Conclusion
Face negotiation theory addresses intercultural communication on cultural, individual, and inter-relational levels. Individualistic and collectivistic cultures will have different methods of maintaining face and resolving conflict. What comes naturally to people from one culture may not seem an appropriate communication style to individuals from another culture.
An example of this was in 2003 when the United States went to war with Iraq. The Iraqi information minister was adamant that US troops were not in the country, despite the obvious fact that they were. Why use such a tactic? Ting-Toomey’s face negotiation theory would recognize Arabic culture as collectivistic. Thus, one might say it was a method of face management to maintain credibility with the ingroup (i.e., the Iraqi people) rather than dealing with the problem more directly.
As Greenberg, Simon, Pyszczynski, Soloman, and Chatel point out, one’s cultural worldview is taken as an absolute, and the fact that there are other people who share that view reinforces it. So, face negotiation theory can be an effective and necessary tool in developing intercultural communication competence.
Read more about this topic: Face Negotiation Theory
Famous quotes containing the word conclusion:
“Human affairs are so obscure and various that nothing can be clearly known. This was the sound conclusion of the Academic sceptics, who were the least surly of philosophers.”
—Desiderius Erasmus (1469–1536)
“The conclusion has never changed: the worst sort of people come here for the worst sort of reasons and put upon those of us who have conveniently forgotten where we came from and how we got here.”
—Anna Quindlen (b. 1952)
“I have come to the conclusion that the major part of the work of a President is to increase the gate receipts of expositions and fairs and by tourists into town.”
—William Howard Taft (1857–1930)