美国工厂

Analysis of culture conflicts reflected in “American Factory” from the perspective of Triandis ’individualism-collectivism theory and religion

“American Factory” is a documentary film of the establishment of a Chinese-run industrial corporation in Dayton, Ohio on the site of a closed GM plant, illustrating, with total objectivity, contradictions that ensue from the imposition of one national worldview upon another. The most-depicted clashes in the film are the conflicts between individualistic values and collectivist ones, which were manifested in the contrast between Chinese and American workers’ daily working style, and many other details.

In the following essay, based on Triandis ’individualism-collectivism theory, I will first analyze what the conflicts reflect about American and Chinese culture identities and then from the perspective of religion, give some possible reasons for these differences. Finally, I will put forward my solution to these problems.

1, What: Individualism V.S. Collectivism

Harry Triandis (1995) proposed the individualism-collectivism theory, which further developed Hofstede’s I-C theory: instead of looking at individualism and collectivism as two opposite poles, he argues that they are two major facets of every culture and are complementary and interdependent to each other. Besides, Triandis believe this should be discussed on an individual level rather than a national or racial one. Generally speaking, there are five major characteristics to distinguish an individualistic culture from a collectivistic one:

First, the self-definition is interdepended in collectivistic culture and independent in individualistic culture. People in an individualistic country behave as independent entities, whereas those people from a collectivistic country are often defined by their in-groups (Fu,2013). One great example in the film of this lies in workers’ daily speech: most of the American workers used “I” or “you” when interviewed, while Chinese workers normally started the sentence with “We”. “We” as Fuyao workers, as Chinese people, as a family member, never “me” alone.

The second feature, is that the personal goals and communal goals are closely aligned in collectivism and not at all aligned in individualism (Fu,2013). This is expressed explicitly by Curt, the supervisor on his China tour (47min): “most of Americans come here (Fuyao) just to make money, not glass.” In contrast, He Shimeng (何世猛), chairman of Fuyao worker union described the relationship between workers and Fuyao as “in the same boat”. Fuyao’s interest is the worker’s interest. In another word, Chinese employers live to work, while American employers work to live.

The third feature and the fourth are both about what influences personal conducts most. In a collectivism society, norms, obligations and other people’s viewpoints decide most of personal behaviors, while in an individualistic society, personal needs, people’s own attitudes towards the matter decide their conducts. For example, when Chairman Cao gave his first speech to Chinese workers, in order to boost their morale, he appealed to the Chinese national identity as “the most important thing.” “Do things for our country and our people.” Another great example is hidden behind film editing: one minute ago, Chinese workers were celebrating the New Year in the factory together and got couple-married right on stage; next minute, the camera shifted to USA, where one American worker complained about the factory production space occupied their lunchroom (56-58min). Because the norms of a “family” (“福耀大家庭”) is to share everything together, which is also continually advocated by company directors, it is regarded perfectly acceptable to have one’s own wedding held in the workplace. However, Americans cannot even bear to eat their lunch in the factory space because they put their own personal boundaries above any authority or social norms.

The last feature is about how individuals treat in-groups and out-groups differently. People in a collectivism country display a drastic change in their attitudes towards people in their circle of life and people who are not. To the former, extreme kindness and the desire to stay in good relationship; to the latter, indifferent or even hostile. In contrast, people in an individualistic country treat everyone almost the same, neither too close nor too cold. This feature is typically manifested when a Chinese lecturer tried to convince Chinese workers why union was a bad thing (1h4min): “(with union), we are not able to communicate to our American co-workers directly and equally.” The threat of “separating” a company seems more horrible than losing money in Chinese people’s mind.

2, Why: Puritanism V.S. Buddhism

Though seemed irrelevant to the realistic theme, the hints of religion are everywhere in the film. As religion plays an important role in a country’s identity and contributes greatly to the differences between culture, it surely worths discussing. Why Americans are so individualistic, and Chinese collectivistic, from the perspective of their religions?

Puritanism is the most typical, most influential and deep-rooted national thought in America. At the very beginning of the film, we saw a group of American workers mourning and praying to God outside the closed GM plant. The speaker specifically mentioned how hardworking these workers were, a value much emphasized by puritans. Working diligently and rejecting any earthly pleasure is deemed to be the only way to salvation in puritan preachings. So why modern Americans have become so “lazy”? The Chinese worker’s answer in the film is: “It’s just your nature. It’s not bad.” While puritans do value labor, they also deem the accumulation of their OWN wealth as approvals of God, so that they THEMSELVES could go to heaven. When Americans found out that most of the money out of their hard-work went into the boss’ pocket, they decided there was simply no reason for them to work hard anymore. In another word, the only thing Americans concern about a job is how it can help themselves become rich. This is a typical individualistic thought, with roots in puritanism.

In contrast, Chinese people are famous for their Buddhism and Zhouyi (周易) heritage. At 14min, Chairman Cao was displeased with the facing of the garage door and demanded it to be changed at the cost of $35,000. The film did not tell the audience why, but we Chinese immediately understood: “坐北朝南，顺应天道” guarantee a lucky fengshui. Cao is also a Buddhist. At 39 min, there was a close-up shot of a small blue statue of Guang Yin (观音像) at Cao’s office table, and at 1h38min, Cao went to a temple to kneel down and pray, which shows his piety. In a Buddhist’ mind, harmony, unity and inner peace is of great importance, which explains why he was so keen on making Fuyao a “family”, and so firmly opposed to union. This religious aspect of Chinese culture could be seen as one source of collectivism traditions.

3, How: Man vs. Machine

At the end of the film, automation came into light and took away jobs, no matter Chinese or American. So, it seems not that important, or necessary to discuss how to resolve the culture conflicts between Americans and Chinese when there might not even BE jobs for either of them. However, I would still like to propose two practical suggestions to improve the situation.

First of all, minimize the conflicts between cultures by stopping creating them in first place. Do not expect Americans to be “Chinese”. As it was discussed above, individualism and collectivism both have deep cultural and religious roots which are not going to be easily changed in a long time. Instead of copying Chinese experiences and practices to the American factory, I believe it would be better if they could reconstruct the regulations and management styles in the American way.

Second, make sure both Americans and Chinese workers receive information-loaded, unbiased and instructive I-C classes. In the film we only saw several lectures in condescending tones from the Chinese, and the Americans seemed completely unaware of Chinese way of thinking. The class should be the necessary preparation before they work together.

References

[1]邓若芬.从文化维度理论看纪录片《美国工厂》的中美文化差异[J].剧影月报,2021(05):44-46.

[2]宋晖.重读《美国工厂》：全球化下的劳动世界[J].电影评介,2021(05):71-74.DOI:10.16583/j.cnki.52-1014/j.2021.05.016.

[3]王新霞,曹玲.纪录片《美国工厂》所展现的中美文化现象分析[J].文化创新比较研究,2020,4(29):187-189.

[4]谢冰.异质文化碰撞的中立呈现与矛盾悬置探讨——观《美国工厂》有感[J].科技传播,2020,12(18):71-72+78.DOI:10.16607/j.cnki.1674-6708.2020.18.030.

[5]徐健翔.清教主义思想对美国个人主义思想的影响[J].牡丹江大学学报,2017,26(12):128-129.DOI:10.15907/j.cnki.23-1450.2017.12.041.

[6]付玉霞. 有关集体主义/个人主义维度不同倾向的实证研究[D].安徽大学,2013.

[7]吴秀芝. 重新认识Triandis的“个人主义和集体主义”[C]//江苏省外国文学学会.第六届中国跨文化交际研究会年会论文摘要汇编.第六届中国跨文化交际研究会年会论文摘要汇编,2005:135-136.