Incompatibility of Monochronic and Polychronic Time

I found Hall’s discussion of polychronic and monochronic time and its effects on bureaucracies to be the most interesting part of this particular piece because of its economic and political ramifications. As a student of international relations, I am constantly concerned with issues dealing with development, governance, etc. While I had always been aware of how cultural differences affected a state’s ability to adapt to capitalistic and democratic norms, I was unaware of these differences in how time was perceived. As Hell mentions, these differences in time perception affect (at least) how bureaucracies deal with constituent concerns, how centralized bureaucracies are, and how employees within the bureaucracy see the ‘bigger picture’ behind their work. Although Hall also talks about how these differences are not ‘good’ or ‘bad’ in terms of efficiency and governance, he does admit that monochronic time and polychronic time are incompatible. Given that the current international political and economic structure is dominated by ideas that were largely spread by monochronic cultures, one might be able to begin to see why some states or particular cultures have had trouble adapting.

Hall, included in his discussion of how polychronic and monochronic time do not mix, also talks about how foreigners have trouble dealing with these differences in time perception. While he provides his own personal anecdote in which he is thrust into the fast-paced and jam-packed schedule in Japan, I have been fortunate enough to have experienced the effects of living in a polychronic culture. One winter break I had the wonderful opportunity of staying with a family friend in Kuwait. Upon arrival into the country, I had to show that I had indeed been invited by someone within the country, so that I could make my way past the airport. Luckily enough for me, this family friend had some connections within the airport so despite the fact that she had lost her passport and visa a week earlier, I was able to accompany her out of the airport in a relatively timely manner. I was unaware of how lucky I was until after we had gotten into the car and she told me some of the horror stories of other people who had been stranded at the airport for days while waiting for approval to enter the country. It turns out that because of her close relationship to some one within the bureaucracy, my approval was streamlined. In this way, Kuwait’s polychronic culture actually worked in my favor.

My luck ran out after this incident, however, as my friend later informed me that our planned trip across parts of the Middle East had to be cancelled. When I pressed her for the reason why, she told me that she was still waiting for the American Embassy to issue her a new passport, which in turn was holding up her ability to get a new Kuwaiti visa. Without these two documents, neither of us would be able to legally re-enter the country. American monochronic culture had left us at the mercy of some pre-determined schedule in which my friend would have to wait for the embassy to process her request. At the time I was unaware of how different cultures perceived time. Now, however, the ease that I got into the country and the difficulty that my friend had dealing with the U.S. embassy makes much more sense to me after reading Hall’s article.