Home > Archive > Software Engineering > December 2006 > Re: Thanks for all guys, a question about job interviewWest
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Re: Thanks for all guys, a question about job interviewWest
|
|
| H. S. Lahman 2006-12-01, 7:01 pm |
| Responding to Gotostop...
> one question is: When you in a team, you have conflicts with other
> members, how do you handle this? it is really hard for me, I have never
> argue with any person, how can i give them answer?
This is a major problem, particularly for people from many Asian
cultures where everyone is brought up to avoid confrontation. In the
Industrial West, some degree of confrontation is actually valued. (This
is speaking from some experience since I lived for many years in
countries outside the Industrial West.)
The tricky part in Western confrontation is to avoid making it personal.
Walking that line is ingrained from childhood in the psychological set
of most Western cultures as much as techniques for avoiding
confrontation are ingrained in many Asian cultures. Part of that
implantation is that statements that would be offensive in an Asian
culture are quite acceptable in a Western culture. IOW, in Western
cultures the line across which statement becomes offensive has been
moved relative to the same line in many Asian cultures.
> I know this question is very common, if some one had a interview and
> had the same question how do you answer them. I want a specific answer.
Unfortunately, because it is a cultural issue there is no simple answer.
However, one can make a couple of basic observations.
(1) Confrontation is institutionalized in Western culture. It is seen
as a means to ensure finding the best solution. By suggesting
alternative views, one ensures that all possibilities have been covered.
By challenging views, one ensures that judgments are based on fact
rather than personal conviction. So...
(2) In Western culture one is expected to express opinions without
prompting. As a result it is actually rare to be directly asked for an
opinion; everyone assumes that if you had one you wanted to share, you
would have done so. So in a team context, if you have something useful
to say, you have to volunteer it.
(3) Any time one presents an alternative to a proposal or challenges a
proposal there is a disagreement in view (i.e., a confrontation). The
tricky part is to keep disagreements from becoming personal. So in
Western culture there is a notion of "consensus" that is particularly
important for teams. Asian cultures have a similar notion but it tends
to be implemented in a much more formal way. For example, the TQM
7-Step process or constructing Kawakita diagrams are formal processes
for obtaining consensus in teams. Such techniques provide a formal
framework that allows personal views to be expressed without objectively
rather than on a person-to-person basis.
In Western culture consensus building tends to be much more informal and
personal, largely because the culture has a much narrower view of what
an offensive posture is. So teams talk about disagreements until one
side converts or some compromise is reached. Only when those informal
techniques fail to reach consensus does one invoke a more formal
conflict resolution technique like letting the boss decide.
The key to the Western view of consensus is that one must be able to
discuss disagreements objectively. The focus is about getting to the
right answer, not who proposed it; in the end everyone on the team gets
the credit. Part of that is to regard alternative views as simply
proposals to be evaluated without prejudging their merits. The
perception is that alternatives are presented simply to ensure that the
team has applied due diligence, not because the proposer believes things
must be done that way. IOW, one should think of proposing alternatives
as simply a mechanism to ensure the team hasn't missed anything. So
presenting alternatives and challenging proposals is actually a /duty/
for each team member.
Of course, there are limits on how one expresses alternatives or
challenges proposals. "I think we should consider ..." carries no
personal threat in a Western consensus. OTOH, "Nobody but an idiot
would think that ... will work," is clearly out of line as a personal
challenge. What Western culture provides is a psychological set that
"knows" where the line is between personal and impersonal. Alas, that
is tricky for newcomers to the culture. My advice would be to develop
some stock phrases that seem innocuous and use them to introduce your
opinions until you get used to the culture. That segues to...
(4) In Western cultures one needs to be thick skinned. Relative
strangers in Western cultures will tend to start making jokes about one
another far sooner than in other cultures. Nor are sarcastic barbs
limited by status (e.g., relative age or employer/employee status).
This is a direct result of accepting confrontation. One cannot
institutionalize confrontation if each party interprets disagreement as
a personal affront. So culturally Westerners have to treat disagreement
in an impersonal manner. That naturally leads to a much more
restrictive view of what constitutes an insult and, consequently, a much
broader view of innocent humor.
Alas, this is a potential minefield for newcomers to the culture because
it can take years to learn where the boundary between humor and bad
taste lies. So the safe approach for a newcomer is to always assume any
jokes that seem personal aren't intended that way. Conversely, one
should not attempt to "fit in" by trying the same sort of humor.
(5) In Western culture one is expected to ask questions if one does not
understand something, regardless of stature. That view is epitomized by
a quote from Steinmetz, "No man really becomes a fool until he stops
asking questions." It is considered far worse to do something wrong
because one did not understand how to do it properly than it is to look
slightly foolish by asking a silly question to make sure you can do it
properly. This is probably one of the major manifestations of cultural
difference. If one does ask a foolish question, one may even get kidded
about it. But in the West, that doesn't mean anything and it doesn't
reflect adversely on the questioner. OTOH, people will get really
annoyed if one screws up out of ignorance when they had a chance to get
enlightened.
IME, this is one of the more difficult things for people from cultures
with strong caste-like social contexts to get used to. In such cultures
asking questions of a superior is often considered impertinent. In the
West, failing to ask reasonable questions is more likely to be viewed as
a sign that one is not paying attention.
*************
There is nothing wrong with me that could
not be cured by a capful of Drano.
H. S. Lahman
hsl@pathfindermda.com
Pathfinder Solutions
http://www.pathfindermda.com
blog: http://pathfinderpeople.blogs.com/hslahman
"Model-Based Translation: The Next Step in Agile Development". Email
info@pathfindermda.com for your copy.
Pathfinder is hiring:
http://www.pathfindermda.com/about_us/careers_pos3.php.
(888)OOA-PATH
| |
| Gabriel Claramunt 2006-12-04, 10:01 pm |
| Great insight!
I've been in the worst combination: Asian managers with Western engineers.
Managers will not allow any alternative view and engineers questioned
everything managers said... it took a while to get something done.
:-)
"H. S. Lahman" <h.lahman@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:dW_bh.18$4p2.11@trndny07...
> Responding to Gotostop...
>
>
> This is a major problem, particularly for people from many Asian cultures
> where everyone is brought up to avoid confrontation. In the Industrial
> West, some degree of confrontation is actually valued. (This is speaking
> from some experience since I lived for many years in countries outside the
> Industrial West.)
>
> The tricky part in Western confrontation is to avoid making it personal.
> Walking that line is ingrained from childhood in the psychological set of
> most Western cultures as much as techniques for avoiding confrontation are
> ingrained in many Asian cultures. Part of that implantation is that
> statements that would be offensive in an Asian culture are quite
> acceptable in a Western culture. IOW, in Western cultures the line across
> which statement becomes offensive has been moved relative to the same line
> in many Asian cultures.
>
>
> Unfortunately, because it is a cultural issue there is no simple answer.
> However, one can make a couple of basic observations.
>
> (1) Confrontation is institutionalized in Western culture. It is seen as
> a means to ensure finding the best solution. By suggesting alternative
> views, one ensures that all possibilities have been covered. By
> challenging views, one ensures that judgments are based on fact rather
> than personal conviction. So...
>
> (2) In Western culture one is expected to express opinions without
> prompting. As a result it is actually rare to be directly asked for an
> opinion; everyone assumes that if you had one you wanted to share, you
> would have done so. So in a team context, if you have something useful to
> say, you have to volunteer it.
>
> (3) Any time one presents an alternative to a proposal or challenges a
> proposal there is a disagreement in view (i.e., a confrontation). The
> tricky part is to keep disagreements from becoming personal. So in
> Western culture there is a notion of "consensus" that is particularly
> important for teams. Asian cultures have a similar notion but it tends to
> be implemented in a much more formal way. For example, the TQM 7-Step
> process or constructing Kawakita diagrams are formal processes for
> obtaining consensus in teams. Such techniques provide a formal framework
> that allows personal views to be expressed without objectively rather than
> on a person-to-person basis.
>
> In Western culture consensus building tends to be much more informal and
> personal, largely because the culture has a much narrower view of what an
> offensive posture is. So teams talk about disagreements until one side
> converts or some compromise is reached. Only when those informal
> techniques fail to reach consensus does one invoke a more formal conflict
> resolution technique like letting the boss decide.
>
> The key to the Western view of consensus is that one must be able to
> discuss disagreements objectively. The focus is about getting to the
> right answer, not who proposed it; in the end everyone on the team gets
> the credit. Part of that is to regard alternative views as simply
> proposals to be evaluated without prejudging their merits. The perception
> is that alternatives are presented simply to ensure that the team has
> applied due diligence, not because the proposer believes things must be
> done that way. IOW, one should think of proposing alternatives as simply
> a mechanism to ensure the team hasn't missed anything. So presenting
> alternatives and challenging proposals is actually a /duty/ for each team
> member.
>
> Of course, there are limits on how one expresses alternatives or
> challenges proposals. "I think we should consider ..." carries no
> personal threat in a Western consensus. OTOH, "Nobody but an idiot would
> think that ... will work," is clearly out of line as a personal challenge.
> What Western culture provides is a psychological set that "knows" where
> the line is between personal and impersonal. Alas, that is tricky for
> newcomers to the culture. My advice would be to develop some stock
> phrases that seem innocuous and use them to introduce your opinions until
> you get used to the culture. That segues to...
>
> (4) In Western cultures one needs to be thick skinned. Relative strangers
> in Western cultures will tend to start making jokes about one another far
> sooner than in other cultures. Nor are sarcastic barbs limited by status
> (e.g., relative age or employer/employee status). This is a direct result
> of accepting confrontation. One cannot institutionalize confrontation if
> each party interprets disagreement as a personal affront. So culturally
> Westerners have to treat disagreement in an impersonal manner. That
> naturally leads to a much more restrictive view of what constitutes an
> insult and, consequently, a much broader view of innocent humor.
>
> Alas, this is a potential minefield for newcomers to the culture because
> it can take years to learn where the boundary between humor and bad taste
> lies. So the safe approach for a newcomer is to always assume any jokes
> that seem personal aren't intended that way. Conversely, one should not
> attempt to "fit in" by trying the same sort of humor.
>
> (5) In Western culture one is expected to ask questions if one does not
> understand something, regardless of stature. That view is epitomized by a
> quote from Steinmetz, "No man really becomes a fool until he stops asking
> questions." It is considered far worse to do something wrong because one
> did not understand how to do it properly than it is to look slightly
> foolish by asking a silly question to make sure you can do it properly.
> This is probably one of the major manifestations of cultural difference.
> If one does ask a foolish question, one may even get kidded about it. But
> in the West, that doesn't mean anything and it doesn't reflect adversely
> on the questioner. OTOH, people will get really annoyed if one screws up
> out of ignorance when they had a chance to get enlightened.
>
> IME, this is one of the more difficult things for people from cultures
> with strong caste-like social contexts to get used to. In such cultures
> asking questions of a superior is often considered impertinent. In the
> West, failing to ask reasonable questions is more likely to be viewed as a
> sign that one is not paying attention.
>
>
> *************
> There is nothing wrong with me that could
> not be cured by a capful of Drano.
>
> H. S. Lahman
> hsl@pathfindermda.com
> Pathfinder Solutions
> http://www.pathfindermda.com
> blog: http://pathfinderpeople.blogs.com/hslahman
> "Model-Based Translation: The Next Step in Agile Development". Email
> info@pathfindermda.com for your copy.
> Pathfinder is hiring:
> http://www.pathfindermda.com/about_us/careers_pos3.php.
> (888)OOA-PATH
>
>
>
|
|
|
|
|