Cultural Blind Spots: Country

I was in a team meeting recently comprised mainly of individuals from China, India and the United States. In the course of discussing a business topic emotions began to creep into the conversation. Those from the United States were clearly driving forward to a conclusion. The Indian team members continued to argue their points more vigorously as time went on and the Chinese team members were mostly silent. The meeting went long and the team did not make the progress they had hoped. At times it almost seemed like the Tower of Babel because everyone was talking, but I’m not sure people really understood what they were hearing. I couldn’t help thinking that each person was primarily focused on themselves and their needs.

In my work with different global teams I have used a tool from Training Management Corporation which has been quite helpful in helping individuals and teams understand each other better. I’d like to share a little of the Cultural Orientations Index™ in this article and show how it might be used to diminish cultural blind spots like those I’ve described above.

Editor’s Note: Just to be clear, I have no affiliation with Training Management Corporation but I have used their tool successfully over the years and have found it quite beneficial when working with global teams. My message is simple – using a tool such as this one is crucial to becoming culturally savvy. If you have a tool you like better – use it – and tell me about it as well.

As more and more businesses “go global” and the world gets smaller and smaller, it will be essential for individuals and businesses to understand their cultural orientations and also be aware of their potential cultural blind spots. Although the Cultural Orientations Index™ highlights ten different dimensions, for the purposes of this article I’d like to focus on two – Action and Communication. The Cultural Orientation index™ measures an individual’s orientations. The regional orientations I use in this article are also from the Cultural Orientations Guide™ also from Training Management Corporation.

Action

The Action dimension focuses on how “individuals conceptualize actions and interactions with people and objects in their environment”. There are two orientations – Being and Doing. Those individuals with a Being orientation focus on building relationships with others and value reflection in making decisions. Those individuals with a Doing orientation focus on completing tasks and value achievement. In the team meeting above, the individuals were acting true to their country orientation.

It will come as no surprise that the United States has a Doing orientation and that The People’s Republic of China has a Being orientation. India falls squarely in the middle with a hybrid Being/Doing orientation. If the individuals on the team knew their orientation they could have taken that into consideration. Someone could have said to those team members from the United States – “I know you have an orientation to finishing the task, but I need some more time to contemplate our findings. Can we take a ½ hour break and then come back together to finish our discussion? That will give me time to think through my concerns.” Or, knowing they need more time for reflection those from China and India could have taken it upon themselves to think about the topic and review all materials thoroughly prior to the meeting.

The blindspot was that no one seemed to be thinking about this. The cultural gaps manifested themselves during this team meeting in silence, acquiescence, excessive arguing, disagreements that couldn’t be resolved and giving up. Everyone dealt with the cultural gaps differently but none were resolved.

Communication

Another dimension that affected this team meeting was the Communication dimension. Communication is defined simply as how individuals “express themselves”. In the Cultural Orientations Index™ communication is broken down further into four categories: High/Low Context, Direct/Indirect, Expressive/Instrumental and Formal/Informal.

High/Low Context: A High Context orientation values behavior over words, relying heavily on non-verbal clues in conversations and meetings. A Low Context orientation values explicit communication relying on the literal meaning of words in conversations and meetings.

Direct/Indirect: A Direct orientation values direct and explicit conflict management. An Indirect orientation values the opposite – indirect and implicit conflict management.

Expressive/Instrumental: People with an Expressive orientation are comfortable with all the emotions that may come up at work and are comfortable using them. Individuals with an Instrumental orientation value accuracy and objectivity in communication.

Formal/Informal: A Formal orientation values observing the rules of etiquette and protocol to establish credibility and respect. An Informal orientation values the dispensing of such rules of etiquette and protocol in order to create a friendly, casual environment.

In the team we talked about above, it will come as no surprise here as well that there are great differences in the Communication orientation. While both The People’s Republic of China and India have a High Context orientation, the United States has a Low Context orientation. That means that when those from the US spoke, they thought they were being ‘crystal clear’ through their choices of words, while those from China and India were implying rather than stating what they meant. Those team members from the States heard the words and took them at face value, those team members from China and India were likely reading the non-verbal cues more closely than the specific words being spoken. You can see why although there was a lot of conversation going on, there was little true communication. Talk about a Tower of Babel!

You can see the implications for potential team derailers in this dimension. The differences in how conflict is approached and resolved, the differences in how emotion is expressed (or not) – the reaction of being on the receiving end of such emotion – can all lead to misunderstandings and difficulty in moving the team to successful completion of their charter. It is so important for cross-cultural teams know enough about their cultural orientations to bring them out in the open and work with them as they work to complete their tasks.

Each individual can take responsibility to know their own orientations and take steps to mitigate any potential issues it may create. For example, someone with a strong Expressive Communication orientation can remind themselves that not everyone is comfortable with expressing emotions like they are, and take steps to temper this in the course of conversation. Or someone with an Indirect approach to conflict management can make more of an effort, when working with people with a Direct approach to conflict management, to express their opinions openly about a topic or to name the conflict and call for resolution.

Conclusion

Understanding culture can be both overwhelming and seemingly time consuming for individuals and teams. It also has the potential to bring great rewards and a real return on time and money invested. My advice is: Don’t go it alone. If you are committed to “going global” invest in training for all your employees. Make understanding culture part of core job responsibilities and a requirement for all global team leaders. Utilize your internal Human Resources or Organization Development group or outside consultants as team coaches to work with both team leaders and teams in this area. The subtleties of culture can be overwhelming to people as they try and do the best job they can day in and day out, but it is something that can be mastered over time.

Credits

All quotes in this article are taken from the Cultural Orientations Guide™ which is published by Training Management Corporation (TMC). TMC is a recognized leader in global management and cross-cultural training. If you are interested in learning more about the Cultural Orientations Index™ or Training Management Corporation, please visit their website at: www. tmcorp.com.

Click here to see other articles.

Click here to return to Banks Consulting! Home Page