Direct vs Indirect Styles: Face, Wa and Self-Enhancement

North American directness versus Japanese and Chinese indirectness

In Reading Passage: Managing Conflict, paragraph 2 explains that “the kind of direct approach that characterizes many North Americans is not the norm in other parts of the world.” It also says that the assertiveness that may seem reasonable to a Canadian would be considered rude and insensitive in many Asian countries. This shows a basic contrast: North American conflict communication is often more direct, while Japanese and Chinese communication is often less direct.

Paragraph 3 of Reading Passage: Managing Conflict explains this contrast more specifically. It says that cultures like Japan and China value self-restraint, avoid confrontation, and place great importance on preserving and honouring the other person’s “face.” Because of this, language that a Canadian might think is vague or indirect can actually be polite in an Asian context.

• North American style: more direct and assertive.
• Japanese and Chinese style: more self-restrained, less confrontational, and more concerned with saving face.
• Face-saving: preserving the other person’s dignity and social respect.

Reading Passage: Managing Conflict gives a simple Japanese example. Instead of saying “Close the door,” which is too straightforward, a person might say, “It is somewhat cold today.” The meaning is indirect, but it is understood. The passage also says that Japanese speakers are reluctant to say no directly. Rather than refusing openly, a person may say, “Let me think about it for a while,” which functions as a refusal in that cultural context.

Wa, or harmony

Paragraph 4 of Reading Passage: Managing Conflict introduces the Japanese concept of wa, meaning harmony. The passage says that the Japanese notion of self-restraint is reflected in this important concept. Interpersonal harmony includes a tendency for individuals to be self-critical rather than to find fault in others.

This means that maintaining harmony is not only about avoiding open conflict. It is also about how people evaluate themselves and others. In the passage, Japanese communication is connected with self-restraint, indirectness, and a willingness to look for one’s own weaknesses instead of criticizing other people.

Heine et al. (2000) and self-enhancement

Reading Passage: Managing Conflict describes a cross-cultural study by Heine et al. (2000) comparing Canadian and Japanese university students. The study examined whether students would accept information that they were better than average at a task and whether they would resist information that they had done worse than their peers.

The findings support a contrast between North American self-enhancement and Japanese self-criticism:

• Canadians, on average, found it difficult to believe that they were outperformed by their average classmate.
• Canadians easily accepted that their own performance was superior.
• Japanese students were reluctant to believe that they had outperformed the average student from their university.

According to Reading Passage: Managing Conflict, North Americans are, on average, motivated to find out what is good about themselves and are reluctant to find fault with themselves. Japanese students, in contrast, tend to search for their weaknesses in order to correct them. This difference helps explain why conflict and criticism may be handled differently across these cultures.

Lim’s (2009) two harmony motives

Paragraph 4 of Reading Passage: Managing Conflict also presents Lim’s (2009) explanation that harmony can involve two different motives:

1. to enhance harmony and actively promote group cohesiveness, in which case a more assertive problem-solving approach is preferred;
2. to avoid the disintegration of group harmony, in which case avoidance or non-assertion are preferred.

These two motives help explain why harmony does not always lead to exactly the same conflict style. In some situations, harmony may support assertive problem solving. In other situations, harmony may lead people to avoid direct confrontation.