Cultural Psychology and Sociology

Why does the author use the metaphors of 'citadel' and 'caravan' and what purpose do they serve?

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

Cultural contrasts are exciting for tourists. They pay to experience them. But for those who have to live and work in a foreign culture, the contrasts can be difficult, confusing and painful. Differences are hard to live with.
Not everybody believes that cultural differences matter. ‘We are all human beings,’ an Iowan businessman declared at a meeting on cross-cultural business interacts, ‘Japanese, Americans, or Germans, underneath we are all just the same. We cry the same tears, we smile the same smiles, and we bleed the same blood.’ He, like so many others, believes that in the face of love and profit people are all the same.
Sameness was also on the mind of the American student when she walked into an Amsterdam shop to ask the way to the Anne Frank house. Still shocked she later told how the woman in the shop had refused to answer. She had suggested she buy a map! According to the student such a rude response was unheard of in the US.
This student had failed to recognize that not all people are the same. Some people consider an American who demands directions in a loud voice rude. Likewise, Japanese and German business people may not appreciate ‘Just call me John’’ ‘a deal is a deal’, ‘get to the point’, ‘I am what I am’, or any other expression that the Iowan businessman customarily uses. Not recognizing such differences can cost dearly, in emotional energy and possibly lost deals.
There is need to focus on the differences that exist between the people of Europe and the US. It offers the transnationals two metaphors as an aid for coping with those differences, namely the citadel for European society with its firm roots in tradition, and the caravan for the less established and more fluid society of the United States. It can well be predicted that people who see the transatlantic contrasts through these metaphors will avoid much confusion, pain, and, who knows, some cost. Here is a sample.
A few years ago an American sales team made a presentation to the manufacturing team of an Italian tractor company. The Americans had prepared themselves thoroughly. They came right to the point, provided illustrations with slides, had anticipated all conceivable questions about their products, and could counter all objections. Afterwards the Americans congratulated each other on a job well done. They did not, however, get the sales contract.
An executive who is familiar with cross-cultural business dealings attended the meeting. He noted: ‘The Americans came to the point too quickly. They alienated the Italians with the style of their presentation. The Italians operate in a business environment where personal relations are crucial; they want to get to know the people they deal with. The Americans would have done better to take the Italians out for a long business conversation over lunch with good food and wine.’
Misunderstandings like this one are all too common. One would expect that, with the increasing internationalization of politics and business, sensitivity to cultural differences would grow, and that at the same time such differences would become less pronounced. Yet neither expectation is fulfilled. Cultural differences are real and pervasive; and we have learned that frequent contact does not guarantee mutual understanding. (Excerpted from The Caravan and The Citadel by Arjo Klamer)

What, according to the writer, should be the people’s approach towards others' culture in general?

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

Cultural contrasts are exciting for tourists. They pay to experience them. But for those who have to live and work in a foreign culture, the contrasts can be difficult, confusing and painful. Differences are hard to live with.
Not everybody believes that cultural differences matter. ‘We are all human beings,’ an Iowan businessman declared at a meeting on cross-cultural business interacts, ‘Japanese, Americans, or Germans, underneath we are all just the same. We cry the same tears, we smile the same smiles, and we bleed the same blood.’ He, like so many others, believes that in the face of love and profit people are all the same.
Sameness was also on the mind of the American student when she walked into an Amsterdam shop to ask the way to the Anne Frank house. Still shocked she later told how the woman in the shop had refused to answer. She had suggested she buy a map! According to the student such a rude response was unheard of in the US.
This student had failed to recognize that not all people are the same. Some people consider an American who demands directions in a loud voice rude. Likewise, Japanese and German business people may not appreciate ‘Just call me John’’ ‘a deal is a deal’, ‘get to the point’, ‘I am what I am’, or any other expression that the Iowan businessman customarily uses. Not recognizing such differences can cost dearly, in emotional energy and possibly lost deals.
There is need to focus on the differences that exist between the people of Europe and the US. It offers the transnationals two metaphors as an aid for coping with those differences, namely the citadel for European society with its firm roots in tradition, and the caravan for the less established and more fluid society of the United States. It can well be predicted that people who see the transatlantic contrasts through these metaphors will avoid much confusion, pain, and, who knows, some cost. Here is a sample.
A few years ago an American sales team made a presentation to the manufacturing team of an Italian tractor company. The Americans had prepared themselves thoroughly. They came right to the point, provided illustrations with slides, had anticipated all conceivable questions about their products, and could counter all objections. Afterwards the Americans congratulated each other on a job well done. They did not, however, get the sales contract.
An executive who is familiar with cross-cultural business dealings attended the meeting. He noted: ‘The Americans came to the point too quickly. They alienated the Italians with the style of their presentation. The Italians operate in a business environment where personal relations are crucial; they want to get to know the people they deal with. The Americans would have done better to take the Italians out for a long business conversation over lunch with good food and wine.’
Misunderstandings like this one are all too common. One would expect that, with the increasing internationalization of politics and business, sensitivity to cultural differences would grow, and that at the same time such differences would become less pronounced. Yet neither expectation is fulfilled. Cultural differences are real and pervasive; and we have learned that frequent contact does not guarantee mutual understanding. (Excerpted from The Caravan and The Citadel by Arjo Klamer)

Which of the following can definitely not be inferred from the passage?

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

Cultural contrasts are exciting for tourists. They pay to experience them. But for those who have to live and work in a foreign culture, the contrasts can be difficult, confusing and painful. Differences are hard to live with.
Not everybody believes that cultural differences matter. ‘We are all human beings,’ an Iowan businessman declared at a meeting on cross-cultural business interacts, ‘Japanese, Americans, or Germans, underneath we are all just the same. We cry the same tears, we smile the same smiles, and we bleed the same blood.’ He, like so many others, believes that in the face of love and profit people are all the same.
Sameness was also on the mind of the American student when she walked into an Amsterdam shop to ask the way to the Anne Frank house. Still shocked she later told how the woman in the shop had refused to answer. She had suggested she buy a map! According to the student such a rude response was unheard of in the US.
This student had failed to recognize that not all people are the same. Some people consider an American who demands directions in a loud voice rude. Likewise, Japanese and German business people may not appreciate ‘Just call me John’’ ‘a deal is a deal’, ‘get to the point’, ‘I am what I am’, or any other expression that the Iowan businessman customarily uses. Not recognizing such differences can cost dearly, in emotional energy and possibly lost deals.
There is need to focus on the differences that exist between the people of Europe and the US. It offers the transnationals two metaphors as an aid for coping with those differences, namely the citadel for European society with its firm roots in tradition, and the caravan for the less established and more fluid society of the United States. It can well be predicted that people who see the transatlantic contrasts through these metaphors will avoid much confusion, pain, and, who knows, some cost. Here is a sample.
A few years ago an American sales team made a presentation to the manufacturing team of an Italian tractor company. The Americans had prepared themselves thoroughly. They came right to the point, provided illustrations with slides, had anticipated all conceivable questions about their products, and could counter all objections. Afterwards the Americans congratulated each other on a job well done. They did not, however, get the sales contract.
An executive who is familiar with cross-cultural business dealings attended the meeting. He noted: ‘The Americans came to the point too quickly. They alienated the Italians with the style of their presentation. The Italians operate in a business environment where personal relations are crucial; they want to get to know the people they deal with. The Americans would have done better to take the Italians out for a long business conversation over lunch with good food and wine.’
Misunderstandings like this one are all too common. One would expect that, with the increasing internationalization of politics and business, sensitivity to cultural differences would grow, and that at the same time such differences would become less pronounced. Yet neither expectation is fulfilled. Cultural differences are real and pervasive; and we have learned that frequent contact does not guarantee mutual understanding. (Excerpted from The Caravan and The Citadel by Arjo Klamer)

What is the basis of all 'cultural conflict' (Line 30)?

Answer the question based on the following passage.

            An important variable affecting communication across
            cultures is fate and personal responsibility. This refers to
            the degree to which we feel ourselves the masters of our
            lives, versus the degree to which we see ourselves as
(5)       subject to things outside our control. Another way to look at
            this is to ask how much we see ourselves able to change and
            maneuver, to choose the course of our lives and relationships.
            Some have drawn a parallel between the emphasis on
            personal responsibility in North American settings and the
(10)      landscape itself. The North American landscape is vast,
            with large spaces of unpopulated territory. The frontier
            mentality of "conquering" the wilderness, and the
            expansiveness of the land stretching huge distances, may
            elate to generally high levels of confidence in the ability to
(15)      shape and choose our destinies. In this expansive landscape,
            many children grow up with an epic sense of life, where ideas
            are big, and hope is eternal. When they experience setbacks,
            they are encouraged to redouble their efforts, to "try, try again."
            Action, efficacy, and achievement are emphasized and expected.
(20)      Free will is enshrined in laws and enforced by courts.
            Now consider places in the world with much smaller territory,
            whose history reflects repeated conquests and harsh struggles:
            Northern Ireland, Mexico, Israel, Palestine. In these places,
            there is more emphasis on destiny's role in human life. In
(25)      Mexico, there is a legacy of poverty, invasion, and territorial
            mutilation. Mexicans are more likely to see struggles as inevitable
            or unavoidable. Their fatalistic attitude is expressed in their way
            of responding to failure or accident by saying "ni modo" ("no
            way" or "tough luck"), meaning that the setback was destined.
(30)      This variable is important to understand cultural conflict. If
            someone invested in free will crosses paths with someone
            more fatalistic in orientation, miscommunication is likely.
            The first person may expect action and accountability. Failing
            to see it, they may conclude that the second is lazy,
(35)      obstructionist, or dishonest. The second person will expect
            respect for the natural order of things. Failing to see it, they
            may conclude that the first is coercive or irreverent, inflated in
           his ideas of what can be accomplished or changed.