Power Distance is an important dimension on which to compare cultures on both the macro and micro levels. Power Distance is defined as "the extent to which the less powerful members of institutations and organizations within a country expect and accept that power is distributed unequally" (Oetzel, Face and Facwork, 239). These less-powerful members can potentially be ethnic minorities, poor people, females, homosexuals, Christians, etc. There is no simple formula to show how such social identities affect communication; however, it has been shown over and over that there are usually more communication conflicts in heterogeneous groups than in homogeneous ones, as well as between people of various self-construals and cultural backgrounds, especially during initial meetings.*

To help bridge this difficulty, the following observable phenomenon should be remembered as you strive toward Intercultural Communication Competence:

Influence of Power Distance & Group Interaction Characteristics Effect of Power Distance on Facework Strategies In large power distance cultures, like Mexico, low-status members more commonly use "self-effacing strategies to minimize the loss of face" (Griffin, 443). High-status members use shame-inducing and indirect tactics (Ting-Toomey & Kurogi, Facework, 200). In small power distance cultures, like Israel, even the low-status members use self-face strategies because their culture allows them to perceive that they have a fairly equal amount of influence and importance (Griffin, 443). High-status members use more dominating and verbally-direct coercive tactics (Ting-Toomey & Kurogi, Facework, 200). Effect of Cultural I/C versus Self-Construal Cultural I/C or one's Social Identity is more salient during heterogeneous group interactions.** Self-Construal or one's personal identity is more salient during homogeneous group interactions.** Effect of Cultural Individualism in Group Interactions Cultural Individualism is correlated to taking more turns, initiating more conflicts, and using more competitive conflict tactics in heterogeneous groups with Collectivists. They are inclined to talk more and be more assertive, putting the expression of their ideas & feelings ahead of sharing turns.* * Cultural Individualism is correlated to more competitive conflict tactics in homogeneous groups, when compared with a homogeneous group of collectivists, but not all the other tactics as mentioned above.** Effect of Cultural Collectivism in Group Interactions Cultural Collectivism is correlated to other, and mutual-face, as well as with avoiding and obliging tactics. Also sharing turns was more important than self expression.     1 Factors 1b Cultural I/C & Self-Construals

* Though initially more difficult, one study indicates we should strive for diversity in group interactions. It shows that over time heterogeneous groups eventually "have processes at or above the level of homogeneous groups" (Oetzel, Explaining, 206).
**According to studies by John Oetzel (Oetzel, Explaining, 220), some conclusions can be drawn regarding the interactions of individuals of different Culture ICs (social identities) and self-construals. He is credited with furthering the popularity and legitimacy of Facework Negotiation Theory with several empirical research efforts..