This study questions the conventional view of the indirectness of Chinese communication. Drawing on qualitative interviews with Finnish and Chinese business professionals, the authors examine the effect of cultural identity on the directness of the communication of Chinese professionals who work for internationally operating Finnish companies located in Beijing and Shanghai, China, and who use English as the shared language with their Finnish colleagues. Three components of cultural identity (i.e., vocation as an international business professional, fairly young age, and the use of English as the business lingua franca) are particularly relevant in the participants’ professional communication and stimulated its openness and directness. The study finds that the evolution of English as the business lingua franca can be detected in the signs of convergence identified in Chinese and Finnish professional communication.
BakerW. (2011). Intercultural awareness: Modeling an understanding of cultures in intercultural communication through English as a lingua franca. Language and Intercultural Communication, 11, 197–214.
2.
BeamerL. (2003). Directness in Chinese business correspondence of the nineteenth century. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 17, 201–237.
3.
CardonP. W. (2008). A critique of Hall’s contexting model: A meta-analysis of literature on intercultural business and technical communication. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 22, 399–428.
4.
ChildJ.TseD. K. (2001). China’s transition and its implication for international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 32, 5–21.
5.
DanielsJ. D.CanniceM. V. (2004). Interview studies in international business research. In Marschan-PiekkariR.WelchC. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research methods for international business (pp. 185–206). Cheltenham, England: Elgar.
6.
DingD. D. (2006). An indirect style in business communication. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 20, 87–100.
7.
Du-BabcockB. (1999). Topic management and turn taking in professional communication: First- versus second-language strategies. Management Communication Quarterly, 33, 141–164.
8.
Du-BabcockB. (2006). An analysis of topic management strategies and turn-taking behavior in the Hong Kong bilingual environment: The impact of culture and language use. Journal of Business Communication, 43, 21–42.
9.
Du-BabcockB. (2009). English as a business lingua franca: A framework of an integrative approach to future research in international business communication. In Louhiala-SalminenL.KankaanrantaA. (Eds.), The ascent of international business communication (pp. 45–66). Helsinki, Finland: HSE Print. Retrieved fromhttp://hsepubl.lib.hse.fi/FI/publ/hse/b109
10.
EhrenreichS. (2010). English as a business lingua franca in a German multinational corporation. Journal of Business Communication, 47, 408–431.
11.
Finnish advisory board on research integrity. (2012). Retrieved fromhttp://www.tenk.fi/en
12.
GerritsenM.NickersonC. (2009). BELF: Business English as a lingua franca. In Bargiela-ChiappiniF. (Ed.), The handbook of business discourse (pp. 180–192). Edinburgh, Scotland: Edinburgh University Press.
13.
GilesH.CouplandN. (1991). Language: Contexts and consequences. Pacific Grove, CA: Wadsworth.
GudykunstW. B.KimY. Y. (1992). Communicating with strangers: An approach to intercultural communication (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
16.
HofstedeG. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences on work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
17.
JamesonD. A. (2007). Reconceptualizing cultural identity and its role in intercultural business communication. Journal of Business Communication, 44, 199–235.
18.
JenkinsJ. (2000). The phonology of English as an international language. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
19.
JenkinsJ.CogoA.DeweyM. (2011). Review of developments in research into English as a lingua franca. Language Teaching, 44, 281–315.
20.
JungY.Louhiala-SalminenL. (2012). “Korean employees are direct”: (Im)-politeness and rapport in international professional encounters. Dispute Resolution Studies Review, 10, 179–210.
21.
KankaanrantaA. (2006). “Hej Seppo, could you pls comment on this!” Internal email communication in lingua franca English in a multinational company. Business Communication Quarterly, 69, 216–225. Retrieved fromhttp://ebooks.jyu.fi/solki/9513923207.pdf
22.
KankaanrantaA.Louhiala-SalminenL. (2010). “English?—Oh, it’s just work!” A study of BELF users’ perceptions. English for Specific Purposes, 29, 204–209.
23.
KankaanrantaA.PlankenB. (2010). BELF competence as business knowledge of internationally operating business professionals. Journal of Business Communication, 47, 380–407.
24.
KaplanR. B. (1987). Cultural thought patterns revisited. In ConnorU.KaplanR. B. (Eds.), Writing across languages (pp. 9–21). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
25.
KettunenE.LintunenJ.LuW.KosonenR. (2008). Suomalaisyritysten strategiat Kiinan muuttuvassa toimintaympäristössä [Strategies of Finnish companies in a changing business environment in China](Tech. Rep. No. B-98). Helsinki, Finland: Helsinki School of Economics.
26.
LeungK.BhagatR. S.BuchanN. R.ErezM.GibsonC. B. (2005). Culture and international business: Recent advances and their implications for future research. Journal of International Business Studies, 36, 357–378.
27.
LiY.LiuB. C. (2006). Cultural differences and clashes in communication. In ReuvidJ.LiY. (Eds.), Doing business With China (pp. 158–166). London, England: GMB.
28.
Louhiala-SalminenL.CharlesM.KankaanrantaA. (2005). English as a lingua franca in Nordic corporate mergers: Two case companies. English for Specific Purposes, 24, 401–421.
29.
Louhiala-SalminenL.KankaanrantaA. (2011). Professional communication in a global business context: The notion of global communicative competence. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 54, 244–262.
30.
LuW. (2013). Localization of human resource management practices in China: A qualitative comparative analysis approach (Doctoral dissertation in preparation). Aalto University School of Business, Helsinki, Finland.
31.
Marschan-PiekkariR.ReisC. (2004). Language and languages in cross-cultural interviewing. In Marschan-PiekkariR.WelchC. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research methods for international business (pp. 224–243). Cheltenham, England: Elgar.
32.
McSweeneyB. (2002). Hofstede’s model and national cultural differences and their consequences: A triumph of faith—a failure of analysis. Human Relations, 55, 89–118.
33.
MeierkordC. (2002). “Language stripped bare” or “linguistic masala? ” Culture in lingua franca conversation. In KnappK.MeierkordC. (Eds.), Lingua Franca Communication (pp. 109–133). Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Peter Lang.
34.
PattonM. Q. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
35.
SeidlhoferB.JenkinsJ.MauranenA. (2012). Editorial. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 1, 1–3.
36.
TrimarchiM.LieschP. (2006). Business communication in interactions between mainland Chinese and Western firms through Hong Kong Chinese intermediaries. European Journal of Marketing, 40, 1210–1235.
37.
VihakaraA. (2006). Patience and understanding: A narrative approach to managerial communication in a Sino-Finnish joint venture. Tampere, Finland: Esa Print.
38.
WilkinsR.IsotalusP. (2009). Finnish speech culture. In WilkinsR.IsotalusP. (Eds.), Speech culture in Finland (pp. 1–16). Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
39.
WangJ. (2010). Convergence in the rhetorical pattern of directness and indirectness in Chinese and U.S. business letters. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 24, 91–120.
WormV.FrankensteinJ. (2000). The dilemma of managerial cooperation in Sino-Western business operations. Thunderbird International Business Review, 42, 261–283.
42.
ZhuY. (1999). Business communication in China. Commack, NY: Nova Science.
43.
ZhuY. (2005). Written communication across cultures: A sociocognitive perspective on business genres. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Benjamins.
