Cultural competence

Three examples of quantitative assessment instruments are:[13]

• the Intercultural Development Inventory[15]
• the Cultural Intelligence (CQ) Measurement[16]
• the Multicultural Personality Questionnaire[17]

Research in the area of 3C assessment, while thin, points to the value of qualitative assessment instruments in concert with quantitative ones.[18][19][20] Qualitative instruments, such as scenario-based assessments, are useful for gaining insight into intercultural competence.[21][22][23][24]

Intercultural coaching frameworks, such as the ICCA (Intercultural Communication and Collaboration Appraisal), do not attempt an assessment; they provide guidance for personal improvement based upon the identification of personal traits, strengths, and weaknesses.[25][26]

Intercultural Communicative Language Teaching Model. In response to the needs to develop EFL learners’ ICC in the context of Asia, a theoretical framework, which is an instructional design (ISD) model ADDIE with five stages (Analyze – Design – Develop – Implement – Evaluate) is employed as a guideline in order to construct the ICLT model for EFL learners. The ICLT model is an on-going process of ICC acquisition. There are three parts: Language-Culture, the main training process. (Input – Notice – Practice – Output), and the ICC, which are systematically integrated. The second part is the main part consisting of four teaching steps to facilitate learners’ ICC development, and each step reflects a step of the knowledge scaffolding and constructing process to facilitate learners’ ICC development.[33]

A salient issue, especially for people living in countries other than their native country, is the issue of which culture they should follow: their native culture or the one in their new surroundings.

International students also face this issue: they have a choice of modifying their cultural boundaries and adapting to the culture around them or holding on to their native culture and surrounding themselves with people from their own country. The students who decide to hold on to their native culture are those who experience the most problems in their university life and who encounter frequent culture shocks. But international students who adapt themselves to the culture surrounding them (and who interact more with domestic students) will increase their knowledge of the domestic culture, which may help them to "blend in" more. In the article it stated, "Segmented assimilation theorists argue that students from less affluent and racial and ethnic minority immigrant families face a number of educational hurdles and barriers that often stem from racial, ethnic, and gender biases and discrimination embedded within the U.S. public school system".[34] Such individuals may be said to have adopted bicultural identities.

Another issue that stands out in intercultural communication is the attitude stemming from ethnocentrism. LeVine and Campbell defines ethnocentrism as people's tendency to view their culture or in-group as superior to other groups, and to judge those groups to their standards.[35] With ethnocentric attitudes, those incapable to expand their view of different cultures could create conflict between groups. Ignorance to diversity and cultural groups contributes to prevention of peaceful interaction in a fast-paced globalizing world. The counterpart of ethnocentrism is ethnorelativism: the ability to see multiple values, beliefs, norms etc. in the world as cultural rather than universal; being able to understand and accept different cultures as equally valid as ones' own. It is a mindset that moves beyond in-group out-group to see all groups as equally important and valid and individuals to be seen in terms of their own cultural context.

• Collectivism[6][36][37]
  • Decisions are based on the benefits of the group rather than the individual;
  • Strong loyalty to the group as the main social unit;
  • The group is expected to take care of each individual;
  • Collectivist cultures include Pakistan, India, and Guatemala.
• Individualism[6][36][37]
  • Autonomy of the individual has the highest importance;
  • Promotes the exercise of one's goals and desires and so value independence and self-reliance;
  • Decisions prioritize the benefits of the individual rather than the group;
  • Individualistic cultures are Australia, Belgium, the Netherlands, and the United States.

• Masculine Cultures[6][37]
  • Value behaviors that indicate assertiveness and wealth;
  • Judge people based on the degree of ambition and achievement;
  • General behaviors are associated with male behavior;
  • Sex roles are clearly defined and sexual inequality is acceptable;
  • Masculine cultures include Austria, Italy, Japan, and Mexico.
• Feminine Cultures[6][37]
  • Value behaviors that promote the quality of life such as caring for others and nurturing;
  • Gender roles overlap and sexual equality is preferred as the norm;
  • Nurturing behaviors are acceptable for both women and men;
  • Feminine cultures are Chile, Portugal, Sweden, and Thailand.

• Reflects the extent to which members of a society attempt to cope with anxiety by minimizing uncertainty;
• Uncertainty avoidance dimension expresses the degree to which a person in society feels comfortable with a sense of uncertainty and ambiguity.
  • High uncertainty avoidance cultures[6][37]
    • Countries exhibiting high Uncertainty Avoidance Index or UAI maintain rigid codes of belief and behavior and are intolerant of unorthodox behavior and ideas;
    • Members of society expect consensus about national and societal goals;
    • Society ensures security by setting extensive rules and keeping more structure;
    • High uncertainty avoidance cultures are Greece, Guatemala, Portugal, and Uruguay.
  • Low uncertainty avoidance cultures[6][37]
    • Low UAI societies maintain a more relaxed attitude in which practice counts more than principles;
    • Low uncertainty avoidance cultures accept and feel comfortable in unstructured situations or changeable environments and try to have as few rules as possible;
    • People in these cultures are more tolerant of change and accept risks;
    • Low uncertainty avoidance cultures are Denmark, Jamaica, Ireland, and Singapore.

[6][37]

• Refers to the degree in which cultures accept unequal distribution of power and challenge the decisions of power holders;
• Depending on the culture, some people may be considered superior to others because of a large number of factors such as wealth, age, occupation, gender, personal achievements, and family history.
  • High power distance cultures[6][37]
    • Believe that social and class hierarchy and inequalities are beneficial, that authority should not be challenged, and that people with higher social status have the right to use power;
    • Cultures with high power distance are Arab countries, Guatemala, Malaysia, and the Philippines.
  • Low power distance cultures[6][37]
    • Believe in reducing inequalities, challenging authority, minimizing hierarchical structures, and using power just when necessary;
    • Low power distance countries are Austria, Denmark, Israel, and New Zealand.

[6][37]

• Short-term or Monochronic Orientation[4][6][37]
  • Cultures value tradition, personal stability, maintaining "face", and reciprocity during interpersonal interactions
  • People expect quick results after actions
  • Historical events and beliefs influence people's actions in the present
  • Monochronic cultures are Canada, Philippines, Nigeria, Pakistan, and the United States
• Long-term or Polychronic Orientation[4][6][37]
  • Cultures value persistence, thriftiness, and humility
  • People sacrifice immediate gratification for long-term commitments
  • Cultures believe that past results do not guarantee for the future and are aware of change
  • Polychronic cultures are China, Japan, Brazil, and India