Hi, I'm Julie Tietz, and welcome to Conflict Resolution-- Putting the Pieces Together. Today we're going to talk about how we can make conflict resolution processes culturally competent to fit in with cross-cultural conflict.
In the United States, the conflict resolution process is founded and formed upon cultural worldviews and communication styles in line with United States culture. And so if we are in a process that involves an individual or parties that come from other cultures, we may need to adapt our process to accommodate their culture.
Meeting the needs of individuals is universal across cultures. So although that is the fact and the truth, we still may need to, again, accommodate and adapt our processes to fit in with other cultural worldviews so they can feel that they are a part of the process and comfortable in participating.
We're going to go and look at what the United States mediation model looks like. So first of all, the United States mediation model assumes that there is going to be low-context communication. So parties in the process are expected to have direct communication. So when we're in the process, the parties are going to say exactly what they mean verbally and aren't going to require us to interpret what they're saying, and this may be an issue for somebody that has a high-context communication style where they want us to pick up on their hints and subtleties in their nonverbal cues.
Also, it involves low power distance. So in the United States mediation model, all of the parties involved are considered to be equal to one another. And so we are not involving status or role in terms of making another individual higher or better or deserving of more respect in the process.
Also, it has a high tolerance for ambiguity. So the parties are expected to be comfortable with vagueness and not needing to know exactly what's going to happen, but having a general view and not being really hung up on the details and having the ability to take things as they come and improvise.
Also, it has an internal locus of control. And so it believes or assumes that individuals control their own circumstance. So we're in charge of our own destiny here, we're here to make up our own rules and processes rather than involving maybe external factors that contribute to our circumstances.
So how as a conflict intervener can we adapt the process to accommodate other cultural worldviews and communication styles? Well first, some examples in which we can accommodate different worldviews could be through tolerance for ambiguity. So if we're in a process that involves an individual that has a high tolerance for ambiguity and an individual that has a low tolerance for ambiguity, we may need to adapt the process for that individual with low tolerance and take the time to give out specific details about the process and what's going to happen and what to expect so they can feel comfortable in going through the process knowing that there is some level of detail here.
As well as we can adapt our locus of control in the process. In the United States model we know that there is an internal locus of control where the parties have a lot of autonomy in creating their own rules and solutions on how to go about the process and resolve their conflict. Well this could be really difficult for somebody that has an external locus of control and feels that we have-- or our circumstances may be better off controlled by external factors. And so we may need to set up some concrete rules for ourselves or as the intervener, maybe set up some rules to accommodate that locus of control.
We also want to accommodate different communication styles. So if we're dealing with individuals or working with individuals that come from a high-context communication style and a low-context communication style, for that low-context individual, we may want to ask a few more clarifying questions so we can really understand what they are meaning in their messages and really bring out the context, and make sure that they are conveying or we are understanding the message that they want us to hear.
Let's look at our key points on making conflict resolution culturally competent. We know that the United States mediation and conflict resolution processes are based upon United States cultural worldviews and communication styles. So we know that it requires relatively low power distance, low-context communication, high tolerance for ambiguity, and an internal locus of control. And because we're coming from the culture of the United States, we may need to adapt and accommodate the process to include other cultural communication styles and worldviews for those parties that are not a part of the United States culture.
Here are your key terms before we go. Feel free to pause and look at them a little bit closer. Thank you so much for taking the time out to view this, I hope that you've learned something, and I can't wait to catch you again next time.