Introduction:
With increasing globalization opportunities for trade new markets arise frequently. However, these prospects are not unproblematic, as communication between contrasting cultures brings numerous of difficulties. Therefore, it is an essential requirement for corporations to interact efficiently when doing business with people from a range of different cultures. The field of intercultural communication deals with this extensive issue, both on a scientific and on an operational level which mainly is focused on guidelines for optimal behavior in intercultural circumstance, e.g. Roger Axtells’ “Do’s and Taboos Around the World” (1993). On the scientific level, from a functionalistic approach “culture is seen as determining communication” (Net>værk 2002: 129). In the process of communication, here culture has an external influence in determining people’s behavior. On the contrary, also on the scientific level, the interpretive approach sees culture as engaged symbol-systems, which exists in the interaction between people. The interpretive approach therefore sees these relations between people in interaction with culture as determining the communication. Finally, the critical approach which shares many of the interpretive approach’s assumptions also includes an historical context as well as power relations, which combined is an integral part of the communication (Martin 2007: 63).
The functionalistic approach sees communication as a linear process of information going from sender to receiver. National culture, which is seen as a standardized size, is the foundation this process relies on. Differences in culture are considered as boundaries, which can be overcome with the right intercultural competencies (Net>værk 2002: 129). The functionalist Edward Hall categorized countries into high and low contexts and thereby made a framework for defining