Concepts of time and space in different cultures

Concepts of time and space in different cultures

Culture can’t be defined specifically because it the meaning is different for each individual. It is dependent on the circumstances in a society someone grows up and any other influences in daily life. The definition of culture develops with the individual’s experiences. If a person is talking about its culture just a personal view how the person itself understands culture can be expected. Scientists often try to find a definition for what culture is, like Kroeber and Kluckholm (1952) who identified 164 definitions. There are several concepts of culture like from “Kroeber A.L. and Kluckholm C. (1952). Transmitted patterns of values, ideas and other symbolic systems that shape behaviour.”, “van Maanen J. And Schein E.H. (1979). Values, beliefs and expectations that members com to share.”, “Hall E.T. and Hall M.R. (1987). Primarily a system for creating, sending, storing and processing information.”

In modern culture, there have been changes in the perception of space and time. In place of an unambiguous existence came a multiple, variation reality, which requires a comprehensive study and understanding. Essential features of modern culture are the variance, multiplicity, massification, visualization. The most effective tool for the study of contemporary culture is a concept, which features (fragmentation, subjectivity, variability, open structure) correspond to the characteristic features of modern culture. It should be emphasized that changes in the perception of the concepts of space and time, due both to extensive changes, particularly globalization, mechanization of mass communication, etc., and intense, associated with the internal logic of the development of philosophy, science, art, history, etc.

Space concept (strongly based on E.T. Hall). Every human being has his/her own demand for space to protect his/her cover from external influences of the environment. To create, find and define this boundary between oneself and the outside is essential. Especially important is it to know or at least to estimate someone’s boundary/skin correctly. It can have big influence in daily and business life when dealing with strangers and members of other cultures whose definition of and treating with space might be unknown. There are different points when characterizing space. One point is that people trace out their own territories which they will protect and defend if necessary. This pont which is influenced by someone’s cultural origin is well developed in Germany and USA.

Americans have distinctive places which they call “mine” and don’t want them to be “disturbed”. Germans may have an even stronger feeling about their territories. Personal things especially like their cars should rather be avoided to be “touched”  without permission or treated differently from that like the owner would treat it. The same counts for houses, grounds and offices. They shouldn’t be accessed without a detailed/explicit allowance. The size and location of offices are also both considered as very important because they express some kind of status and power. Like a corner office or one without walls. But the power symbol has a higher value in Germany than in USA. Whereas in France the top management of a company is commonly placed in the middle of the building – corresponding to their way of doing something – “everything” has to be centralized. The central position is a key position in France because all information and decisions can be controlled from the central point. Like already mentioned there are different categories of space. The other one is personal space which is another from of territory. First of all personal space is depending on the relationship people have, their emotions and cultural background. Every culture and more precisely every individual has its own demand of personal space. This can be described as a bubble which defines the personal boundary is needed to feel comfortable in interacting with people. This bubble can be penetrated from others but just when fulfilling eh “invisible” requirements like already mentioned – a good relationship. In France this bubble is rather small comparing to Germany, USA and Finland. It is not seen as penetration when French people kissing each other when greeting someone. The bubble in Germany, USA and Finland is rather big and it is an attack to a person’s space/personal territory when kissing or touching someone without “agreement”. The distance between people should be kept and will be dissolved by shaking hands only. It is perceived as impolite and very rude when not keeping the distance between you and your interlocutor. In China an even greater demand of space is the norm. Nowadays of course about the strong western cultural influences shaking hands is nothing unusual. But old and very traditional people in business may appreciate a bigger physical distance when greeting each other by bowing the head. It has to be figured out very carefully how space is handled and perceived as correct behaviour. Not paying attention to that can cause an immediate loss of your business relation because of attacking and not respecting someone’s demand of space.

Time concept. The importance of time is dependent on the different view points of people’s origin respectively culture. “Time is one of the fundamental bases on which all cultures rest and around all activities revolve” (Hall, 1990, p. 179). The are differences how cultures handle time. In earlier times time was measured in seasons, darkness and daylight. Nowadays time is more important and complex than in the past. Kluckholm and Strodtbeck identified three types of culture: (1) present orientated, with little attention to what has happened in past and what the future will bring. Past is considered as unimportant while future is seen as vague and unpredictable; (2)past-orientated cultures have a high sense on traditions like to their ancestors, family, traditionalism and aristocracy. The present is tried to be maintained; (3) future-orientated cultures with a high value in changes have a more desirable development in economic and social scales.

For companies time is considered as an endless challenge they have to compete with and find solutions to the time managing problem.There is also a cultural difference in how they deal with time. In some cultures appointments it is not necessary to be precisely on time at appointments. Sometimes delays in appointments are expected, tolerated or at least taken into account. But in Germany, Finland, USA and China time has a high value and has to be precisely organized to keep business running. Any delay or disturbance in time-(managing) will influence the whole schedule of a manager. It might be helpful for the waiting person to get informed about any delay.

In France it is similar but punctuality depends on the importance of the person. If the delay is not more than 15 minutes, it is acceptable to wait. The cultural differences relating to time can be easily described with the “Circle Test” from Tom Cottle who asked questions about how people from different countries value and see past-present- future. *4

The Americans see a very small overlap between present and past but an increasing importance from past to highest the future. Americans are used to work if necessary 70 hours a week just to reach their targets as fast as possible to increase the chances in the competition about jobs and hierarchies. But they forget sometimes to care about their health like other cultures which value time to a very high degree. Time pressure can cause stress and if it becomes “negative stress” – that’s stress which is overwhelming and can’t be managed – people get sick and unproductive.

A similar behaviour is reflected in German culture. Germans most important attitude seems to be always punctual. Everything else than being right in time is an insult for the waiting person and a shame for the person who keeps waiting. Time is considered as very rare and expensive. That’s why time has to be well/perfectly organized. Finns and Germans consider time nearly in the same way. They have a big emphasize on present which is clearly linked with the past and future in similar proportions. France instead emphasizes the past and their long history most. Present is also well related with past and future but with less value/importance on future. In China present, past and future are seen as independent not overlapping periods with the same amount of importance.

To describe planning and who business is done in different cultures, Cottle’s “Time horizon” is helpful. France, China and Finland are close behind each other on the Time horizon scale. This means that they are more long-time orientated than in contrast the Germans who are planning in shorter periods and least the Americans who manage their planning in very short terms. They often plan just quarterly because of the fast moving market conditions in the States. If we look at Hong-Kong specifically than the future planning has the biggest extend. In business it is often the case that plans are made for decades in advance. This means the are willing to wait for 10-20 years until their investments will return into profit, but these are then “super profits”. At a very short term orientation the future progress of a company may lack.

It needs a great level of flexibility and readiness to change quickly and adapt to new market conditions. It is absolutely necessary/recommended to consider future planning in a wider prospect because of future strategies development and planning. The present shouldn’t be neglected either should you emphasize it to much in consideration of future planning. To find the right extend/proportion is the companies challenge starting into the new millennium.

References

1. Benedict, Ruth (1934). Patterns of Culture. Boston: Houghton Miflin Company

2. Forsberg, A. Definitions of culture CCSF Cultural Geography course notes. Retrieved: 2006-06-29.

3. Greene, Brian: The Fabric of the Cosmos; Space, Time and the Texture of Reality, Random House, 2004

4. Geertz, Clifford. 1973. The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. New York. ISBN 978-0-465-09719-7.

5. Kroeber, A. L. and C. Kluckhohn, 1952. Culture: A Critical Review of Concepts and Definitions. Cambridge, MA: Peabody Museum

6. Szamosi, Geza: The Twin Dimensions; Inventing Time and Space, McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1986

7. http://www.via-web.de/

8. www.webofculture.com/presskit/resources.html 
9. www.apmforum.com/columns/boye28.htm

10. www.wam.umd.edu/~tkang/what.html 
11. www.afs.org/efil/old-activities/dimjan98.htm

12. www.unesco.org/culture_and_development/ocd/chapter5.html 
13. www.bena.com/ewinters/culiss.html 
14. www.gallup.com/poll/reports/china.asintercultural.home.ml.org