Introduction

This document is part of larger project to bring the reality and theory of culture together. At its core it the website www.culturalcompetence.eu. The model used has the size of groups as its starting point, ranging from very large groups through larger and smaller groups to the individual. This idea is summarised in the triangle model of culture (see Culture 1).

Communication is the flipside of culture because culture only exists in its communication to others . The study of communication as a process in society is a fairly new discipline and this applies even more so to communication across borders. These borders could national ones as in communication across national cultures but are not limited to them. In line with the triangle model of culture the argument applies to the border of larger and smaller groups as well; e.g. organisational culture and the culture of a family or a team (see Culture 4 and Culture 5).

I am using deliberately the term 'communication across cultures',

trying to find a neutral term. More common terms are 'intercultural communication' and 'cross-cultural communication' but both are not correct from a scientific point of view. 'Inter~' in the strict sense refers to differences and 'cross~' points at commonalities. Effective communication across cultures requires the reconciliation of differences and commonalities, a process in which both play their role. Such a situation is formally called transcultural communication. Although the term is not quite common in day-to-day discussions, it hints at the idea of a higher order and hence, indicates the objective of communication across borders.

Overview

First the process of communication is briefly discussed, just to give you an idea. In the second part the cultural factors of the communication process are introduced. Whatever model of communication you use, every aspects of it is influenced by culture!

I also read this year a meta-study on the different ways of communicating. Logical scientific communication is based on facts and logical reasoning. It appear to me the best way to explain how things are structured in outline. An anecdote is no proof, I want to see hard data. However, in narrative communication it is all about anecdotes and communication from which someone has to derive the bigger picture. Several studies now show that the latter way of communication functions much better. Ionica Smeets, de Volkskrant (Dutch newspaper), December 24th, 2015.