Richard Lewis's 'How Different Cultures Understand Time'
Although our world consists of different countries, time zones, and cultures, we all experience the concept of time. In Richard Lewis’s article “How Different Cultures Understand time”, there are two main types of perception of time; monochronic and polychronic. Monochronic time is best described as flowing in a linear line, forever extending into the future. People who function in a monochronic society are individualistic cultures and are very clock-driven who are concerned with schedules and appointments. On the opposite side, polychronic cultures see time as coming back around, or in a cyclical manor. Societies who operate this way are people-oriented and are nature driven; they do not worry or stress about time being wasted since they know
…show more content…
“For an American, time is truly money. In a profit-oriented society, time is a precious, even scarce, commodity”(Lewis). In most situations, if you’re not making money with the time you’re given, you’re wasting it. Other countries such as Switzerland, Germany, Britain, and Austria believe that “time is passing (being wasted) without decisions being made or actions being performed”(p. 2).
Eastern cultures on the other hand follow the cyclical perception of time. When doing business with Asian societies, deadlines are not an immediate concern, so as a result conflicts arise when western and eastern societies need to collaborate. “Asians do not see time as racing away unutilized in a linear future”, but realizing that with time they may make wiser and less hastily decisions (p. 5).
One particular perception of time drew my attention. This was multi-active time. It is unlike linear or cyclical, were the people in this society value time with how many things they can accomplish at the same time. “Multi-active people are not very interested in schedules or punctuality. They pretend to observe them, especially if a linear-active partner or colleague insists on it, but they consider the present reality to be more important that appointments”(p. 3). Cultures such as the Spaniards, Italians and Arabs experience time this way. Societies who function in multi-active time value conversations, so much so that they would completely disregard the passing of
“For an American, time is truly money. In a profit-oriented society, time is a precious, even scarce, commodity”(Lewis). In most situations, if you’re not making money with the time you’re given, you’re wasting it. Other countries such as Switzerland, Germany, Britain, and Austria believe that “time is passing (being wasted) without decisions being made or actions being performed”(p. 2).
Eastern cultures on the other hand follow the cyclical perception of time. When doing business with Asian societies, deadlines are not an immediate concern, so as a result conflicts arise when western and eastern societies need to collaborate. “Asians do not see time as racing away unutilized in a linear future”, but realizing that with time they may make wiser and less hastily decisions (p. 5).
One particular perception of time drew my attention. This was multi-active time. It is unlike linear or cyclical, were the people in this society value time with how many things they can accomplish at the same time. “Multi-active people are not very interested in schedules or punctuality. They pretend to observe them, especially if a linear-active partner or colleague insists on it, but they consider the present reality to be more important that appointments”(p. 3). Cultures such as the Spaniards, Italians and Arabs experience time this way. Societies who function in multi-active time value conversations, so much so that they would completely disregard the passing of