Lesson 2.1: Saying it versus implying it

The American anthropologist Edward T. Hall described a difference that helps explain many cross-border misunderstandings. In his book Beyond Culture, he contrasted high-context and low-context communication. The idea is still widely used in intercultural business training, and it is one of the frameworks behind DealDialect's content.

In low-context communication, most of the meaning is in the explicit words. A good message is clear, direct and complete on its own. The reader should not need to know the sender, the history or the setting to understand it.

In high-context communication, much of the meaning sits outside the words: in the relationship, shared history, status, timing, tone and what is left unsaid. A good message may be lighter on facts and richer in courtesy, because both people already share much of the context. Listeners are expected to read between the lines.

Hall's framework describes a range, not two boxes. Every culture uses both styles, and individuals vary. Even in the U.S., a conversation between old friends carries more unspoken context than a software license. What differs between cultures is the usual default in business settings.

Many Nigerian and West African business settings lean toward the high-context end, particularly with senior people, new partners or guests. Meaning often travels through who introduced you, how warmly you are greeted, how soon a reply comes and what is not said. U.S. business culture generally leans toward the low-context end. Lesson 2.2 looks at that more closely.

How the difference shows up in a deal

• Refusals. Low-context: "We can't accept these terms." High-context: "We will look into it," followed by a slower reply.

• Requests. Low-context: "Send the signed contract by Friday." High-context: "When you have a moment, we would be grateful to receive the signed contract."

• Disagreement. Low-context: stated openly in the meeting. High-context: raised privately later, or through a trusted third person, so that no one loses face.

• Agreement. Low-context: the signed contract is the agreement. High-context: the relationship is the agreement, and the contract records it.

Each of these is logical within its own system. A high-context refusal protects the relationship and the dignity of both sides. A low-context refusal protects everyone's time and avoids false hope. Both are forms of respect, aimed at different things.

Here is a practical way to use the idea. When a partner's message seems vague, ask yourself what context you might be missing. Who else is involved? What happened in the last conversation? Is this a topic where a direct answer would embarrass someone? A vague message is often a full message that you are reading without its context.

Then turn the question around. When your own message seems perfectly clear to you, ask what context your reader might need. Usually it is a greeting, a reason for the request, a sign of the relationship and an open door. Adding those does not make you less clear; it makes you clear in a way your reader recognizes. It also tells the reader that you see them as a partner, not just a purchase order.

Worked example: a video call with Alhaji Sani, managing director of a distributor in Kano, at the end of Lisa's product presentation. Lisa sells farm equipment from Georgia.

Alhaji Sani: Your proposal is very interesting. We will discuss it among ourselves.

Lisa: Great. So I'll send the contract over tomorrow?

Alhaji Sani: Your proposal is very interesting. We will discuss it among ourselves.

Lisa: Thank you, Alhaji. We appreciate the time you have given us.

Is there anyone else on your side we should brief, or any part of the proposal we could explain further?

What changed: Lisa first heard a low-context "yes" and moved to the contract. In a high-context reading, "we will discuss it among ourselves" signals that others must be consulted and nothing is decided. Her second reply respects that process and invites the information she needs.