Cultural Intelligence Teamwork Report
Cultural tendencies varied in the group and existed in different degrees. For instance, the regarding tasks, some of the members were controlled and that affected how they formed human interactions. The above notion took place when the controlled members could not loosen up and be open about who they were. They were controlled i9n terms of time and that limited how they formed relationships with other people. The tasks they were involved with were very limited to and specific about what they could or could not do. Some of the members remained unrealistic in what they defined to be their culture. There are certain happenings or actions that are out of the norm for the standard society. The unrealistic behavior leads to particularism that could hinder one from fully exploiting life (Earley & Ang, 2003). The members differed from my culture that is general. They had particularism regarding food, how they dressed, and who they interacted with because of their culture. My culture takes a general approach and is not as limiting. The group members that showcased such unrealistic attributes were from Asia. Other members showed an informal tendency in how they spoke and the language that they used for interaction. The members were from my tribe and could talk in any way that they found suitable. As a result, the aspects of individualism could not be traced because they forged good rapports with other members. Those members who were particular could not even share a meal with the others because their cultures forbid the eating of some foods and mingling in a certain manner.
The non-verbal cues for all the members were mostly similar even though there are a few things that could have stood out. One is the use of hand gestures, where an individual had too much hand movement that explained the nervousness he felt at his cultural affiliations and traditions were exposed and became the subject of attention. The rest of the members remained calm and maintained normal body movements when they were asked questions. The difference showcased the particularism of the culture from the East especially when it came to the characteristics of religion. Another lady from the Indian culture could not maintain eye contact with the rest. She was particularly evasive with her eyes when the issue of marriages and religion were brought up. The other members of my culture remained unmoved and had the usual non-verbal cues. They laughed when need be and maintained casual gestures. The cues showcased the differences in my culture that is more open and theirs which is closed and particular.
I adapted to the behaviors above by maintaining a general conversation that was not too detailed and involved universal subjects. The reason is that after realizing that some individuals were particular and unrealistic in their cultures, I had to keep the interactions light so as not to appear offensive. The differences that existed would mean that some of the things we freely talked about were not well received by people who had certain extremes in their culture. An example is a talk about religion. When I discussed my Christian background, the questions that emanate do not make me uncomfortable. The case is not the same with all the cultures regarding religion, food, music and other things. Any remark that is not thought over could come off as rude. Therefore, the only way to embrace the differences in a way that would be good for everyone was through the use of general subjects and careful picking of words.
We are the ultimate creator team because of how active we are in exploring our differences. Adjusting to a culture can be difficult because of the extreme differences that exist. However, my team members were able to put that aside and create rapports through communication. The creator group involves more than theoretical forms of adaptations and is involved in more actual practices (Hogan & Thomson Gale, 2007). Ideally, that is what my team does through the discussions that exist in a culture albeit with a slow pace. Sometimes, the discussions became uncomfortable, and we would talk about other issues that bring the cheer back. The practical manner in which we are dedicated to learning about each other, and communicating is evidence that the group in a creator one. Disagreements were obviously present, but that did not dissemble the group. The differences were discussed, and a common point established, which led to amicable agreements and understanding.
The organizational communication in the future would involve a group-centered learning process where each person is given time to explain their cultural affiliations fully. The communication will be more discussion oriented as opposed to a question session to allow for more interactions among the people. Additionally, the communication will be fostered because everybody will be afforded time to talk about their feelings and culture. In addition, there will be a comprehensive session where everybody has to say something that interests them about another.
References
Earley, P. C., & Ang, S. (2003). Cultural intelligence: Individual interactions across cultures. Stanford, Calif: Stanford Business Books.
Hogan, C., & Thomson Gale (Firm). (2007). Practical facilitation: A toolkit of techniques. Farmington Hills, Mich.: Thomson Gale.
