Between the Lines vs. Saying It Straight: Direct vs. Indirect Communication

Have you ever been working with a colleague on a project and, when you’re unsure of how to proceed, your colleague says,

“I’d reach out to the other department for this.”

How did you react? Did you understand that your colleague will take action to reach out to the other department? Or did you understand that your colleague wanted you to do it?

This is an example that I have directly seen between a colleague from the U.K. and a colleague from the Netherlands. And this small interaction is a subtle example of how communication styles can sometimes cause confusion!

Communication can be more than just the literal meaning of words — it can also include intent, tone, and nuance. But in some cultures, communication very much prefers the literal meaning of words. While in other cultures, there's an emphasis on what’s left unsaid. The challenge? Whether to rely on direct clarity or dance in nuanced subtlety.

Direct Communication: Clarity and Precision

In cultures that value directness, being explicit is seen as respectful. The message is clear, leaving little room for misinterpretation. "Yes" means "yes", "no" means "no". Sugarcoating or beating around the bush is avoided, and telling it like it is is appreciated. This approach avoids ambiguity but it doesn’t mean it’s rude, informal, or lacks empathy.

"Between the Lines" Communication: Subtlety and Context

In contrast, indirect, or "between the lines" communication relies on implying the message through what is not said. The listener is expected to infer meaning from the context or tone rather than the words themselves. While this approach can feel less confrontational, it may sometimes lead to uncertainty, especially for those unfamiliar with the style.

Let's take a look at some extreme examples of each:

The Cultural Spectrum

Every culture falls somewhere along the spectrum of direct to indirect communication. However, these are tendencies, not rules. Cultures evolve, and individual preferences often blend elements of both styles.

Countries that tend to prefer direct communication include: the Netherlands, Germany, Russia, Denmark, Czech Republic, and Hungary. And countries that tend communicate in a more nuanced way include: Japan, Korea, China, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, and India.

While not firmly the case in all countries, we do see a tendency that more collectivist cultures prefer between-the-lines communication and more individualistic cultures use more direct communication.

But remember: every culture is on a spectrum. So while British culture might feel more direct to someone from India or Nepal, it might feel more indirect to someone from Germany or the U.S.

Why This Matters

Misaligned communication styles can create misunderstandings in global teams. For example, a direct communicator might feel frustrated by perceived vagueness or symbolism (not "getting the hint"), while an indirect communicator could interpret bluntness as rudeness or harshness or "stating the already obvious". Recognizing these differences helps build trust and clarity in cross-cultural settings.

This Shows Up Outside of Work Too

In indirect communication, symbolism is very important. In Japan, communication often extends into art forms like ikebana, the traditional practice of flower arranging. Unlike Western decorative flower arrangements, ikebana blends simplicity and balance to subtly communicate intended emotions and reflections on life. Similarly, Zen gardens use rocks and sand to symbolize land and sea, indirectly conveying deeper Buddhist and Shinto philosophies about nature and our place within it. These art forms highlight how subtle, indirect communication can be deeply meaningful — a contrast to Western perspectives, where gardens are often appreciated for their surface beauty without conveying deeper messages.

in Hindi, simple expressions like "I know" or "I would like" often come across as too direct compared to their English counterparts. This difference reflects the cultural nuances embedded in the language, where humility is emphasized. For example:

"I know" in English is a straightforward statement. In Hindi, it might be phrased rather as "मुझे पता है" (mujhe pata hai) or मुझे मालूम है (mujhe maaloom hai), which literally means "It is known to me" or "it is aware to me". This construction subtly shifts the focus away from the speaker's direct certainty and adds a layer of humility or understatement.

"I would like" is similarly nuanced. Instead of directly stating a desire, Hindi might use मुझे चाहिए (mujhe chahiye) for "I would like", which literally means "to me it is wanted." The use leads to a less assertive approach to expressing desires, in a culture where directness can sometimes be perceived as overly blunt or even rude.