CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION
Culture is learned from the people you interact with as you are socialized (Spencer-
Oatey, H., & Franklin, P., 2012) (Spencer-Oatey, H., & Franklin, P. (2012). What is
culture. A compilation of quotations. GlobalPAD Core Concepts, 1(22), 1-21.).
Nowadays, people communicate with several different cultural communities, such as
international businesses and schools, or even social media, where you can make friends
from around the world. Therefore, when you interact with someone new from a
different culture, the viewpoints, actions, world, and other qualities of humans are
reflected through culture, which plays an essential role in identifying and shaping their
personalities. Additionally, culture helps not only individuals but also their groups or
communities to identify themselves, follow society's common ideals, and respond to
their communities.
Additionally, foreign-owned enterprises have appeared in Vietnam, which creates
cultural diversity to enrich societies, workplaces, or even management and working
styles. The meetings of international businesses reflect these differences most clearly.
Understanding these cultural differences in meetings is essential for businesses aiming
to successfully negotiate and build long-term partnerships. Consequently, this report
explores the differences in meeting styles and approaches between American and
Vietnamese cultures. By providing a comprehensive overview of these cultural
nuances, this study aims to understand better how cultural frameworks shape
communication styles, influence relationship building, and decision-making in
culturally diverse workplaces.
CHAPTER II: CONTENT
2.1 Background concepts
2.1.1 Definition of meeting cultures
Meeting culture refers to the shared norms, values, and expectations that
individuals or groups have in a meeting in order to obtain information and help the
organization move forward. According to Allen, Lehmann-Willenbrock, & Rogelberg
(2015), this concept contains of elements such as structured agendas, defined purposes,
established expectations, informal rules that influence participation styles, power
hierarchies, and overall interaction in a meeting. Meeting culture is continually shaped
by group to team compositions, leadership approaches, and advances in virtual meeting
options. (Wheelan, 2016). Furthermore, a successful meeting culture has been linked to
enhanced collaboration, improved decision quality, and better overall team
performance, underlining its critical role in contemporary organizations (Rogelberg,
2019).
2.1.2 Key cultural influences on meetings
2.1.2.1. Communication styles in meetings
Direct communicators tend to say what they think. Their message is conveyed
primarily through the words they use, and they rely on the literal interpretation of these
words. The overall goal of direct communication is “getting or giving information”
(Peace Corps, 2002, p. 78). In low-context cultures, direct communication is common
and usually appears more culturally heterogeneous, emphasizing individualism,
independence, and self-reliance.
In contrast, indirect communicators tend to convey their message not only through
words but also through nonverbal behaviors such as "pauses, silence, tone of voice,"
which is very common in high-context cultures. According to Ting-Toomey (1999),
the overriding goal of indirect communication is maintaining harmony and saving face.
2.1.2.2. Relationship in meetings
Social hierarchy plays an important role in any communication style, especially in
meetings of both Vietnamese and American cultures. The relationship between
speakers, age, and social network is all important aspects in determining what language
to use in communication in a meeting (Scollon & Scollon, 2001).
About contextual sensitivity, Plunkett and Sundell (2017) had argued that the two
speakers express actuality, a genuine disagreement does not entail that their utterances
express opposite opinions. Furthermore, Tran (2019) mentioned that these differences
prove the profound impact of cultural values on communication styles. They shape not
only how people address each other, but also how they express emotional and social
interactions in several different contexts.
2.1.2.3. Decision-making
In a consensual culture, which is often associated with collectivism, they need a lot of
time to make decisions as everyone has the opportunity to express their opinions.
Therefore, the time of decision-making is considered very important, the key point in
the whole process. In contrast, in a top-down culture, which is often associated with
individualism, the decision-making responsibility belongs to an individual. In that type
of culture, the leader makes decisions very quickly at an early stage by the leader.
However, the decision is not the final decision. During the implementation process, if
there are more new opinions or information, the plan is regularly adjusted(Meyer,
2014, p. 155).
2.2. Three main differences in meetings between Vietnam and America
a. Communication styles in meetings
American and Vietnamese communication styles in meetings reflect profound
differences rooted in their cultural values. As Hall (1976) described, American
communication favors a direct and open communication style. As I mentioned, this
type of communication style tends to convey messages primarily and rely on the literal
interpretation. So, this approach encourages employees to freely express their ideas
and feedback, fostering transparency and quick decision-making (Dobni & Klassen,
2015). In the American workplace in which is an individualistic and innovative culture,
such openness aligns with these fundamental values (Bennett & Nikolaev, 2021;
Hofstede, 2001).
In contrast, Vietnamese communication tends to adopt a more indirect communication
style, emphasizing respect and harmony within the workplace (Nguyen, Terlouw, &
Pilot, 2006). In high-context cultures as Vietnamese meetings, employees typically
avoid conflict, instead using subtle harmony methods to give feedback or ideas to
prevent offense (Vuong et al., 2018). This communication style is rooted in
Vietnamese culture, reflecting the importance of saving face and promoting group
harmony.
To further illustrate differences between American and Vietnamese communication
styles in meetings, the first chart shows the different ways that speakers indicate their
disagreement in meetings. The second chart shows the percentage of frequency of
conversation interruption through direct and indirect ways in American and
Vietnamese meetings
How do American and Vietnamese speakers indicate their dis-
agreement in meetings?
100% 90%
80%
60%
60%
40%
40%
20% 10%
0%
American Vietnamese
Direct Indirect
Chart 1. Differences in how speakers indicate their disagreement in meetings
Vietnamese tend to indicate their disagreement indirectly, with 60% of respondents
preferring to maintain harmony and avoid confrontation. Although the rest (40%)
prefer direct communication, they also respond politely and subtly instead of showing
significant frustration. In contrast, American speakers prefer direct communication,
showing a stronger emphasis on open and straightforward interaction, with more than
half of the chart (90%). This encourages transparency and feedback, while only 10% of
Americans favor indirect communication styles, indicating a clear preference for direct
dialogue.
How often do they interrupt each other?
100% 90%
80%
80%
60%
40%
20%
20% 10%
0%
American Vietnamese
Often interrupts Let others finish before speaking
Chart 2. Differences in how speakers indicate their disagreement in meetings
In America, most speakers tend to interrupt each other frequently, especially when they
have any issues, with 80% of the total. This means they encourage direct feedback and
engage in open discussion, reflecting values of assertiveness and transparency. While
only 20% wait for others to finish, emphasising speakers tend to have a clear
conversation and quicker decision-making. In contrast, the Vietnamese rarely interrupt
each other while they are speaking, just only 10% of speakers preferring. In case they
stop others, they also speak gently and prefer to maintain relationships in the
workplace as well.
2.2.2. Relationship in meetings
In a collectivistic orientation like Vietnamese, managers typically expect respect and
deference from their subordinates. This leads to a formal atmosphere in the workplace,
especially in boss-employee relationships (Nguyen, 2020). People in high-context
cultures place more emphasis on the surrounding context rather than on the words
describing a negotiation (Mary & Dana, 2011). Therefore, they tend to depend on the
context of conversation and hierarchy to choose their words carefully and give
feedback or ideas based on the relationship with the listeners. On the other hand,
American leaders typically embrace an egalitarian approach, treating employees as
equals (Squires, 2018; Northouse, 2016, 2021), which is also a hallmark of individual
leadership styles. People in these cultures place less emphasis on tradition, ceremony,
and social rules; such as North Americans are soon on a first-name basis with others
(Mary & Dana, 2011). Moreover, Mary and Dana also assumed that North American
business prefers to come to the point immediately instead of being indirect because
they feel it wastes time. For that reason, they commonly use first names in most
contexts and tend to minimize hierarchical distinctions.
The first chart shows significant cultural differences between Vietnam and America in
the way speakers address each other in meetings. The second chart shows the
percentage of newbies or seniority who will give opinions in meetings.
How do people address each other in meetings?
120%
100%
100%
80%
80%
60%
40%
20%
20%
0%
0%
American Vietnamese
First names Pronouns
Chart 3. Differences in how speakers address each other in meetings
In Vietnamese workplaces, 100% of employees prefer using pronouns to address each
other in meetings. They tend to avoid using first names because it is considered an
offense and disrespectful to others, especially in the employee-boss relationship. With
various second-person singular pronouns, they are used according to the context in
meetings or situational requirements. In contrast, only 20% of American speakers use
pronouns in meetings; most of this 20% also use pronouns for the introduction of
speakers' names. The rest (80%) primally use first names and encourage open
communication, emphasising egalitarian and minimilized hierarchy feelings.
Who will give opinions in the meeting?
120%
100%
100% 90% 90%
80%
60%
40% 30%
20%
0%
American Vietnamese
Newbie Senior
Chart 4. Differences in who gives opinions in meetings
In America, both newbies and seniors hold the same position when expressing their
opinions. There is a 10% chance that either a newbie or a senior can voice their
thoughts in meetings, particularly during presentations, as attendees generally prefer to
allow the speaker to finish their ideas. This profoundly emphasizes the reduced impact
of social hierarchy, fostering engagement in open discussions while also respecting
contextual sensitivity. Vietnamese culture, on the other hand, is a hierarchical system,
and the managers frequently encourage subordinates' new solutions for the problems,
meanwhile, they also expect respect and adherence to established procedures from
them. It is a tricky dilemma, while the newbies are often unable to speak frankly about
some matters due to the desire to save face.
2.2.3. Decision-making in meetings
In America, a culture characterized by strong individualism, employees are encouraged
to provide ideas and feedback and take responsibility for their decisions to demonstrate
a profound belief in personal autonomy. According to Hofstede (2001), managers
generally expect that employees will make their own independent choices, and
managers also prioritize individual achievements over group cooperation. As I
mentioned, in this culture, the decision is not the final decision (Meyer, 2014), because
the plan will be adjusted if there are any new opinions or information. Furthermore,
Eisenberg (2000) asserts that the American principles of dynamic contract law are not
determined by what happens when a contract is formed. Instead, they are influenced by
the ongoing sequence of events that precede, follow, or shape the formation of the
contract.
In Vietnam, conversely, in such a collectivist culture, individualism among leaders is
typically low (Tran, Fallon & Vickers, 2016). Vietnamese management activities
emphasize collectivism, especially in meetings, where decisions are made
collaboratively with respect for hierarchy and group harmony (Tran, 2015). Despite
seeking input from superiors and team members to ensure harmony and collective
agreement (Nguyen & Nguyen, 2019), final decisions are ultimately made by
superiors, who do not expect subordinates to take the lead independently (Hofstede,
2021). Katz (2006) stated that Vietnamese treat personal feelings and experiences more
highly than empirical data and objective facts. Agreements and contracts are likely to
be adapted based on changing circumstances and relationships.
To further illustrate these differences between American and Vietnamese decision-
making styles in meetings, the first chart shows the percentage that focuses on whether
decisions are made by group or individual. The second chart shows the differences in
how long these decisions are made.
Who is the final decision maker?
100%
80%
80%
60%
60%
40%
40%
20%
20%
0%
American Vietnamese
Group Individual
Chart 5. Differences in who the final decision maker is
In America, 80% of decisions are made individually, meanwhile the rest (20%) are
made in groups, which highlights a lesser percentage of collaboratively, although they
still have reliance on teamwork or group consensus. This still shows that American
tends to be responsible for their own outcome. Additionally, American organizations
usually empower employees to make decisions in place of requiring them to be under
How long does it take to finalize a decision?
80% 70%
60%
60%
40%
40% 30%
20%
0%
American Vietnamese
Immediately Later
control. In contrast, in Vietnam, 60% of decisions tend to be made in groups, and 40%
of decisions are made individually. A collectivist country like Vietnam, where
organizations usually prioritize workplace harmony and emphasize group consensus.
Moreover, the employees tend to avoid conflicts with their boss and maintain harmony.
Therefore, they typically finalize decisions with the group or hierarchy.
Chart 6. Differences in how long it takes to finalize a decision
The chart illustrates the differences in time when people in the meeting finalize a
decision to show their decisiveness and consensus. In America, the making decisions
time when people have a deal or consent to the ideas during meetings, they make
decisions immediately, with 70% of the total. The rest (30%) mostly are the failed
deals, or they are not able to accept the idea of others. In contrast, in Vietnam, people
in meetings tend to make decisions after the meetings, and then they have a private talk
to finalize the decision, with 60% of the total decisions being made later. The rest
(40%) are the important deals that everyone needs to confirm immediately the
information and their roles in the projects. Overall, this comparison highlights the
American inclination toward inclusivity, while the Vietnamese workplace maintains
traditional, authority-focused expectations.
III. CONCLUSION
In conclusion, American and Vietnamese business cultures exhibit significant
differences in meetings through communication styles, the relationship, and decision-
making. American meetings tend to encourage a collaborative and inclusive
atmosphere, characterized by direct communication and a focus on equality among
participants. Meanwhile, Vietnamese meetings maintain traditional hierarchical
structures, value indirect communication, and emphasize compliance and respect for
authority. These distinctions highlight how deeply cultural traditions shape workplace
behavior and organizational practices.
Universities should include cultural negotiation studies in their curriculum to prepare
students for cross-cultural interactions in the global business environment. The subject
should emphasise the unique characteristics of negotiation styles, not only in America
but also in other countries. Role-playing as an interactive activity is suggested to help
students develop speaking and presentation skills and adapt their negotiation approach
based on cultural context.
For students, especially those majoring in linguistics, it is crucial to enhance their
awareness of cultural variations in negotiation and develop emotional intelligence and
cultural sensitivity to prepare for working in international business. Moreover, students
should be skilled at identifying when to use formal and informal communication in
order to strengthen their proficiency in both types of communication.
