20200809_1038 - Cultural Dimensions: Time Perception and Orientation
* Note created: [time=Sunday, 09 August 2020 10:38:10 +0700]
* ###### tags `sTREaming`
* clock-oriented vs event oriented.
* aka monochronic vs polychronic
* aka clock-time vs social/activity/event/task-time `// event here includes natural things / clues like sunset, sunrise, new moon, arrival of birds`
What how you view time says about you | Anne-Laure Sellier | TEDxHECParis https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUrrljujWc0&t=46s
> most humans on Earth today still function in event-time. The ones who function in clock-time are in industrialized societies.
> clock-timers recognize causality in the world at large significantly less than event-timers. if you ask clock-timers and event-timers to estimate the degree of causality between these two events, we consistently find that clock-timers will give a significantly lesser estimate compared to that of event-timers. They recognize causality less.
> Now, this is very important because it means that since our event-time ancestors were left behind and we increasingly relied on the clock to schedule our activities, we also began to perceive the world as a more and more disconnected place, a more and more random place, a more and more chaotic place. ==Clock-timers believe the world is more chaotic than event-timers.== // `really tho? I thought everyone is linear / complexity is hard for everyone to grasp`
> We know that when people locate control externally rather than internally, it tends to make them feel less happy. So, we wondered, Are clock-timers less happy than event-timers? Well, if you think about it, event-timers rely on their emotions. They are very attuned to their emotions because they rely on that all the time to decide when to move from one activity to the next, right?
> Clock-timers, on the other hand, they don't need to be attuned to their emotions because they surrender to the clock. The problem is, psychologists now know that in order to be happy, we need to be attuned to our emotions. And particularly, we need to be able to savor positive emotions. OK, that is a critical antecedent of happiness. And what we find is that clock-timers are less able than event-timers to savor positive experiences.
> we find that clock-timers immerse themselves less in the moment, they display their emotions less, and they share their emotions less with others on the spur of the moment or later. They savor less. Now, what does that mean?
> So, what we find is that clock-timers are significantly, again, less likely to seize an opportunity like that compared to event-timers. Two reasons for that: they savor imagining the free vacation less, yeah, and then, they need more time to rearrange all their schedule.
> So, relying on the clock decreases your chances of seizing exploding opportunities. `// again, really?`
> if you have clock-timers who, on the one hand, believe that chance and fate and powerful others control the world more, and at the same time, they can savor less the moment, then they should suck at any task where being in the moment is critical and having high personal control is critical.
> We found that people who relied on the clock, versus not, attributed their performance to the instructor more. So, they did a good yoga - it was because of the instructor. They did bad yoga - it was still because of the instructor. They also felt significantly less inspired. Inspiration being the goal of meditation, the very essence of yoga, they found it harder to reach and maintain that state.
> And finally and more importantly, they literally sat down more often, they gave up on the task entirely more often and skipped more of the 26 poses as a result.
> What's important to remember here also is that we got this result just with the presence of the clock in the room - that is, independently of whether students were in general clock-timers or in general event-timers.
> Well, over 60% of the CEOs interviewed claimed they perceived today's environment as being increasingly turbulent and more random and more chaotic than ever before.
> The other thing that we learned from this poll is that these CEOs claimed that the key leadership quality to survive in this environment is creativity - the capacity, the ability to come up with new ways of solving tough problems. And they noticed that companies that do better than others at navigating this environment are also companies who grasp exploding opportunities more.
> we also need to question the pervasiveness of the clock in our lives, in industrialized societies. Our research suggests that if clock-time serves standardized tasks very well, it may not be the most productive way of producing breakthrough creative output. So, maybe it is time to transform our universities and transform our companies to allow more event-timers to enter, take control and thrive.
> Chronemics is the study of the use of time, and the way that time is perceived and valued by individuals and cultures, particularly as regards non-verbal communication. These time perceptions include things like punctuality, willingness to wait, approaches to face-to-face interactions, and reactions to time pressure.
> Misunderstandings of chronemics can lead to a failure to understand intentions, especially in business communication. For example, monochronists may view polychronists as undisciplined, lazy, irresponsible and untrustworthy, while polychronists may consider monochronists to be obsessed with rules and formalities, and emotionally cold.
> After economic well-being and industrialization, the single strongest predictor of differences in tempo is population size. The strict clock time of the modern world is imposed most strongly in large, vibrant cities. People in bigger cities move faster than their counterparts in smaller towns and rural areas. In one study of the behaviour of children in supermarkets and stores, the average city child was shown to walk nearly twice as fast as their small-town equivalents, and spent a third of the time interacting with clerks and other shoppers, and significantly less time physically touching objects in the store. Other studies have found an almost perfect correlation between population size and walking speed.
> It is also apparent that a culture’s basic value system is also reflected in its norms about tempo. For example, individualistic cultures tend to move faster than those that emphasize collectivism. In the United States, a classic individualistic culture, people tend to move fast and time is at a premium. On the other hand, in traditional Asian countries like Pakistan, India, Tibet and Nepal, where typically many people share large homes with their extended families, the pace is slow. Individualistic cultures tend to focus on achievement, which usually leads to a “time-is-money” mindset in which there is an urgency to make every moment count. In cultures where social relationships take precedence, however, there is a much more relaxed attitude toward time.
`// interesting to see how much of this stress I actually adopt and absorb is really from the industrialised world and not something inherent`
> there is a complete disregard for the artificial units (minutes, hours, and ‘working days’) of clock-time. Anthropological and historical evidence suggests that this attitude to work—in which labour is oriented to the completion of specific tasks with a minimal demarcation between work and leisure—was prevalent among traditional tribal and Western pre-industrial societies alike
> Industrial/organizational psychologists emphasize the significance of monochronic versus polychronic work patterns (Bluedorn, 2002). People and organizations in clock-time cultures are more likely to emphasize monochronic (M-time) approaches, meaning they like to focus on one activity at a time.
> People in event time cultures, on the other hand, tend to emphasize polychronic (P-time) approaches, meaning they prefer to do several things at once. These labels were originally developed by Hall (1983). M-time people like to work from start to finish in linear sequence: The first task is begun and completed before turning to another, which is then begun and completed. In polychronic time, however, one project goes on until there is an inclination or inspiration to turn to another, which may lead to an idea for another, then back to first, with intermittent and unpredictable pauses and reassumptions of one task or another. Progress on P-time occurs a little at a time on each task.
> A related temporal difference concerns what people perceive as “wasted time.” People, cultures, and economies that emphasize the rule that “time is money” may see any time not devoted to tangible production as wasted time. People in other cultures, however, believe that overemphasis on this rule is a waste of one’s time in a larger sense, that it is a wasteful way to spend one’s life. If something more worthy of one’s attention—be it social- or work-related—challenges a planned schedule, it is seen as wasteful to not deviate from the planned schedule. In fact, the term “wasted time” may make little sense. A typical comment may be, “There is no such thing as wasted time. If you are not doing one thing, you are doing something else” (Levine, 1997).
## Time Orientation
Between **past** (adherence), **present** (short term, the now, hedonistic tendency), and **future** (dreams, aspirations, arrival fallacy, constant seeking) **time orientation**
## On broader theme of Cultural Dimensions
The different aspects / theories
- High Context/Low Context communication
- Time/Clock vs. Event oriented
- Task vs. Relationship leadership // `hm. this is new. and made me realise I practice relationship-oriented leadership`
> The task-relationship model is defined by Forsyth as "a descriptive model of leadership which maintains that most leadership behaviors can be classified as performance maintenance or relationship maintenances.
- Power Distance // `Hofstede’s Power distance Index measures the extent to which the less powerful members of organizations and institutions (like the family) accept and expect that power is distributed unequally.`
## Further reading