The spot for the observation was chosen due to the high people’s turnover. I was observing people at the arrival space of the Port-au-Prince International Airport, where the cross cultural communication and passengers’ differentiation were present and possible to observe. It was a day time, from 11 am till 2 pm, and the flights arrivals from New York, Santiago and Miami took place. There were 2 main groups distinguished: the local people of Port-au-Prince, who were mostly the serving staff at work (bus and cabs drivers, guides waiting for tourists and the pick-up representatives from the hotels, airport employees), those were the representatives of a Black ethnic group; and the tourists coming to Port-au-Prince to spend their leisure time, who were diversified as Black, White and Hispanic ethnic groups’ representatives.
Assumptions made before the observation: I was expecting to see the local Black people communicating within their group freely on any occasion, and talking to the arriving passengers only by a specific need like recognition of the customer or an attraction of one. From the tourists perspective the minimal communication with locals was expected in order to solve the urgent issues, while within their groups more cheerful and informal contacts were considered. The communicational distance between the locals and tourists was assumed due to the existing prejudices by locals, who might perceive the tourists being lucky in life without implementing much effort (symbolic interactionism) (Scarince).
Observation: As it was expected, the representatives of local citizens were greeting each other, once entered the airport facility. They were waving at each other and smiling back. Some of the guides (they were identified as such due to the tabs they were holding with the name of the group tour) were chatting with few hotel pick-up representatives. The locals were showing a synchronic culture behavior, while doing several things at one time: moving a cart, talking to somebody, waving to someone, etc. (Goman, 2011). At first they were mostly concentrated within the 3 areas of the arrival room, but as the time showed the flight landing they all had spread across the room, facing the corridor, and the communications between them had stopped. Once the group of tourists arrived, each local representative started bustling in order to find their client faster. The arrived tourists were coming out in groups, interacting with each other. They were exchanging bags, passing documents, however all of their actions were more consistent than the actions of locals, thus, their behavior was distinguished as sequential (Goman, 2011). It seemed like the newcomers were ignoring the locals at first. Some of the tourists were intentionally keeping the distance from the attracting their attention locals: they were passing by the pick-up representatives saying “no, thank you” or “give me a moment”. Within the next 15 minutes the leader within each tourist group had shown himself and started communicating with locals in order to get the process going. The rest of the group members were waiting aside, some of them were faced into their cell phones, the younger people were making selfies, and the elder visitors were checking their papers and gathering the group together. The interaction between the groups was minimal, but once each local had found his/her group/client, the more informal greeting and smiles between the local representative and the group occurred and they all walked towards the exit together. At that point only a tourist leaders were mostly (if noticed doing so) communicating with their local representative, while the rest of the tourists were concentrated on talking with each other.
Both of the groups were considered as emotionally effective within their own groups, however, the representatives of tourist groups turned more emotionally neutral wile communicating with local representatives (Goman, 2011). In comparison to the tourists, the local people were showing more of a nonverbal communication signs: running eyes, crossing hands and hand’s fluttering, touching face, changing the body positions, etc.
In Russia the general gender equality at work place is a must by law, however. a certain consistent pattern can be noticed: man is considered to be in charge, while women is “often the force to be reckoned with, and who sees to it that things get done” (Archer, 2012). While, the traditional idea of men being a representative of a stronger sex is common, it does not eliminate women from occupying manager’s positions. “Russians do not refer to women as “the weaker sex”—nor do they think women are weak at all—but instead women are “the prettier sex” (Buck, 2012). Women in Russia follow the desire of being a good looking character within the company no matter what they do. “Whenever they are out in public, Russian women dress pristinely, always in high heels, regardless of the weather. It would be a social scandal to wear sweatpants or running shoes unless one is on their way to the gym” (Buck, 2012). As the result, women are more likely to get the position, where the visual contact is more applicable or necessary, since they are considered as a mood driver and, thus, by some unwritten agreement, they have to support this perception with their look. Men in business are taken seriously if they show themselves as true gentlemen: “Men are allowed - nay, advised - to compliment a woman's appearance. They stand up when a woman enters a room or comes to a table. They get the door.” (Archer, 2012). For both genders the appropriate education is important, so once you meet a business person, no matter what gender he or she is, you should act respectfully, assuming that this person is qualified for the position he or she holds.
Goman, K. C. (March, 2011). Communicating Across Cultures. ASME.
Retrieved from: https://www.asme.org/engineering-topics/articles/business-communication/communicating-across-cultures
Scarince, C. Symbolic Interactionism in Sociology. Study.com.
Retrieved from: http://study.com/academy/lesson/symbolic-interactionism-in-sociology-definition-criticism-examples.html
Archer, G. (25th of April, 2012). Gender in Russian Business Culture. MBA-Exchange.com.
Retrieved from: http://www.mba-exchange.com/candidates/mba-knowledge-article.php?kpo=62
Buck, A. (25th of October, 2012). The Prettier Sex: Understanding the Gender Roles in Russia. Georgetown University: Berkley Center.
Retrieved from: http://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/letters/the-prettier-sex-understanding-gender-roles-in-russia