Đề tài How to communicate effectively with foreign colleagues in foreign organizations and companies

type, which is one of the most serious problems in communicating with people from different cultures, must be rejected. “A stereotype is a simplified and/or standardized conception or image with specific meaning, often held in common by people about another group.” (“Stereotype” Wikipedia). When learning about another culture, we can not only understand different points of view and develop our friendships but also avoid miscommunication or hurting or humiliating others unintentionally. People had better build rapport by trying to understand and appreciate other multifaceted human beings rather than believing in the previously formed opinions or attitudes. If we can identify and be more aware of cultural similarities as well as differences, we will definitely communicate with our foreign colleagues more effectively. 2.8.2. English language performance The rate of using English for daily work in international working environment in Vietnam is rather high, accounting for 69% (“DN "lạnh nhạt" dần với chứng chỉ ngoại ngữ A, B” “Vietnam’s enterprises’ less appreciation of English certificate of A & B levels” Vietnamnet). 66.1% of Vietnamese staffs get English certificate of C level, 25.7% B level, and 6.7% A level (“Thực trạng và giải pháp phát triển nguồn nhân lực chất lượng cao” “Facts and solutions for the development of high-qualified human resources” Congnghieponline). These certificates, however, have been reducing their reliability and replaced by others international standard certificates such as TOEIC (Test of English for International Communication), TOEFL (Test of English as a Foreign Language), IELTS (International English Language Testing System), etc. Sadly enough, a big problem is Vietnamese staffs’ poor English skills, which still remains to be solved. Many discussions on this problem have taken place, yet few investigations about the staffs’ level of English have been carried out. This is one of the reasons why I conducted a survey to find out how good their English skills are. For those people having studied English since they began to go to work, they may have to face a lot of difficulties. It is a fact that English is not an official language in Vietnam. For this reason, it is not put at the top priority despite its vital importance. Their English is not proficient enough to meet high demands of the jobs. A large number of Vietnamese people have studied English for a long time. Meanwhile, some employees or staffs might have not have a chance or a driving force to access to English before, thus learning by doing seems a popular way for them to improve English ability. Generally speaking, their English skills remain weak. On the one hand, they can hear and understand what their foreign colleagues are talking about. However, it is difficult for them to speak out in English, which is not their native language. An idea is conceived in their mind but they can not produce it. They do not know how to express it by words or make others get their points. Their ability to respond to foreign colleagues is low. This somehow can disrupt the working environment. On the other hand, people can talk in English but their listening skill is poor, which also can impede workplace communication. The main problem may be the accented English. Foreign colleagues from different countries say in different accents, causing Vietnamese people difficulties to recognize words. Another reason is that they pronounce the words incorrectly and imprecisely. Their bad pronunciation somehow influences on their listening skill. Consequently, they do not get others’ points comprehensively. In addition, many people have difficulties in encoding and decoding body language when they talk to their foreign colleagues. This may be due to the fact that it is not highly appreciated by the Vietnamese. Conversations, therefore, are often ruined when incorrect gestures are conveyed. As body language plays an important part in communication, it should be taken into considerations so that better communication among Vietnamese staffs and foreign ones is facilitated. As such, when ideas or instructions are misunderstood, the organization or the company may suffer from a substantial loss of money. Imagine that staffs have a team working on a project in an organization or a company. If there is miscommunication among Vietnamese staffs and foreign ones, the meetings will last longer or they might hold some more meetings to ensure that everything is clear to everybody. Consequently, time and money could be wasted to the organization or the company. Worse still, the staff’s full potential is not fully utilized because of the communication problem. It is the communication barriers that frustrate to those who speak English as a second language as well as their listeners. Although they have spent years learning English, it is their actual English skills that are holding them back. CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY AND ANALYSIS 3.1. Methodology 3.1.1. Study design The paper was written based on the theory of communication process of “Business Communication Essentials.” At first, I intended to focus on the barriers to effective communication with foreign colleagues which included language performance and cultural differences. Each nation, however, has its own culture, which influences the way they communicate with other people. Correspondingly, it is very difficult for me to study the identity differences among cultures. That is the reason why I followed the communication process stated in chapter 2 to find out what is the most effective way to communicate with their foreign colleagues. The ways that were chosen by the majority of the informants will be considered as the most effective ones when Vietnamese staffs deal with foreigners in the workplace. Among a wide range of non-empirical methods, survey investigation was chosen. The questionnaires designed were based on my own knowledge and the consultancy of my supervisor and the consultant of Pan Nature, a local non-governmental organization. Respondents were given statements and they would choose the best or the most appropriate options with them. Besides, if no statement was appropriate, they could tick the option “other ways” and specified their ideas. 3.1.2. Research Instrument The pilot survey was done beforehand by 4 people who work for foreign organizations. After the pilot phase, the questionnaire was adjusted according to some comments from the respondents and then sent to 25 targeted participants directly (26%) and 70 via email (74%) at the beginning of May. Within two weeks, when 77 questionnaires were filled and returned (81%), the information and data were enough for analysis. However, when the questionnaires were delivered to the participants, I assumed that all of them were good at English enough to understand the questions although I took considerations about their English level. In fact, according to the survey results, some had poor or fair English, which was over my expectations (see 3.2 for more details). The data, accordingly, may not be really reliable. 3.1.3. Participants’ characteristics The survey questions were designed to collect opinions of the Vietnamese staffs who work with foreigners. For the convenience of time use and data analysis, the eligible participants for the study are Vietnamese and working in a foreign company or organization in Hanoi. Additionally, other working characteristics of the participants were mentioned including gender, current occupation, type of organization or company, and duration of working with foreign colleagues. 3.1.4. Brief on the survey questions The questionnaire was designed in English basing on the theory of communication process by Bovée, Thill, and Schatzman (Business Communication Essentials 4). It consisted of 14 multiple-choice questions. With such medium length, the participants would be willing to complete the questionnaires as it took them only 5-7 minutes. The questionnaire aimed at discovering the communication process between the Vietnamese staffs and their foreign colleagues in foreign organizations and companies to find out the most effective ways to communicate with foreign colleagues. To achieve this aim, the questionnaire was divided into 2 parts. The first part consisted of 7 questions concerning general background information of the participants (Vietnamese staffs) and their foreign counterparts. Apart from the working characteristics such as their gender, current occupation, type of organization or company, and duration of working with foreign colleagues, other factors including their English level, foreign colleagues, and frequency of communicating with them were also concluded. The second part, questions 8 to 14, asked the respondents to reveal how they would behave during the communication process with their foreign colleagues in the workplace. In this part, each question was about each step of the communication process. The first step in which the sender has an idea was assumed to be obvious, thus no question asked about this. Question 8 was the second step of encoding idea. Questions 9 and 10 asked about the channel and media they used to transmit the message. Step 4 was manifested through questions 11 and 12, which found out how the staffs made sure that the receivers got the message and how they earned attention from their foreign colleagues. Question 13 was about step 5 when the receiver decoded the message. Finally, the last step of sending feedback was expressed in question 14. For some questions, the option “other ways” was included to seek further ways of responses that the participants might think of. By doing so, the limitations of quantitative methods were minimized. 3.1.5. Data processing The data collected was processed by Excel. Then it was expressed through figures and tables so that it can be systematic. The findings were organized and presented under the sub-headings, which facilitated the analyses and interpretations of the data. The researcher studied the data basing on the understandings of effective communication as well as theoretical background showed in the first chapter. 3.2. Findings The questionnaire consisted of 14 questions and divided into 2 parts as explained in section 3.1.4. Followings are the results of the findings. 3.2.1. Response rate The questionnaire was delivered directly and via emails. 25 hard copies of the questionnaire were distributed and 70 soft copies were sent via emails to people who are working in foreign organizations and companies in Hanoi. After two weeks, 25 hard copies (100%) and 52 softcopies (74.28%) were successfully completed and returned. This is a high rate of response that can to some extent ensure the reliability of the results from the surveyed people. In the first part of the questionnaire (questions 1 to 7), the respondents provided basic information such as gender, current occupation, type of company or organization, English ability, working duration with foreign colleagues, and frequency of communication with foreign colleagues. The survey people were from both sexes. Male informants accounted for 46.75% and female ones 53.25% (Figure 3.1). Figure 3. 1. Respondents’ sex distribution About their current occupations, less than half of them were junior staffs, some were seniors or managers and higher, and the rest were internships (Table 3.1). Table 3. 1. Occupation of surveyed staff Occupation Managers or higher Senior staff Junior staff Internship Percentage 15.58 % 27.27% 46.75% 10.39% In terms of type of organization or company, 100% foreign invested companies make up for the largest proportion (35.06%). Many of the informants work in join venture companies (19.48%) or non-governmental organizations (NGOs) (22.08%). Only 7.79% work for Vietnam NGO and the rest (15.58%) are from others including limited, private companies, government-donor mechanism, Institute, and International Agency (Table 3.2). Table 3. 2. Type of organization or company Type of organization or company Percentage 100% foreign-invested company 35.06% Joint venture company 19.48% NGO 22.08% Vietnam NGO 7.79% Others 15.58% According to the survey results, a large number of the participants know English very well, which is one of the advantages for them as they work with foreign colleagues (Figure 3.2). More than half (51.72%) of the total of the respondents are good at English. Especially, 18.39% reaches to an excellent level of it. These people are often seniors or managers and work in foreign companies. English language, therefore, is not a communication barrier to them. Anyway, there are some informants having fair or even poor English. This somehow has a significant influence on their conversations with their foreign colleagues and possibly impairs the effectiveness of the communication. Figure 3. 2. Level ranked by the respondents Among those who have good or excellent English, female participants account for 60.65% while this dropped down to 39.35% for males. It could not be wrong to conclude that women are better at English than man. The data also reveals that less than half of junior staffs (47.23%) were good at English. Together with the English language ability, the duration of working in foreign organizations and companies is also a contributory factor to the effectiveness of communication with foreigners. Table 3. 3. Response rate by working duration Working duration Less than 5 years 5 - 15 years More than 15 years Percentage 57.89% 39.47% 2.63% According to the results of the survey provided in table 3.3, those who have been working with their foreign colleagues for less than 5 years are in a majority within the surveyed interviewed people (57.89%). This proportion dropped to 39.47% for those having working duration with foreign colleagues for 5 – 15 years. Only 2.63% of the total participants worked with foreigners for more than 15 years. It can be said that the longer they work with foreigners, the more experiences they have, thus the better they communicate with them. The proportion of foreign colleagues as native English speakers and non-native English speakers is nearly equal (44 % and 56% respective). As such, the Vietnamese staffs have many opportunities to work in a multi-cultural environment. Accordingly, it is necessary for them to know the cultural differences between Vietnam and other countries where their foreign colleagues come from. Understanding others’ cultures helps to facilitate a good communication. Similar to the duration of working, the effective communication is also greatly affected by the frequency of communicating with foreign colleagues. As clearly presented in figure 3.3, while it was 58.44% for everyday communication with foreign colleagues, it dropped to 28.97% for communication in a couple of days in a week (28.97%). Very few respondents communicate with their foreign colleagues once a week or rarely (7.79% for each). Figure 3. 3. Response rate by frequency of communication Of the entire respondents, 60% were female and 40% were male. Nearly half of junior staffs (44.45%) communicated everyday with foreign colleagues. This helps us to conclude that the more Vietnamese staffs communicate with foreigners, the more they could develop their communication skills. Regular communication with foreigners not only improves their English skills but builds up their confidence as well. 3.2.2. How Vietnamese staff communicate with their foreign colleagues As explained earlier, questions 8 to 14 were designed basing on the communication process mentioned in chapter 1. The phases inside this process were the foundation for designing these questions. Phase 1, in which sender has an idea, was not asked. In case there were no appropriate options for the participants, they could choose “other ways” and specified their own ideas. 3.2.2.1. Phase 2 – Sender encodes idea The results of the survey were presented in figure 3.4. None of the respondents took into consideration all of the factors stated before starting a conversation with their foreign colleagues. Topic was normally paid much attention to than any other elements (33.83%). Besides, the structure/flow to deliver the content of the topic was also considered carefully (21.80%). 16.54% of the surveyed people took notice of the message form (words, facial expressions, and gesture) and 12.78% focused on their audience - foreign colleagues. The length of the topic was received little attention (8.27%). Only 4 informants took heed to the tone (3.01%). The level of importance of factors is as follow: topic, structure/flow to deliver the content of the topic, message form, and foreign colleagues. Figure 3. 4. Factors considered before starting a conversation In summary, no surveyed people thought of all factors despite their importance. The survey has shown that the informants mostly paid attention to topic, which is the focus of the communication. Specifically, more than half (55.56%) of total respondents choosing topic were female while 44.44% were male. 27 out of 77 informants, which comprised 35.06%, chose only topic. 27 other survey people ticked several factors apart from the topic. In addition, only 34.88% of the participants paid attention to the topic when they communicated with native English speakers while this increased to 65.11% for communicating with non-native English speakers. Hence, it can be concluded that when we talk with non-native English speakers, it is necessary to give more emphasis to the topic. For the same question, few survey people had their own options such as “time to dialogue, objectives, follow-ups,” “colleagues’ mood, circumstances at that time to make sure the colleagues are ready to talk or receive the messages.” One participant said that the “availability and suitability of time also defines length of topics, form of messages (written or oral).” This reveals that they were really careful about the communication process with their foreign colleagues. They bore in mind not only internal factors but external ones as well. Unfortunately, however, one man even did not care about any of those factors at all. This partly proves that men hardly think first before delivering their ideas, leading to less effectiveness in communication. 3.2.2.2. Phase 3: Sender transmit message The number of participants using communication channel and medium is summarized in the table 3.4. Table 3. 4. Channel and medium Oral communication Percentage Written communication Percentage Face-to-face 62.04% Emails 78.72% Phone 29.63% Memos 12.77% Voice mail 8.33% Social network sites 8.33% Face-to-face and emails were the most frequently used to communicate with their foreign colleagues in both foreign organizations and companies. In oral communication channel, the people also liked to use phone. Voice mail, which represented 8.33% of oral communication channel, was widely used in 100% foreign-invested companies. In written communication channel, besides emails, memos and social network sites were more popular in foreign companies than in NGOs. There were 40 female participants communicating face-to-face with their foreign colleagues, which made up for 59.70%. Meanwhile, only 27 men that held 40.30% used this channel of communication. Nearly 60% of those communicated face-to-face worked with foreign colleagues for less than 5 years while more than 40% worked for 5-15 years. Hence, we can conclude that face-to-face communication is preferred by women than men and often used by those who have been working for few years rather than for long time. In terms of emails, the number of informants used this channel was quite high (56.76% for females and 43.24% for males). The rate of using emails was also depended on the working duration. Those who worked for less than 5 years comprised more than 60% while this remained nearly 40% for those working from 5-15 years. Similar to face-to-face communication, more female staffs used this type of written communication and it was popular among those working for short time with their foreign colleagues. 3.2.2.3. Phase 4: Receiver gets message When being asked “What would you do to make sure that your foreign colleagues get your message?” 44.21% of the entire respondents chose the first option, which is “repeat, brief and emphasizes the key points.” This might be the simplest way to make others receive the messages. Through the survey, data also shows that explaining and interpreting were their common choices, which made up for 30.53%. Demonstration to ensure that their foreign colleagues got the message was the option of 15.79% of the participants. Figure 3. 5. Ways of confirmation The survey also reveals that most of the respondents who had poor English skill ticked the first option rather than others. It is because they were not capable enough to explain or interpret in another language. English remained as a barrier causing them a lot of difficulties in communicating with their foreign colleagues. The ration of male and female chose the first option was not so much different (52.38% and 47.68% respectively). Among these people, there were 16 (38.10%) working with their foreign colleagues who were native English speakers. In contrast, this increased to 61.90% for those who used this way with the non-native English speakers so that their foreign colleagues could get their message. From this situation, we can see that when communicating with foreign colleagues that are not native English speakers, we should repeat, brief and emphasize the key points to ensure their confirmation. To express the same message, only 9.47% of the entire participants provided other ways such as “asking some related questions,” “asking the foreign colleagues to confirm” (by emailing or calling), “watching their reactions,” “talking slowly and moderately, going straight to the point, even with some explanations and background information,” “notifying to them (maybe before or after sending those messages)”, or asking directly whether they got the messages or not. In addition, it is important to get attention from the foreign colleagues while talking with them (Figure 3.6). As can be seen from the chart, the large percentage of the informants (31.68%) chose the option “stop for a while.” This can be explained that it may be the most polite way to capture attention from others. Only by stopping talking for a moment, the participants could delicately let the audience know that they should concentrate on the conversations. We can also see that to earn attention from their foreign colleagues, the proportion among the survey people “asking them to give feedback of what you have said” was 28.71% while it dropped to 15.84% for those who “ask them to pay attention” and 13.86% for those who “ask them if they are interested in the conversation.” These 2 latter are straight and direct ways of asking people to turn their attention to the dialogue. This could be explained by looking at Vietnamese culture, which would be discussed in more details later in the next chapter. Figure 3. 6. Ways to draw attention The figure also shows that very few people used gestures to attract attention from the audience (5.94%) such as looking at the audience’s face or eyes during the conversation. “Facial expression and hands using also demonstrate my ideas (like this, like that),” one informant specified. “Sometimes I have to demonstrate my ideas by writing on the papers to make it easier to understand,” she added. The other required the foreign colleagues to give her one second to make them pay attention to the conversation. Another person chose the way of “giving simple and short sentences with full information.” Those are verbal and non-verbal skills that were rarely adapted in practice. For the option that was mostly selected (“ask them to give feedback of what you have said”), no participant with poor English took this one. It was the choice of 55.17% of respondents who were good at English and 29.59% who were excellent. Only 34.48% of male survey people followed this way to grab attention from their foreign colleagues while it was the choice of quite a few female respondents (65.52%). Of those 29 people, 19 (65.52%) worked with native English speakers and 10 (34.48%) with non-native English speakers. Accordingly, we could come to conclusion that it is better for Vietnamese staffs to ask feedback from their foreign colleagues that are from native English speaking countries in order to command their attention. 3.2.2.4. Phase 5: Receiver decodes message In phase 5 of decoding the message of the foreign colleagues, the survey people took different options when they did not totally understand the message. This is also the feedback to their foreign colleagues (Figure 3.7). According to the results pre