NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
... e and negative face. These terms are somewhat self-explanatory, but basically can be explained in a compromise analogy. In Facework negotiating, as in any compromise situation, the two sides give a little on each side and get a little on each side. It is during this pulling and pushing for balance is negotiation in its own. There is a median that is trying to be reached on both sides that both can be happy with, or even at least a point that is tolerable for each party involved.
In face negotiation in an intercultural setting, as in any setting, each side has their own self-face concern and an other-face concern. It is on which end of the spectrum, self-face, other-face, each party places more emphasis on, that decides how they deal with the conflict. This is looked at as attaining self positive-face, self-negative-face, other positive-face and other negative-face. When one side is gaining self-positive-face the other side is experiencing other negative-face.
The idea of positive and negative faces has to be considered and understood when dealing with conflicts form culture to culture. For example, a Japanese student may be more inclined to use self positive-face in a conflict to fulfill the need for inclusion and association with others, typical of a high context culture (Ting-Toomey ICS 219). The Facework strategies of individualism, collectivism, low context cultures and high context cultures are the main strategies of the theory. It is these concepts through which the theory was able to grow. Researchers looked at what the theory is based on, individualism, collectivism, conflict, low and high context cultures, and built the theory around these blocks. The Facework theory has not necessarily grown through extension, that is, through adding knowledge and new concepts, but more through intension; by developing a deeper understanding of the original concepts and variables.
The original theory from Ting-Toomey was based on 12 propositions dealing with individualistic and collectivistic societies. By looking at specific societies such as Japan (collectivistic) and the United States (individualistic), a deeper and more in-depth understanding of these societies was gained to widen the theory. Many studies have been done using the United States and Japan. One study involved 197 college students from the United States and 190 from Japan, with proportions of men and women basically equivalent. The test was deemed the Individualism and Collectivism Manipulation Check. Each student was given a questionnaire / survey to fill out.
Some examples from the surveys are, I would blame myself for whatever the problem is, I would accuse my classmate of wrongdoing, I would try indirectly to get my classmate to volunteer, It is better to consult others and their opinions before you do anything, etc, etc. What came from this experiment was that Japanese students surprisingly showed a higher individualistic score than expected. Actually, it was even higher than their American counterparts. I feel that after surveys and experiments such as this, Ting-Toomey had to expand her original theory criteria. The original twelve propositions were based on the idea of cultures and societies being either individualistic or collectivistic.
It was understood that these two concepts were cut and dry, and that every society in the world fell into one or the other on the whole. She was basically forced to expand her theory to incorporate the idea that people in each society may in fact be the opposite of what researchers thought they were (Cocroft 485). There are many uses for the Facework Negotiation Theory and numerous applications. Five important applications to this theory are the following. 1.
Face Negotiation can be used towards any intercultural problem that may arise involving face-saving actions (Ting-Toomey ICS 230). 2. It can be used in situations where a certain partys face is threatened at a high level (Ting-Toomey ICS 230). 3. It can be applied to a given situation where two intercultural parties may have a high level of uncertainty and an extra coating of politeness is in order (Ting-Toomey ICS 230). 4. It can be applied to a situation along with other communication acts, such as compliment acts or insult acts (Ting-Toomey ICS 230). 5.
Finally, it can be used with other theories, such as compliance gaining, to achieve a certain goal (Ting-Toomey ICS 230). Overall, I feel this theory to be useful when looking at intercultural conflicts and trying to explain why someone reacts (saving face) one way from one culture and why someone from a different culture acts (saving face) another way. My final understanding of the theory can be summed up with the following statements. That is, when dealing with conflict management, Facework is constantly happening. There is a constant negotiation of face giving, face gaining and face sharing.
If two parties are dealing with face negotiation in an intercultural context, each person must change which aspect of face he is focusing towards from one culture to the next (Ting-Toomey ICS 231). The expansion of the theory from 12 to 32 propositions was needed in order to take into account specific behavioral acts inside a culture. If I were to try and explain, describe and analyze the conflict management styles of two parties from two different cultures I would definitely use Ting-Toomey's Facework theory, but I would not adhere to it exactly. I would use it as a guide to see what she has come up with. The theory needs to be expanded to when specific situations in specific cultures can be dealt with simply by referring to Ting-Toomey's set of propositions.
The studies done thus far have provided the groundwork for further research to be continued in the future. Bibliography: Works Cited Cocroft, Beth-Ann, et al. Facework in Japan and the United States, International Journal of Intercultural Relations. Vol 18, No 4. Fall 1994. 469 - 506 Ting-Toomey, Stella, et al. Intercultural Conflict Styles (ICS), Theories in Intercultural Communication.
Sage Publications, Newbury Park. 1996. 213 - 32. Ting-Toomey, Stella, et al. The Challenge of Facework. SUNY Press, Albany. 1994. 307 - 36. Ting-Toomey, Stella. Facework Competence in Intersultural Conflict, International Journal of Intersultural Relations.
Vol 22, No 2. May 1998. 187 - 225. Ting-Toomey, Stella, et al. The Influence of Cultural Individualism-Collectivism, Self Construals, and Individual Values on Communication Styles Across Cultures, Human Communication Research, June 1996. 510 - 39.
Free research essays on topics related to: high level, international journal, conflict management, high context, one culture
Research essay sample on High Context Conflict Management
