In the first class of my intercultural communicationcourse, I put this question on the board:
Your friend has invited you to his birthday party, the party starts at 8pm. What time do you arrive?
a. At 8pm
b. At 8.30pm
c. At 9pm
d. At 9.30pm
e. After 9.30pm
The answers differ. Students from northern Europe are more likely to choose the first two options. Students from South American countries and Arab countries are more likely to choose any of the last three options. Is there an explanation for this difference, or is it just individual?
An anthropologist called Edward Hall tried to answer this question. He studied how different cultures perceive and manage time and came up with these two concepts: monochronic and polychronic time. He claimed that different cultures view time differently.
Just the other day I was with my friend Ella from Denmark and Sebastian from Argentina. Their behaviour regarding punctuality was a textbook example of Edward Hall’s theory.
I had promised Ella I’d meet her at 9:00 AM sharp for coffee. At 9:05 AM, I was sprinting towards the café, hoping those five minutes wouldn’t be a big deal. But as I reached the door, I spotted Ella, my friend, she already had her coffee and was stirring it and looking around.
Ella is one of those people who operates on what Edward Hall calls monochronic time. Hall’s theory claims that monochronic people like Ella view time as linear, segmented, and highly structured. To them, being late isn’t just about missing the first few minutes of a coffee date; it’s about disrespecting the entire framework of plans and schedules.
When I finally reached Ella, slightly out of breath, she gave me a half-amused, half-exasperated look. “Five minutes late,” she said, tapping her watch for emphasis. Just as we were finishing our coffees, in walked Sebastian, another friend who was joining us. He strolled in with a big smile, a solid twenty-five minutes past our agreed time. “Sorry, traffic was crazy!” he said, despite the fact he had come by metro.
Sebastian is a poster child for what Hall describes as polychronic time. Polychronic people see time as more fluid and flexible. Relationships and interactions are often more important than rigid schedules. So, when Sebastian is running late, it’s not that he doesn’t value other people’s time; it’s just that he has a different relationship with time itself.
Sebastian is the epitome of polychronic time management. He views schedules as suggestions rather than strict rules. This is where Edward Hall’s theory comes in. He found that in many Western cultures, particularly northern Europe and English-s, especially in business settings, monochronic time is the norm. Being punctual is seen as a sign of reliability and respect. Meetings start and end on the dot, and any deviation can be seen as unprofessional. But this isn’t a universal truth. In many other parts of the world, including Latin America, the Middle East, and parts of Asia, a polychronic approach prevails. Here, it’s common and even expected for schedules to be more flexible. Relationships and personal interactions take precedence over strict adherence to the clock.
This doesn’t mean that everyone from Argentina is late, or that everyone from Denmark arrives on time. It means that if you are late in Argentina, this does not reflect badly on you. Culturally, being late is acceptable because nobody expects a meeting scheduled for 9am to actually start at 9am. It means that this is the time that people will start arriving.
In contrast in most northern European countries, a meeting scheduled for 9am means that you must get there five minutes before then so that the meeting can start promptly at nine. Anyone arriving after that time is seen as rude or unprofessional.
Take my friend Maria, who’s from Brazil. When she says we’ll meet for dinner at 7:00pm, I’ve learned that this could mean anytime between 7:00 and 8:00pm. Our dinners are always delightful, relaxed affairs with no one nervously glancing at their watch. The focus is on enjoying each other's company, not on adhering to a rigid timeline.
But let’s be honest—this can sometimes cause friction. When people with monochronic and polychronic mindsets collide, it can lead to frustration and misunderstandings. Sebastian’s habitual lateness has occasionally caused tension with my more time-conscious friends. We’ve had to learn to navigate this delicate balance, especially when it comes to professional settings where being on time can make or break a deal.
As our coffee date continued, Ella, Sebastian, and I discussed the challenges of balancing different perceptions of time. Ella admitted that Sebastian’s laid-back approach often stressed her out, while Sebastian shrugged and said he simply couldn’t understand why everyone was always in such a rush.
So, how can we bridge this gap? How can the monochronics and polychronics of the world coexist without driving each other mad? Here are a few tips to ease the gap in the perception of time:
- Communication is Key: If you know you’re running late, a quick text or call can go a long way. It shows you respect the other person’s time, even if you’re not always on time.
- Set Realistic Expectations: If you’re a polychronic person meeting a monochronic friend or colleague, try to plan ahead and give yourself extra time. On the flip side, if you’re monochronic, understand that not everyone views time the same way, and try to be patient.
- Find a Middle Ground: Sometimes, compromise is necessary. Set meeting times with a bit of buffer room or agree on flexible start times when possible.
- Appreciate the Differences: Remember that different cultures and individuals have different perspectives on time. This diversity can enrich our interactions if we’re open to it.
As our conversation wrapped up, we found ourselves laughing about our different approaches to time. Ella appreciated our efforts to be more punctual, and Sebastian and I learned to see punctuality not just as a rigid rule but as a way of showing consideration.
So, is it okay to be late? It depends. If we take the time to understand each other’s perspectives and try to meet halfway, we can turn potential points of contention into opportunities for deeper connection. After all, time is a construct—what really matters is how we choose to spend it with the people who matter.