Group process in a cross-cultural context
Sorry this is a bit long but wanted to share with you some reflections on group process here.
It is fascinating to me to observe and think about the ways in which the group with which we are working has changed and developed over time. But as facilitators of this group, I find it often similar to facilitating group process online. Regina Smith and I have written about this challenge as making the invisible visible. In contrast to face to face groups, the “processes” of online groups are virtually invisible (no pun intended). Yet, one knows it is there because it manifests itself, from time to time, in the patterns and kinds of electronic interactions that students have with one another. And, if you are paying attention, you can see changes over time in these interactions. But missing are the usual cues to which we pay attention when facilitating group process: nonverbal behavior, intonations of voice, physical positioning, and the ways in which words are spoken.
It occurs to me that working with a group whose language is different than you own poses similar challenges. As facilitators we are responsible for helping the group move forward with its work. But we all know that group work is also intimately connected with relationship issues and the overall socio-emotional climate within the group itself. While we have some access to nonverbal behavior, such “cues” may not mean the same thing in Vietnamese culture as they do in our culture. For example, according to our hosts Vietnamese often smile in response to even painful events or news. They will use a smiling, seemingly happy demeanor to “cover up” sadness and anger. Also, because of a collectivist culture, many might hesitate to respond to a question or initiate interaction within the group. A westerner might interpret such behavior as not understanding the issue, or unwillingness to disclose or engage. Our Vietnamese group members, however, are deeply engaged. They simply manifest it different forms of behaviors. We are told by our translators to give them more time to respond to questions because they are thinking. And it works!
And because of language differences, we often don’t know what exactly is going on in the group – what is being talked about or the ways in which they are talking about something. At times, it would seem that discussion becomes a little more lively because several members are talking at once and the volume of the talk escalates. But we simply have no idea really what they are talking about. Yesterday, we asked the group to move into smaller groups for a period of work. But we also noticed at the time that there seemed to be some interaction going on in the group, and no one really moved to get into groups. The translator turned to us and said, “Excuse me, they would like a little more time. They are talking about something and need about 10 minutes.” After a while, the translator said to us that the group would like to suggest a change in our schedule for the next day. They had been working very hard, we had been working very hard, and they would like to meet only a half day the next day so they could have a party for us and for the members of the group.
Kris and I were nothing short of amazed. This group decision, made in a matter of a few minutes and expressing several things at once, seemed to come out of left field. My guess, however, is that it had been percolating all along among members of the group, and we simply had no idea. It left us wondering what else about the group process don’t we know.
Because of the language barrier, it feels to me as if we are apart from the group. Often discussion erupts spontaneously for which the translator can only provide a general summary. It provides some information but we often wonder about the "larger story" unfolding in the group. There is little doubt in our minds that this group has changed. Reflecting back on our first meeting in February, they are much different now than they were then. They were a bunch of about 20 or so people, a few of which knew each other from the five or six institutions represented in the group, but mostly it was a group of people with little knowledge of one another. Members from these institutions still seem to stick close together but now within the group they are willing to joke with one another, to exchange ideas, and even express some competitiveness in fun.
But all of this is occurring, it seems, in a world fairly invisible to us, or at least a world that we as facilitators are not able to readily “read.” As this group seems to become more self-directed, we are reminded of the limited role that facilitators actually serve in helping groups develop - a very humbling experience.
It is fascinating to me to observe and think about the ways in which the group with which we are working has changed and developed over time. But as facilitators of this group, I find it often similar to facilitating group process online. Regina Smith and I have written about this challenge as making the invisible visible. In contrast to face to face groups, the “processes” of online groups are virtually invisible (no pun intended). Yet, one knows it is there because it manifests itself, from time to time, in the patterns and kinds of electronic interactions that students have with one another. And, if you are paying attention, you can see changes over time in these interactions. But missing are the usual cues to which we pay attention when facilitating group process: nonverbal behavior, intonations of voice, physical positioning, and the ways in which words are spoken.
It occurs to me that working with a group whose language is different than you own poses similar challenges. As facilitators we are responsible for helping the group move forward with its work. But we all know that group work is also intimately connected with relationship issues and the overall socio-emotional climate within the group itself. While we have some access to nonverbal behavior, such “cues” may not mean the same thing in Vietnamese culture as they do in our culture. For example, according to our hosts Vietnamese often smile in response to even painful events or news. They will use a smiling, seemingly happy demeanor to “cover up” sadness and anger. Also, because of a collectivist culture, many might hesitate to respond to a question or initiate interaction within the group. A westerner might interpret such behavior as not understanding the issue, or unwillingness to disclose or engage. Our Vietnamese group members, however, are deeply engaged. They simply manifest it different forms of behaviors. We are told by our translators to give them more time to respond to questions because they are thinking. And it works!
And because of language differences, we often don’t know what exactly is going on in the group – what is being talked about or the ways in which they are talking about something. At times, it would seem that discussion becomes a little more lively because several members are talking at once and the volume of the talk escalates. But we simply have no idea really what they are talking about. Yesterday, we asked the group to move into smaller groups for a period of work. But we also noticed at the time that there seemed to be some interaction going on in the group, and no one really moved to get into groups. The translator turned to us and said, “Excuse me, they would like a little more time. They are talking about something and need about 10 minutes.” After a while, the translator said to us that the group would like to suggest a change in our schedule for the next day. They had been working very hard, we had been working very hard, and they would like to meet only a half day the next day so they could have a party for us and for the members of the group.
Kris and I were nothing short of amazed. This group decision, made in a matter of a few minutes and expressing several things at once, seemed to come out of left field. My guess, however, is that it had been percolating all along among members of the group, and we simply had no idea. It left us wondering what else about the group process don’t we know.
Because of the language barrier, it feels to me as if we are apart from the group. Often discussion erupts spontaneously for which the translator can only provide a general summary. It provides some information but we often wonder about the "larger story" unfolding in the group. There is little doubt in our minds that this group has changed. Reflecting back on our first meeting in February, they are much different now than they were then. They were a bunch of about 20 or so people, a few of which knew each other from the five or six institutions represented in the group, but mostly it was a group of people with little knowledge of one another. Members from these institutions still seem to stick close together but now within the group they are willing to joke with one another, to exchange ideas, and even express some competitiveness in fun.
But all of this is occurring, it seems, in a world fairly invisible to us, or at least a world that we as facilitators are not able to readily “read.” As this group seems to become more self-directed, we are reminded of the limited role that facilitators actually serve in helping groups develop - a very humbling experience.
posted by John at 3:39 PM
2 Comments:
Good point. We have a team of interpreters who are also task force members - they share the vision for the adult ed program, and are fairly experienced. Some are more fluent in the technical language we use (not *that* technical, but it's at least domain-specific), which helps move things along. But it's not unusual for things to move along in a direction that we don't know about for a while and then have to circle back. We wonder about some things being translation problems of words or of concepts. So if they're having trouble with understanding the "gap between what is and what you want to have happen," is it the language (gap) or the concept (gap).
But overall, our interpreters seem to be really good at translate meanings as much as words - and having 4 in the room at once is helpful, since they can turn to one another and check meanings sometimes. And then there are just the funny things that translate in funny ways. I can't think of an example, but there have been some.
I would agree with everything Kris said. I think the role of the translator creates a relatively unique dimension to the group process, and to which I think I will have to give more thought. However, they seem to play a central role in the group process. For example, if at any given time you were to look at one of our Vietnamese colleages speaking and addressing their comments to us, they might as often be looking at the translator while they are speaking as at us. But they don't really facilitate group process. They simply try to tell us what is being said, or the general gist of a discussion that might be occuring too rapidly for direct translation. Their presence and the filtering of the meaning of what is being said does add another dimension to the process that you don't normally enocunter in its literature.
Post a Comment
<< Home