Edward T. Hall-- A Great-Grandfather of NLP
by Brian Van der Horst
Much of the programming that we deal with changing in NLP is a result of cultural programs1.
The habits, problems, and many of the useless things we have learned to
do and wish to change, are often surplus cultural baggage. Especially
in cross-cultural situations. Such as between the differing cultures of
Black, Hispanic, Asian, Amerindian, and European America. Or the
cultures of management and staff. Or of men and women. Or parents and
children.
INTER-CULTURAL COMMUNICATION
Unbeknownst to many of us, quite a few of the approaches that NLP uses
to solve these problems have been inherited from ground-breaking work
in the field of the inter-cultural communication (ICC). This field
studies the subjective experience of culture as a function of
communication separate from, but including the differences in
languages.
Most people date the foundation of ICC from the publication of Edward T. Hall's "The Silent Language,"
in 1959. If Gregory Bateson was the paternal grandfather of NLP, and
perhaps Milton Erickson the maternal, then another, certainly
great-grandfather of NLP would be Edward T. Hall.
To my mind, Hall is one is the most gifted anthropologists ever to
live. He is also our kind of guy. He writes accessible books. He
consults to governments and businesses-- apparently because he enjoys
working with people who interact, who must produce results and who
affect the world. He is obviously not one who would be content to rest
within the warm pink snuglies of academic security.
While I think it is always valable to know one's roots ("Those who cannot remember the past are are condemmed to repeat it.2")
, my primary interest in writing about Hall is sharing what I have
found useful in his genius for understanding and navigating through
different cultures.
I'd like to present some of his major ideas for your delectation and
delight, as well as some examples of how I have benefited from them
while living in Europe for the past eight years.
EDWARD T. HALL AS AN EARLY NLPER
As early as in "The Silent Language," Hall said, "Experience is something man projects upon the outside world as he gains it in its culturally determined form."
If NLP is based on one presupposition, surely it is this same thought--
that the study of subjective experience begins with how we sort,
select, and create our personal realities.
"The analogy with music is useful in understanding culture." Hall says
later. "A musical score is comparable to the technical descriptions of
culture... In both cases, the notation system enables people to talk
about what they do...I would like to stress that there are laws
governing patterns: laws of order, selection and congruence." Here Hall
could be talking about meta programs.
"Like the creative composer, some people are more gifted at living than
others. They do have an effect on those around them, but the process
stops there because there is no way of describing in technical terms
just what it is they do, most of which is out of awareness. Some time
in the future, a long, long time from now when culture is more
completely explored, there will be the equivalent of musical scores
that can be learned, each for a different type of man or woman in
different types of jobs and relationships, for time, space, work, and
play. We see people who are successful and happy today, who have jobs
which are rewarding and productive. What are the sets, isolates, and
patterns that differentiate their lives from those of the less
fortunate? We need to have a means for making life a little less
haphazard and more enjoyable.3"
Of course, here Hall is talking about modelling. "Man is the
model-making organism par excellence..." wrote Hall 16 years later, the
same year Bandler and Grinder named NLP. "Grammars and writing systems
are models of language... Myths, philosophical systems, and science
represent different types of models of what the social scientists call
cognitive sytems. The purpose of the the model is to enable the user to
do a better job in handling the enormous complexity of life. By using
models, we see and test how things work and can even predict how things
will go in the future... People are very closely indentified with their
models, since they also form the basis for behavior. Men have fought
and died in the name of different models of nature.4"
Edward T. Hall received his Ph.D. from Columbia University in 1942.
He's done fieldwork with Navajo, Hopi, Spanish-American, European,
Middle and Far Eastern societies. During the 50s, he directed a
training program for the State Department teaching foreign-bound
technicians and administrators how to communicate effectively across
cultural boundaries. He taught at the University of Denver, Bennington
College, The Washington School of Psychiatry, Havard Business School,
Illinois Institute of Technology, Northwestern University-- the list
goes on. Today he lives in Santa Fe, New Mexico, and lectures widely in
America, Europe, and Japan.
The seeds of most of the major themes of Hall's lifework are to be found in "The Silent Language,"
if indeed, the birth of the field of inter-cultural communication is
dated from the publication of this book, it is at least out of respect
of the immensity of his genius.
On the first page of this book, Hall begins with two themes-- time and space-- to which he will later dedicated entire books: "The Dance of Life (1983)," and "The Hidden Dimension (1966)."
MONOCHRONIC AND POLYCHRONIC TIME
Let's talk about time first.
Hall's first distinctions were between what he calls monochronic and
polychronic time. "M-time is one-thing-at-a-time, following a linear
form so familiar in the West...an outgrowth of the industrial
revolution. Monochronic cultures stress a high degree of scheduling,
and an elaborate code of behaviour built around promptness in meeting
obligations and appointments.
"Polychronic cultures are just the opposite: human relationships and
interactions are valued over arbitrary schedules and appointments. Many
things may occur at once (since many people are involved in
everything), and interruptions are frequent... P-time is polychronic,
that is, many-things-at-a-time. P-time is common in Mediterranean and
Colonial-Iberian-Indian cultures."
Americans are mostly monochronic. The French, for example, are largely polychronic.
So what happens when I, an American living in France, visit a French
office? I arrive punctually. The French boss is taking calls during our
meeting. His family drops by. His subordinates ask questions. We go out
to eat. He invites along a couple of friends. All this seems really
disorganized to me. No problem for the French. They are used to doing
many things at the same time.
The Frenchperson comes to visit me. He's late. I spend a little social
time saying hello. Then I present the agenda. First we will discuss our
needs, wants and outcomes. Second we will negotiate a deal. Third we
will sign a contract. Then last, we will have some more social time.
Mon dieu, thinks my French colleague, is this guy Van der Horst a
picky, finicky fuss-budget!
On an experiential level, these two cultural time orientations may be
represented by what we in NLP call "Through Time"-- monochronic-- and
"In Time" -- polychronic-- time lines.5 In fact, if these distinctions
hold true, this may be one of NLP's potential contributions to
detecting, understanding and changing cultural misunderstandings.
HIGH AND LOW-CONTEXT CULTURES
These two time orientations tend to produce two other significant
cultural phenomena: the difference between high and low context
cultures. "These terms refer to the fact that when people communicate,
they take for granted how much the listener knows about the subject
under discussion. In low-context communication, the listener knows very little and must be told practically everything. In high-context communication the listener is already 'contexted' and so does not need to be given much background information.6"
American contracts, for example, are about 10 times longer than French contracts. Americans like to have a lot of content. The French don't care as much, as long as the context of the agreement is understood.
Remember, the French think, "If it is a beautiful idea, it's got to
work." Americans think, "If it works, it may be a beautiful idea." The
French are a high context culture; America is low context / high
content.
Here's another way these differences can be observed. Jack, an
American, is in France. He takes Marie, a Frenchwoman, out to dinner
and a show. Afterwards, she invites him to her apartment. It is
midnight. She serves coffee and cognac. Jack starts talking about all
the things they have in common. He stares meaningfully into her eyes.
He tries to cuddle closer to Marie. Marie says, "Relax, Jack. You are
going to spend the night. Don't rush it." Jack thinks he's a great
Casanova. He does not know that the context has already determined what content-- sleeping together or not-- will ensue in this situation.
Jules, a Frenchman is in America. It's the same scene as above, only
Mary is an American. Just after coffee and cognac, Jules jumps on Mary.
Mary is horrified. Jules does not understand. He has just received all
the context markers
for seduction. He does not know Mary expects a lot of content, before
cutting to the chase. She wants to know what they have in common, to
discuss their relationship, to share details of intimacies, and to
exchange medical records, before she can switch to the context of a
romantic entanglement.
Mike Tyson would never have been convicted of rape in France.
Under French law, the context of situation ordains the content of "what
happened". I know this sounds crazy. And I am not condoning violence. I
am simply reporting what many of my French friends told me-- including
some lawyers. The idea of context is so important in France, that if a
woman enters into a man's hotel room at 3:00 AM, a French jury will
assume she has already given assent to sexual congress. The contexts of
many famous French court cases explain why "Crimes of Passion" get such
light sentences.
"Japanese, Arabs, and Mediterranean peoples, who have extensive
information networks among family, friends, colleagues and clients and
who are involved in close personal relationships, are high-context."
says Hall writing with his wife, Mildren Reed Hall, in "Understanding Cultural Differences"(1990).
"As a result, for most normal transactions in daily life, they do not
require, nor do they expect, much in-depth, background information.
This is because they keep themselves informed about everything having
to do with the people who are important in thier lives.
"Low-context people include Americans, Germans, Swiss, Scandinavians,
and other northern Europeans; they compartmentalize their personal
relationships, their work, and many aspects of day-to-day life.
Consequently, each time they interact with others they need detailed
background information. The French are much higher on the context scale
than either the Germans or the Americans. This difference can affect
virtually every situation and every relationship in which the members
of these two opposite traditions find themselves."
Here's a nifty chart| 7 the Halls' have created to describe some of the predictable patterns between cultures with differing time systems: |
| MONOCHRONIC PEOPLE | POLYCHRONIC PEOPLE |
|---|
| do one thing at a time |
do many things at once |
| concentrate on the job |
are highly distractable and subject to interruptions |
| take time commitments (deadlines, schedules) seriously |
consider an objective to be achieved, if possible |
| are low-context and need information |
are high-context and already have information |
| are committed to the job |
are committed to people and human relationships |
| adhere religiously to plans |
change plans often and easily |
| are concerned about not disturbing others; follow rules of privacy and consideration |
are more concerned with those who are closely related (family, friends, close business associates) than with privacy |
| show great respect for private property; seldom borrow or lend |
borrow and lend things often and easily |
| emphasize promptness |
base promptness on the relationship |
| are accustomed to short-term relationships |
have strong tendency to build lifetime relationships |
THE HIDDEN DIMENSION OF SPACE
"The Hidden Dimension(1966)" was Hall's exploration into the cultural
phenomena of space, including the invisable boundaries of
territoriality, personal space and the multi-sensory (VAKOG!!)
perceptions of space-- the eyes, ears, skin, and nose as distance
receptors-- including a few distinctions rarely talked about in NLP.
Here are a few of this thoughts on these topics:
Territoriality: "Americans tend to establish places that they label
'mine'-- a cook's feeling about a kitchen or a child's view of her or
his bedroom. In Germany this same feeling of territoriality is commonly
extended to all possessions... If a German's car is touched, it is as
though the individual himself has been touched."
Cultural Orientations Toward Sensory Modalities: "High-context people
reject auditory screening and thrive on being open to interruptions and
in tune with what goes on around them. Hence, in French and Italian
cities, one is periodically and instrusively bombarded by noise."
Personal space: "Each person has around him an invisable bubble of
space which expands and contracts depending on a number of things: the
relationship to the people nearbvy, the person's emotional state,
cultural background, and the activity being performed. Few people are
allowed to penetrate this bit of mobile territory and then only for
short periods of time... In northern Europe, the bubble are quite large
and people keep their distance. In southern France, Italy, Greece and
spain, the bubbles get smaller and smaller. "
These last observations on personal space helped clear up something
that had bothered me for a long time in France. Doing some research of
my own, I found out that personal space is the space in which you feel
you must acknowlege another person, and do something about them if they
enter into this zone. Then there is intimate space-- that distance
which is perceived as an invasion of your privacy.
The personal space for Americans begins at the distance of about two
out-stretched arms. For the French-- although this differs from North
to South-- it averages out at about one arm's lenght. This is the
beginning of an American's intimate space. The French intimate space
begins at an elbow's distance, or closer.
I had been feeling claustrophobic in French bathrooms for years. They
are very narrow-- the walls touch your outstreched elbows-- compared to
their American counterparts-- in which you can usually put out a radius
of an arm's length about you. Reading Hall, I realized that French
bathrooms had been invading my intimate space-- and suddenly I didn't
have to do a V/K dissociation everytime I wanted to visit the lavatory.
I could just smile and say, aha, those cuddly French have done it again.
There is one more essential theme in Hall's work that I feel can aid NLP practitioners, the concept of action chains.
An action chain is "a term borrowed from animal behavior to describe an
interactional process in which one action releases another in a uniform
patterned way. Courtship is a rather complex example. Making a date or
inviting someone to dinner would be another.8"
One of my favorite examples of an action chain is Paul Watzlawick's
example from World War II. Both the English and the Americans during
this time were calling the other culture "over-sexed." This is rather
rare in inter-cultural conflicts. Usually the misunderstandings come in
polarities. One culture is hot and the other cold, for instance.
Watzlawick explains this in terms of action chains.
In both the British and American cultures, there are, let's say 20
distinct steps in the ritual of courtship-- between the first hello and
going to bed. One step that occurs in both cultures is "the kiss on the
lips."
In America, this is about step number three. It's something you do to
establish intimacy. But in England, this is around step 18. It's about
the last thing you do before engaging in sexual intercourse.
So imagine a U.S. soldier on a date with an English girl. To get the
relationship going in the right direction, to warm it up a little, the
guy gives the gal a kiss on the lips. Just like in the (Hollywood)
movies.
The lady in question now has a difficult choice to make. First, she
thinks the guy is definitly over-sexed. After all, she hardly knows the
fellow, and she's just been cheated out of 15 steps. So either she
walks off the scene immediately-- in which case the Yankee says, "She
is obviously over-sexed and hysterical-- all I did was give her a kiss
on the lips."
Her other choice is to start preparing to go to bed. After, all the guy
just yanked her action chain, and she is only a step or two away from
the main event. If she follows this course, the American says, "Boy, is
she over-sexed! She's taking off her clothes, and all I did was give
her a kiss on the lips."
THE CASE OF THE SUPERFICIAL YANKEE AND THE ARROGANT FROG
Getting to know Hall can help you understand, forgive, and maybe even
appreciate that which is invisable, transparent, and unexamined in
inter-cultural conflicts.
Take the case of the French marketing executive I met at a party in the
suburbs of Paris. He was complaining that Americans are so superficial,
and childlike. Of course I asked him, how did he know this?
He had been working in America on assignment. At the end of the first
week, a colleague had invited him home for dinner. A little while
later, his car broke down. He called the American for a ride, but he
didn't want to get involved. "There you have it," he said, "They are
friendly at first, but they don't make lasting friendships."
I had heard this before. First I tried pacing. I said, "I know in
France, inviting someone over for dinner is a very intimate occaison,
and a high mark of social respect. It is often the same for Americans,
with a few differences."
I started thinking about the differences between monochronic and
polychronic cultures, high and low-contexts, and action chains. My wife
asked the Frenchman, "After your dinner, what did you do?" Oh, nothing,
he replied, after all, I brought flowers, we had dinner together, at
his home. I asked, " How much time elapsed between the dinner and the
breakdown?" Three months.
I asked him, "If you were in France, would you ask someone into your
home for dinner the first time you met them?" No, or course not, he
replied (I already knew this action chain). First you have coffee
together, then a drink at a bar, followed by lunch at a bistro, and
then maybe dinner in a restaurant. Then you know if you want to invite
them into your home. "How long does this process take?" Three to six
weeks.
"Then you test the person before you invite them to your house?"
Of course. "Well, so do the Americans," I replied. "Only they do their testing AFTER the dinner."
I explained that if you don't send a thank-you note, or make a
telephone call a day or so after the dinner, you are judged as
impolite. Furthermore, if you do not maintain contact, with either a
call, letter, fax, or visit at least once a week, after a period of
three to six weeks, an American will assume that the relationship has
terminated.
I extended my sympathies. "I am sorry, Monsieur. You did not pass the test."
In France, however, sometimes years can go by after a dinner at
someone's home, but the relationship remains intact. The event --which
has been pre-tested--is so special in the Frenchperson's mind that very
little "upkeep" of the relationship is necessary.
You could also begin to understand why freqently, on first sight, the
French think we are efflusive children and why Americans think the
French are arrogant, if you think in action chains.
The criteria of "Being Liked" and "Being Respected," are important in
both cultures. However, in the U.S., likability comes first in the
sequence of the social action chain. So, if you are concerned about
liking and being liked, what are you going to do behaviorally when you
meet someone for the first time: you are going to smile and say nice
things. Then you are going to next decide how much you repect the
person, especially since in America, we don't have quite the
power-distance, or all the social strata that exist in France. North
Americans expect people to be more or less equal.
Not in France. Here, there is a wider power distance between social
strata. (Would their national slogan be "Liberty, Equality and
Fraternity," if they had it in the first place?) Here, respect is the
first criteria that is demanded to be determined in a social
interaction. So, if respect and being respected are important-- what do
you do behaviorally? You judge, you evaluate, you ascertain the social
class of the other, and you definitely project the moves that will get
you respect in you home culture. Laughing, smiling and saying nice
things come later on your action chain-- after you have determined who
respects whom.
All of Edward T. Hall's writings bear the mark of his genius. I
recommend reading them all, in the order they were published if you
would like some terrific insights into the scientific foundations of
NLP and how to go about handling inter-cultural communications.
If you only have time for one, I recommend starting with "Beyond
Culture," which is a great summary of his work. It has four indexes--
one for authors, one for subjects, one of themes, and one of "Ideas and
Techniques of Transcendence." This last index reads like a poem:
"An individual cannot thru introspection and
Self-examination understand himself or
the forces that mold his life,
without understanding his culture.
"Cultures won't change unless everyone changes.
There are: neurological-biological-political-economic-historic and
Culture-Psychodynamic reasons for this.
"Culture is dictatorial unless understood and examined.
"It is not that man must be in sync with, or adapt to his culture
but that cultures grow out of sync with man.
When this happens people go crazy and they don't know it.
"In order to avoid mass insanity, people must learn to transcend and adapt their culture to the times and
to their biological organisms.
"To accomplish this task, since introspection tells you nothing,
man needs the experience of other cultures.
I.e. to survive, all cultures need each other."
AN EDWARD T. HALL BIBLIOGRAPHY:
The Silent Language, New York: Doubleday, 1959
The Hidden Dimension, New York: Doubleday,1966
Beyond Culture, New York: Doubleday, 1976
The Dance of Life, The Other Dimension of Time,
New York: Doubleday, 1983
Hidden Differences: Studies in International Communication, Hamburg: Grunder & Jahr, 1983, 1984, 1985
Hidden Differences: Doing Business with the Japanese, Garden City, NY, Anchor Press/ Doubleday, 1987
Understanding Cultural Differences, Germans, French and Americans, Yarmouth: Intercultural Press, 1990
Most of the above publications can be ordered through the Intercultural Press: PO Box 700, Yarmouth, ME 04096.
* * * *
Brian Van der Horst has been a professional trainer for
15 years. For the past 8 years he has lived and worked in Paris as a
director of Repere. Previously, he was a consultant with Stanford
Research Institute in the Values and Lifestyles Program in the
Strategic Environments Group, and director of the Neuro-Linguistic
Programming Center for Advanced Studies in San Francisco. He has worked
in journalism as an editor for New Realities, Practical Psychology,
Playboy, and The Village Voice. He has been an acquistions editor for
J.P. Tarcher Books, Houghton-Mifflin, and had a television program in
San Francisco. Before this time, he worked in the entertainment
industry for 10 years, serving as Vice-President of the Cannon Group,
and as Director of Advertising and Publicity for Atlantic Records.
1 Culture here is used as the technical term social
scientists use to refer to the systems for creating, sending, storing
and processing information developed by human beings, that
differentiate them from other life forms; and include beliefs, mores,
customs, habits, arts, sciences and traditions.
One could also use as synonyms, the expressions world-view, model of
the world, or subjective reality.
2 George Santayana
3 This last paragraph was used as a frontispiece for both
"The Emprint Method," and "Know How," by Cameron-Bandler, Gordon and
Lebeau.
4 Edward T. Hall, "Beyond Culture," 1976.
5 See chapter two of "Time Line Therapy," by Tad James and Wyatt Woodsmall (1988) for a discussion of this hypothesis.
6 Edward T. Hall and Mildred Reed Hall in "Understanding Cultural Differences"(1990).
7 Ibid.
8 "Beyond Culture" (1976)
|
|