西奧多萊維特的開創性文章“市場的全球化”（哈佛商業評論1983）讓許多公司開始檢查他們的國際廣告戰略，進而采用一種全球化的戰略。通過這種方式，你可以看出哪些問題嗎？

在廣告這一維度中，為了通過廣告來有效的迎合來自特定文化的人群的標準，口味和喜好，考慮文化的本質是非常有必要的。考慮到這一事實，廣告商們在評定每一種文化的技術性細節上都變得越來越謹慎，同時也讓他們的廣告策略更加協調的融入到文化當中去。

不同文化之間的交流方式是一個至關重要的問題，這與談判有特殊的聯系。文化，是一種集體現象，因為文化是至少生活在同一個環境中的人所相互分享的，這個環境也就是他們獲悉文化的地方。把人們聚集在一起或區分開來的，是人們思維中不同的集體理念。（霍夫斯泰德1991）

Theodore Levitt's seminal article ‘The Globalisation of Markets' (Harvard Business Review 1983) caused many companies to examine their international advertising strategies and to adopt a global strategy. What problems do you see in such an approach?

In the dimension of advertising, it is immensely necessary to consider the nature of cultures in order to cater effectively to the norms, tastes and preferences of the people of that specific culture through advertising.Considering this fact, advertisers become increasingly cautious in gauging the mechanics of each culture and harmonizing their advertising strategies in relation to that culture.

The way communication works in various cultures is a crucial issue that has particular relevance for negotiation. Culture is always a collective phenomenon, because it is at least partially shared with people who live or lived within the same environment, which is where it was learned. It is the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from another' (Hofstede 1991). A culture is the configuration of learned behaviour and results of behaviour whose component elements are shared and transmitted by the members of a particular society. (Ghauri and Usunier 2003).

By defining culture, it can be seen that, according to Guffey M.(2006); there are five dimensions of culture. They are context, individualism, formality, communication style and time orientation. In this part, it will be focused on context which was first time mentioned by Edward T. Hall. In his model, context refers to the stimuli, environment, or ambience 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. In high-context cultures (such as those in Japan, China, and Arab countries), the listener already ‘'contexted'' and does not need to be given much background information. To identify low and high context countries, Hall arranged them a continuum, as shown in following figure. A low context cultures tend to be logical, analytical, and action oriented. Business communicators stress clearly articulated messages that they consider to be objective, professional, and efficient.#p#分頁標題#e#

High context cultures are more likely to be intuitive and contemplative. Communicators in high context cultures pay attention to more than the words spoken. They emphasize interpersonal relationships, non- verbal expression, physical setting and social setting. They are more aware of the communicator's history, status and position. Communication cues are transmitted by posture, voice inflection, gestures, and facial expression. Establishing relationships is an important part of communicating and interacting. (Guffey 2006).

Hall (1976) suggests that members of high-context and high-contact cultures make different assumptions, and create different patterns of communication from those who belong to low-context and low-contact cultures respectively. In that specific regard, high-context cultures are more challenging and difficult to deal with in comparison to low-context cultures.As far as a high-context culture is concerned, things are perceived as an independent entity and have an exclusive identity that does not depend upon the various factors that are surrounding it.Speaking about a low-context culture, it is pretty different from a high-context culture in the sense that factors are perceived in a collective sense rather than an individual sense. In other words, a high-context culture is more of a collective culture while a low-context culture is more of an individualistic culture. (Hofstede 2005)

In order to communicate successfully you have to consider the cultural differences and the noticeable communication process in individualistic and collectivistic cultures. Context has to do with how much you have to know before you can communicate effectively. High-context communication is frequent in collectivist cultures. They emphasize membership in organizations, groups and teams; they encourage acceptance of group values, duties, and decisions.

They typically resist independence because it promotes competition and confrontation instead of consensus. In group oriented cultures like many Asian societies, for example, self assertion and individual decision making are discouraged. Members of low-context cultures, particularly Americans, prefer to value individualism. They believe that initiative and self-assertion result in personal achievement. They believe in individual action and personal responsibility, and they desire a large degree of freedom in their personal lives. (Courtland and Till 2008)

When workers from high-context and low-context cultures have to work together often problems occur by the exchange of information. These problems can be categorized as differences in “direction”, “quantity” and “quality”. At differences in direction employees from high-context cultures like

China and France adapt to their good friends, families and also to close colleagues (in-group members). They communicate with them intensively (quantity difference) and exchange specific/detailed information about many different topics. The result is that every in-group member is constantly up-to-date with the facts around the business.#p#分頁標題#e#

In comparison to high-context cultures low-context cultures like USA and Germany orientate on many people of their daily life because they don't differentiate as much as high-context cultures between in- and out-groups. So their direction of communication is orientated on personal characters and referred to situations (direction difference). They mostly communicate within their out-groups in a broad and diffuse way (quantity difference). Within communication they exchange information just to the necessary extent so that work can be done and they don't discuss or exchange information constantly in their work environment and colleagues (quality difference). (Gudykunst and Yun Kim 1997).

In China communication tends to be very efficient because of their information-flow at work and in privacy. They discuss everything in advance and consider meetings as an official ceremony where the already commonly agreed decision will be announced. This is important in the way of “giving and keeping face”. The Americans and Germans in contrast inform the participating attendants in a meeting about the hard and necessary facts. The decision-making process takes place within the meeting. To French it is similar with their Asian counterparts. They are also well informed before they meet each other. Many explicit and detailed discussions would probably see as an insult because everything is already clear.

To understand what someone really meant in a conversation and to avoid misunderstandings it is important to realize “how” it was said. In high-context systems people expect from their interlocutor that he or she knows what the message of the communication was. This can be done without that it was specifically told Chinese and French use a high-context communication. They place great importance on ambience, decorum, the relative status of the participants in a communication and the manner of massage's delivery. In France it might be hard to feel fully accepted for outsiders within their culture because of their big diffuse connections. In comparison members of individualistic cultures using low-context communication like Germans, Americans and Finns sometimes ignore those differences from high-context countries cultures. In case of a meeting where those countries from low- and high-context cultures would have to work and discuss the French and especially the Chinese would not interact and express their disagreement or reservations.

For Chinese issues, circumstances and relationships are as important as work so they would comment only in a more private or appropriate occasion. (Mckay 2009) Chinese people tend to be reserved which is considered as active behaviour in collectivistic cultures. They first need to build up an interpersonal relationship – a foundation where it is possible to find the right level of context. In contrast low-context cultures they argue about each other's opinion within the decision-making process and take discussions in their own hands to come to an agreement.#p#分頁標題#e#

Within this process members of low-context tend to be precise and provide just the required information and in case of silence it has to be filled. but this is just a generic statement. In contrast the Finns regarding to silence have a different cultural behaviour. Silence is seen as polite and doesn't have to be replaced with communication. In this point they differ immensely from the Americans who are seen as the characteristic low-context country. They need to know what is going on and have to be provided with detailed background information.

In contrast the Germans try to hide information which is sacrificed even within a company or department. French are a high-context culture. They assume that the listener knows everything. It can happen that the “French will think the Americans think they have got problems about understanding situations because they start explaining everything, and vice versa.”(Hoecklin 1995)

When dealing with different people from high- and low-context cultures you always have to be aware of your interlocutor's cultural origin. This helps to avoid misunderstandings and creates a better basis for further discussions.