Ch 4
Juan Guevara
History and Intercultural Communication
In this blog I want to elaborate on a subject which stood out to me; Low Power and High Power distance (Martin 2018, pg. 103).
The term power distance refers to “A cultural variability dimension that concerns the extent to which people accept an unequal distribution of power.” So, it defines what society feels comfortable in regard to people in power. After reading the textbook we know societies such as Denmark, Israel, and New Zealand, value a low power distance. We also know that societies such as Mexico, India, and the Philippines, value a high power distance.
In my line of work, Law Enforcement, there is a high power distance system. There is a heavy structure system. Sometimes, it seems like its too heavy. What I often wonder is how these systems were adopted and put in place. For example, if you have a suggestion that could benefit the department as a whole, not only are you expected to first report it to your immediate supervisor, he/she has the ability to make the suggestion dead on arrival. Imagine all the wonderful ideas which were prevented and why. They could have been prevented due to incompetence, petty jealousy, complacency, or lack of interest.
A high power distance system seems to work well in an environment that may be unorderly and unfunctional; however, in an environment that is capable and has talent, I see this system as hindering progress and innovation. Don’t get me wrong, the structure is good but when the system is set in place for status quo reasons, then it is a useless system.
Martin, J. (2018). Intercultural Communication in Contexts (7th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
History and Intercultural Communication
In this blog I want to elaborate on a subject which stood out to me; Low Power and High Power distance (Martin 2018, pg. 103).
The term power distance refers to “A cultural variability dimension that concerns the extent to which people accept an unequal distribution of power.” So, it defines what society feels comfortable in regard to people in power. After reading the textbook we know societies such as Denmark, Israel, and New Zealand, value a low power distance. We also know that societies such as Mexico, India, and the Philippines, value a high power distance.
In my line of work, Law Enforcement, there is a high power distance system. There is a heavy structure system. Sometimes, it seems like its too heavy. What I often wonder is how these systems were adopted and put in place. For example, if you have a suggestion that could benefit the department as a whole, not only are you expected to first report it to your immediate supervisor, he/she has the ability to make the suggestion dead on arrival. Imagine all the wonderful ideas which were prevented and why. They could have been prevented due to incompetence, petty jealousy, complacency, or lack of interest.
A high power distance system seems to work well in an environment that may be unorderly and unfunctional; however, in an environment that is capable and has talent, I see this system as hindering progress and innovation. Don’t get me wrong, the structure is good but when the system is set in place for status quo reasons, then it is a useless system.
Martin, J. (2018). Intercultural Communication in Contexts (7th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Comments
Post a Comment