[LomodiorCon]

to a large extent I agree that often people are using the word 'culture' when as a local I think it should be 'circumstance'. For instance, lets take the issue of heirarchial structure. In my country today, the heirarchial structure in work place/politics is no culture of ours. The original one is was where the leader is expected to be nurturing and benevolent and with that he or she ran things with great power. The students or juniors are fully committed and full of thanks. This still continues in some institutions of the country which have had the opportunity to evolve in their own local terms.

But unfortunately, in many cases, by jumping times, we now have a left-warped version of our original way of 'heirarchy' which is no where like what I mentioned. Today, the people in power are heartless and without commitment from either side. I know for sure in my work place (with people of a certain kind) people would not have it, given an opportunity. But because of lack of options and the lack of words and a lack of threshold of people complaining - we continue so. That is also why many sometimes many of us work better with farangs as managers, because with the entry of an outsider and break in typical perceptions we adapt quickly to a 'better' sharing way of working...

However, many a farangs in the company sometimes refer to the way of working among locals as their 'culture' and think so it is... That sometimes I think is mistaken....

On the other hand I also do not appreciate some trying to change everything just because of their perception of what's right or wrong wherever in the world.

So, I think its a tricky judgement...