Skip to content

CMA Foundation · Fundamentals of Business Laws and Business Communication · Intercultural and International Business Communication

A Mumbai firm finds that its contract drafts, with exhaustive clauses, offend a prospective partner, who feels that written detail signals distrust, while the firm's US lawyers insist on them. Which statement best explains the clash?

The partner likely belongs to a high-context culture that relies on trust and relationships, finding exhaustive written terms suspicious, while the US side is low-context and depends on explicit written terms. The clash arises from these differing communication expectations.

  1. ABoth cultures are high-context, so detail is irrelevant
  2. BThe partner's culture is probably high-context relying on trust and relationships, whereas the US side is low-context relying on explicit written termsCorrect
  3. CThe partner's culture is low-context and the US side is high-context
  4. DContext has no effect on the importance given to written agreements

Explanation

High-context cultures place weight on trust, relationships and understanding, so very detailed terms may appear insulting. Low-context cultures such as the US rely on explicit written terms. The reverse pairing in the third option contradicts the facts described.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Intercultural and International Business Communication shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Intercultural and International Business CommunicationFree diagnostic mock

More Intercultural and International Business Communication questions