredibility.Thesequestionsrelatetofourrhetoricaltasksinvolvingtheforumandthe

specialtopics:

Task1:Identifytheforum(genre)forconveyinginformation

Whilethisitemseemsself-obvious,itisoftenoverlookedininternationalcommunication

situations.Theproblemistheincorrectassumptionthatallculturesusethesamegenre-basedforums

topresentinformation.Inactuality,whatmightbeconsideredrelativelycommonforums/genresinone

culturemightnotexistinanother.KristinR.Woolever(2001),forexample,notes,“inmanyhigh-

contextcultures[e.g.,Japan,China,SaudiArabia]peoplerelyonmoreinformalrelationships[i.e.,

13

personalconversations]anddiscussionstoestablishthefoundationsandstandardsforproposals”(56).

Asaresult,individualsfromtheseculturesmight“viewasunnecessaryandperhapsasoffensivetheuse

ofwrittenRequestsForProposals(RFPs)”(Woolever,2001,56).Thus,somehigh-contextculturesmight

notuseaforum/genrethatisoftenconsideredfoundationaltomanylow-context(e.g.,Anglo-U.S.)

businesspractices.

InWoolever’sexample,theexpectationthataforum/genreofRFPexistsinotherculturescould

resultinmiscommunicationoroffenseifusedwithindividualsfromculturesthatmightnothavesucha

forum.Forexample,incultureswhereone’swordisone’sbond,therequestforsomethinginwriting

mightbeseenasindicatingalackoftrust(i.e.,“Isn’tourwordalonegoodenough?Doyouhavesuch

littletrustforusthatyouneedsuchdetailsinwriting?”).Fromacultural-rhetoricalperspective,itisa

caseofcredibilitybeinglostthroughfailuretounderstandtheforuminwhichaudiencesexpect

informationtobepresented.Forthisreason,youshouldalwaysbeginyourresearchoninternational

communicationbyasking

“DoesthegenreIwanttousetoconveyinformationexistintheculturewithwhichIwillbe

sharingthatinformation?”

Ifnot,thenyouwillneedtodomoreresearchontherelatedculturetodeterminewhatforum/genres

mightbeusedtoconveysuchinformation.If,however,therelatedgenredoesexist,youneedtomove

ontoasecondandequallyimportanttask–determiningthepurposeofthatforum/genre.

Task2:Identifythepurposeoftheforum(genre)

Asmentioned,forumsaregenerallyorganizedaroundaparticularpurpose.Thispurpose

influencesreaderexpectationsofwhatkindofinformationshouldbepresentedinthatforum.Yet,just

becausetwocultureshavethesameforum/genredoesnotmeanbothculturesseethatforumashaving

asimilarpurpose.AstheearlierexampleofAnglo-U.S.vs.Japanesebusinesslettersillustrates,cultures

14

canassociatedifferentpurposeswiththesameforum.So,onceyouhavedeterminedaculturehasa

particularforum,youmustnextanswerthequestion

“Whatpurposedoesthisforumserveinthisculture?”

Todoso,youcouldreviewsampledocuments(representativesofthisforum)producedbythemembers

oftherelatedculture.Duringthisreview,youwouldlookforthementionofcertainkindsoftopicsthat

couldhelprevealthepurposeofaparticulargenre.Youcouldalsointerviewmembersofthatcultureto

askwhatobjectivesorpurposestheyassociatewiththespecificgenreyouareresearching.Atthis

point,somethingimportanttoconsideristhatcommonexpectationsofpurposedonotnecessarily

meansimilarexpectationsofthekindofinformationneededtoachievethatpurpose.Thus,once

you’veidentifiedthepurposeofagenre,youmustnextdeterminewhatcategoriesofinformation–or

specialtopics–acultureassociateswithachievingthatpurpose.

Task3:Identifythespecialtopicsrelatedtoachievingthepurposeoftheforum(genre)

Theresearchliteratureoncross-culturalcommunicationindicatesculturescanhavedifferent

expectationsofhowtoachievethesameobjectiveinagivenforum.Manyofthemembersofboththe

JapaneseandtheMexicancultures,forexample,viewthepurposeofabusinessletterasestablishing

andmaintaininglong-termrelationships.Yeteachgroupexpectstoencounterverydifferentkindsof

information–orspecialtopics–inrelationtoachievingthisobjective.

AsCampbell’s(1998)researchreveals,displaysofinformationaboutthereader’sculturetendto

beaspecialtopicmanyJapaneseaudiencesassociatewithcrediblepresentationsinbusinessletters

(39).Suchspecialtopicsreflectaworldviewthatplacesaveryhighvalueontheculturalgroup(i.e.,the

Japaneseasaculture)andthevariousculturalandhistoricalfactorsrelatedtotheidentityofthis

greaterculturalgroup.ElizabethTebeaux’s(1999)researchonMexicanbusinessletters,bycontrast,

revealsthatmanyMexicanreaderslookforadifferentkindofspecialtopic–familyties–when

assessingthecredibilityofthesameletter(53-56).AsJohnC.Condon(1997)explains,inMexican

15

businesspractices,anindividual’sinteractionsandrelationshipstendtobegovernedbyfamily

connections(25-29).Thus,accordingtotheMexicanworldview,anindividual’sidentityislinkedtohis

orherfamilymoresothanthecommonhistoryoraspectsofalargernationalcultureorethnicgroup.

Accordingtothisworldview,familymembersaregenerallyconsideredtrustedpartnersfor

long-termbusinessrelations.Non-familymembers,bycontrast,mightbeviewedwithsuspicionand

mightnotgaintrustunlessafamilymembercanattesttothereliabilityofthatoutsider.Forthisreason,

creatingcredibilityinMexicanbusinesslettersofteninvolvestheauthor/sendernotingsomefamily

connectionwiththereader/recipient.Asaresult,thementionofspecialtopicsthatcreatecredibility

withmanyJapanesereaders(e.g.,generalculturalinformation)mightnotcreatecredibilityintheeyes

ofmanyMexicanreaders.Thus,similarculturalexpectationsofaforum’spurposedonotnecessarily

meansimilarspecialtopicscancreatecredibilitywithinthatforum.

So,onceyourresearchhasidentifiedthepurposeaculturalaudienceassociateswitha

particularforum,youneedtoaskanimportantfollow-upquestion:

“What(special)topicsdoesmyaudienceassociatewiththecrediblepresentationofinformationin

thisforum?”

Youcanusetheanswertothisquestiontocreatemoreeffectivematerialsfordifferentcultural

audiences.Identifyingspecialtopics,however,isonlyonepartofcommunicatingeffectivelywith

personsfromothercultures.Theother–andequallyimportant–partisknowingwhenandhowto

presentsuchtopicswithinagivenforum/genre.

Task4:Understandtheproperpresentationformatofthespecialtopicswithinaforum(genre)

Whileidentifyingculture-specificspecialtopicsmightseemrelativelyeasy,usingthem

effectivelyisanothermatter.Thisisbecausethepointatwhichoneisexpectedtomentionaparticular

specialtopiccanbecrucialtoestablishingcredibilitywithinaforum.AsLindaDriskill(1996)notes,

correspondencetoJapaneseaudiencestendtobeginwith“polite,solicitouscomments”–something

16

whichmany“U.S.writeswouldconsiderunnecessary”(Driskill1996,28).Next,thewritermightwishto

raisethemutualgoalthatbothparties(senderandrecipient)canworktoward.Finally,towardthe

conclusion,onecansubtlyraisethe“business”functiontheletterisdesignedtoserve(e.g.,anupdate

oranevaluationoraformalrecord)(Campbell1998,36).Failuretofollowthisexpectedsequencefor

raisingtheseculture-specificspecialtopicscouldresultinproblems.Inthecontextnotedhere,one

mustfirstdisplaythedesiretoformalong-termrelationshipwiththeletter’srecipientbeforediscussing

themore“nuts-and-bolts”purposesforsendingtheletter.Todootherwisemightbeseenastoobrazen

ofanapproach.

Thus,yourresearchonculturalexpectationsofspecialtopicsshouldnotinvolveonlyanswering

thequestion

“WhatarethespecialtopicsthatIneedtoaddressinthisforum?”

Rather,youmustalsoaskandanswerthefollow-upquestionof

“InwhatorderorsequencedoIneedtopresentthesespecialtopics,soIappearcredibleinthe

eyesoftheaudience?”

Onceyouidentifythispresentationorder,youcanfollowitwhensharinginformationwithothercultural

audiences.

Cultureisacomplexconcept,andculturalrhetoricalexpectationscontaindegreesofnuance.

Workingeffectivelyininternationalenvironmentsthereforerequiresextensiveandcontinuousresearch.

Theheuristicframeworkpresentedhereisbutastartingpointinthisresearchprocess.Forthisreason,

youshouldnotconsiderthisheuristictheonlytoolyouwouldneedtoengageeffectivelyininternational

projects.Thisframework,however,canhelpyoumakeeffectiveinitialchoicesthatcancontributeto

successfulcommunicationpracticeswithinavarietyofinternationalcontexts.Tohelpyoubetter

understandthewaysinwhichyoucanapplytherhetoricalideasdiscussedhere,let’slookathowthis

17

heuristicmightbeusedtoaddresstheproblematicsituationofAllianceXwesawatthestartofthis

chapter.

EXTENDEDEXAMPLE:SOHOWCANTECHNICALCOMMUNICATORSAPPLYTHISHEURISTICINGLOBAL

CONTEXTS?

Let’ssaythesituationisthesameasbefore.TheMinistryofEducationinRiendutout

commissionsAllianceXtodevelopanonlinehelpWebsitethatwillprovidetechnicalsupporttoclients

inboththeU.S.andRiendutout.Asbefore,Patistaskedwithdevelopingthissite.Patagaindecidesto

developatwo-partsitethatallowsforstaticdisplaysofinformationandthatincludesadynamic

componentforobtaininganswerstotechnicalquestions.And,onceagain,Patpresentsthisplantothe

managementofAllianceX,andreceivesapprovaltobeginworkonthetwo-parthelpsite.Thistime,

however,Pattakesoneadditionalandall-importantstep.

Beforestartingtheactualsitedevelopment,PatdecidestocontactaRiendutoutcolleaguetodo

someinitialresearchoncultureandcommunication.Pat’sobjectiveistoworkwiththatRiendutout

colleaguetocreateasingleonlinehelpsitethatcanbeusedbyclientsinboththeU.S.andRiendutout.

ThediscussionoftheseideasbeginswithPataskingifonlinehelpsites(forum)arecommonly

usedinRiendutout.Pat’scolleaguereplies“Yes,theyare,andtheyareverypopularhere.”Patnext

asksaboutthecommonreason(purpose)forwhichindividualsinRiendutoutusesuchsites.Pat’s

colleaguerespondsthatreasonsforusearetwo-fold:

• Togainstandardanswerstocommonquestions;

• Togainanswerstospecifictechnicalquestionsorproblems.

Atthispoint,itappearsthatthedevelopmentofasinglehelpsiteforbothcultureswillbeaneasy

process.

Then,Patasksanall-importantquestion:

18

“Whatkindsoffeatures(specialtopics)douserslookfortodetermineiftheonlinehelpsiteisa

goodoracredibleone?”

ThecolleagueinRiendutoutresponds:“Well,presentingacredibleanswerrequiresyoutonote

threethingsinyourresponsestouserquestions:

1. Thejobtitleofthetechnicianprovidingtheanswer;

2. Theamountoftimethetechnicianhasworkedforthecompany;

3. Theuniversityatwhichthetechnicianobtainedhisorherdegreeincomputerscience.”

Pat’scolleaguethenendsthisexplanationwith“InRiendutout,that’sprettystandardstuff,butifyou

don’tincludeit,theuserswillthinkyou’redisregardingthem,foryoudidn’tputintheefforttogeta

realtechnicalexperttoanswertheirquestions.Moreover,ifsuchinformationisnotprovided,users

herewilllikelyalsobesuspiciousofthesourceandthelegitimacyofthesiteprovidingsuch

information.”

Atthispoint,Patbeginstorealizethattheinitialassumptionofworkingonaneasyinternational

projectismoreofadreamthanareality.Patthenexplainstheproposedcustomer-driven,socialmedia

sitetothecolleagueinReindutout.Uponhearingofthisapproach,thecolleaguereplies,“Asystemlike

thatwouldn’tworkhere.Usersneedtoknowtheyareworkingwithtrainedcompanyemployees–not

receivingsuggestionsfromjustanotherconsumer.Ifyouusedsuchacustomer-drivenapproachto

onlinehelphere,you’doffendfolksandmightcreatetheimpressionofafraudulentsite.You’d

certainlyloseamajorpartofyourcustomerbase.”

Usingthisinformation,PatandthecolleaguefromRiendutoutcollaboratetocreateahelpsite

thatwillbeconsideredcrediblebyusersinboththeU.S.andRiendutout.Thesystemcontainsthe

originalstaticFAQpagebothculturalaudiencesconsideredacredibleapproachtoprovidingonlinehelp.

Thesplash(initial)pageforthesite’sdynamicportion,however,offersusersachoicebetween

• EmailaTechnician

19

(aresponsewillbesentwithin24-48hoursofreceivingthismessage)

• ContacttheCommunity

(postquestiontoacommunitymessageboard,andreceivequickanswersandadvicefrom

techniciansandfromotherusers)

Suchanapproachallowsusersfromthetwoculturestoselectthemethodoftechnicalsupportthatbest

appealstotheirculturalexpectations.Inaddition,AllianceXtechnicianshavebeeninformedthat,when

respondingtocustomerquestions,theymustconcludetheirresponsewithasignaturelinethatincludes

• Theirname,

• Theirjobtitlewiththecompany,

• Thenumberofyearstheyhavebeenwiththecompany,

• Theuniversityatwhichtheyobtainedtheirdegree.

Inthisway,AllianceX’stechnicianscanprovideusersfromRiendutoutwiththeinformationtheyexpect

tofindwhenassessingthecredibilityofaresponse.Atthesametime,thisapproachwilllikelynotbe

distractingtoU.S.users,themajorityofwhomareaccustomedtosuchsignaturelinesappearingatthe

endofprofessionalemails.

Whilethedevelopmentoftheinteractivehelpsystemtookmoretimethananticipated,itmet

withapprovalfromclientsinbothcultures.Moreover,AllianceX’swillingnesstomeettherhetorical

expectationsoftheotherculturehelpedthecompanygaincredibilityasavendorinRiendutout.This

credibilityallowedAllianceXtosecurecontractswithotherorganizationsinthecountry.Thus,Pat’s

initialseriesofrhetoricallybasedquestionshelpedprovidetheforumandthespecialtopicsinformation

essentialtothesuccessfulexecutionofthisinternationalproject.

CONCLUSION:WHATARETHENEXTSTEPS?

20

Workingininternationalenvironmentsisnotasimpleprocess,butitisanessentialonein

today’sglobaleconomy.Thus,effectiveinternationalcommunicationskillsareamechanismforadding

valueinanincreasinglycompetitiveglobalmarketplace.Forthisreason,technicalcommunicatorswho

caninteracteffectivelywithoverseasclientsandcolleagueshaveagreatdealtoofferanorganization.

Thesetechnicalcommunicatorsalsopossessskillsthatcanincreasetheirjobsecuritytodayandforthe

future.

Anunderstandingofrhetoricalconceptscanhelptechnicalcommunicatorsparticipatemore

effectivelyintheglobaldistributionofinformationandideas.Successininternationalprojects,

however,isamatterofengaginginfocusedresearchthatexaminestheconnectionbetweenrhetorical

ideasandculturalexpectationsofcredibility.Therhetoricalheuristicpresentedherecanhelpyou

participatemoreeffectivelyinglobalactivitiesrelatedtotechnicalcommunication.Forsuchresearchto

beeffective,however,itmustbeacontinualprocessthatallowsyoutorefineyourapproachtocross-

culturalcommunicationovertime.Youshouldthereforeconsidertheideaspresentedinthischapteras

afirststepyoucantakeindevelopingyourinternationalcommunicationskillsinordertoremaina

valuablecontributortoanorganization’sactivities.

DISCUSSIONQUESTIONS

Question1:Whatcharacteristicsorideasdothemembersofyourculturevaluehighly?Howdothese

factorsreflectyourculture’sworldview?Howdoesthisworldviewaffectyourbehaviors?

Question2:Collectthreetofiveexamplesofthemostcommonlyusedforums/genresinyourculture.

Next,reviewtheseexamplestodeterminethepurposeforwhichmembersofyoucultureuse

thoseforums.Onceyou’veidentifiedthispurpose,reviewthesematerialsasecondtimeto

identifycommonspecialtopicsthatseemtoappearintheseforums.Duringthissecondreview,

21

trytodeterminehowthesespecialtopicshelpthemembersofyourcultureachievethepurpose

forwhichtheyusethatparticularforum.

Question3:Howmightnationallycentralizededucation(vs.state-by-statestandardsoneducation)

affectforumexpectationswithinaculture?Whatmightthisfactormeanforthetopicsyou

shouldresearchwhenengagingininternationalcommunicationprojects?

Question4:Whatrhetoricalaspectsorfactorsdoyouthinkareuniquetoyourparticularculture?What

rhetoricalaspectsorfactorsdoyouthinkarecommonlyusedacrossmultiplecultures?

Question5:Identifyaparticularforumthathasbothprintandonlineformsinyourculture(e.g.,a

newspaper).Next,reviewboththeprintandtheonlineversionsofthisitemtodetermineifyou

couldusethesameapproachtorevisetheseitemstomakethemappearmorecredibletoan

internationalaudience.Duringthisprocess,keepalistofthesimilaritiesandthedifferencesin

theapproachesyouwouldusetointernationalizetheseitemsandcompareyourfindingswith

thoseofyourclassmates.

Question6:Doyouthinkitispossibletoreviseaprinteddocumenttomeettherhetoricalneedsofall

internationalreadingaudiences?Whyorwhynot?

Question7:Locateaprintedsoftwaremanualforaproductyouuseonaregularbasis.Next,applythe

heuristicpresentedinthischaptertotrytoconvertonesectionofthismanualintoaWebsite

usedtoconveythesameinstructionalinformationtousersfromanotherculture.Asyou

22

performthisconversionprocess,considerthekindsofrhetoric-basedquestionsyouwillneedto

askforthisprocess–andfortheresultingproduct–tobesuccessful.

Question8:Inyouropinion,domorecompaniesengageinpre-emptiveorrevisionistapproachto

creatingmaterialsforinternationalaudiences?Why?Whatargumentmightyouuseto

convinceacompanytoshiftitsinternationalcommunicationpracticesfromarevisionisttoa

pre-emptiveapproach?

REFERENCES

Ang,Soon,andAndrewC.Inkpen.2008.Culturalintelligenceandoffshore

outsourcingsuccess:AFrameworkoffirm-levelinterculturalcapability.DecisionSciences39:

337-358.

Barnum,CarolM.,andLiHuilin.2006.ChineseandAmericantechnicalcommunication:Across-cultural

comparisonofdifference.TechnicalCommunication53:143-166.

Berry,JohnW.,YpeH.Poortinga,MarshallH.Segall,andPierreR.Dasen.2002.Cross-cultural

psychology:Researchandapplications2nded.NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Campbell,CharlesC.1998.Rhetoricalethos:Abridgebetweenhigh-contextandlow-contextcultures?in

Theculturalcontextinbusinesscommunication,eds.SusanneNiemeier,CharlesP.Campbell,

andReneDirven,31-47.Philadelphia:JohnBenjaminsPublishingCompany.

Condon,JohnC.1997.Goodneighbors:CommunicatingwiththeMexicans.Yarmouth,ME:Intercultural

Press,Inc.

Driskill,Linda.1996.Collaboratingacrossnationalandculturalborders.inInternationaldimensions

23

oftechnicalcommunication.ed.DeborahC.Andrews,23-44.Alexandria,VA:Societyfor

TechnicalCommunication.

Esselink,Bert.2000.Apracticalguidetolocalization.Philadelphia:JohnBenjaminsPublishingCompany.

Hofstede,GeertandGertJanHofstede.2005.Culturesandorganizations:SoftwareoftheMind.New

York:McGraw-Hill.

Kamath,GuruduttR.2000.TheIndiaparadox.Intercom,10-11.

Kaplan,RobertB.2001.Whatintheworldiscontrastiverhetoric?inContrastiverhetoricrevisited

andredefined.ed.ClayannGilliamPanetta,vii-xx.Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates.

Kohl,JohnR.2008.TheglobalEnglishstyleguide:Writingclear,translatabledocumentationforaglobal

market.Cary,NC:SASInstitute,Inc.

McCool,Matthew.2006.Informationarchitecture:Interculturalhumanfactors.Technical

Communication53:167-183.

Miller,CarolynR.andJackSelzer.1985.Specialtopicsofargumentinengineeringreports.in

Writinginnon-academicsettings,309-341.eds.LeeOdellandDixieGoswami.NewYork:

GuilfordPress.

Neuliep,JamesW.2000.Interculturalcommunication:Acontextualapproach.Boston:HoughtonMifflin.

Panetta,ClayannGilliam.2001.Understandingculturaldifferencesintherhetoricandcomposition

classroom:ContrastiverhetoricasanswertoESLdilemmas.inContrastiverhetoricrevisited

andredefined.ed.ClayannGilliamPanetta,3-13.Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates.

Rude,Carolyn.1998.Technicalediting2nded.Boston:AllynandBacon.

24

St.Amant,Kirk.2006.Globalizingrhetoric:Usingrhetoricalconceptstoidentifyandanalyzecultural

expectationsrelatedtogenres.Hermes–JournalofLanguageandCommunicationStudies37:

47-66.

Tebeaux,Elizabeth.1999.Designingwrittenbusinesscommunicationalongtheshiftingcultural

continuum:ThenewfaceofMexico.JournalofBusinessandTechnical

Communication13:49-85.

Varner,Iris,andLindaBeamer.1995.Interculturalcommunicationintheglobalworkplace.Boston:

Irwin/McGraw-Hill.

Woolever,KristinR.2001.Doingglobalbusinessintheinformationage:Rhetoricalcontrastsin

thebusinessandtechnicalprofessions.inContrastiverhetoricrevisitedandredefined.

ed.ClayannGilliamPanetta,47-64.Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErlbaum,Associates.

Yunker,John.2003.Beyondborders:Webglobalizationstrategies.Boston:NewRiders.