Cross-cultural working is becoming more and more the norm, and a rich fertilisation of cultures can yield enormous benefits. Yet even though it appears that organisations are becoming standardised in their working practices, cross-cultural working often leads to confusion. Communication at a daily level can be fraught with dangers and opportunities for misunderstanding. In this article, Paolo Moscuzza explores some of the common traps that individuals fall into as a result of misinterpreting cultural differences and recommends ways in which they can be avoided.

Tom Wilson arrived at the bank in Milan punctually at 9.00 a.m. as requested in the letter, which he was clutching nervously. In fact, he had been hovering outside the bank for the past 20 minutes – after all he didn’t want to risk being late on his first day in his new job.

At 9.10 the director’s secretary called him in to meet Dr. Augillo. As they greeted each other with a firm handshake, Tom noticed Dr. Augillo was holding a phone in his other hand. After a brief exchange of words Dr. Augillo sat down, returned to his phone call and opened a packet of cigarettes. Tom stood there nervously wondering what he should do. Dr. Augillo signalled for Tom to sit down, as he lit up his cigarette, and continued his conversation with his daughter. Tom could understand the conversation well as he had worked in Lugano for six months last year.

Dr. Augillo offered Tom a cigarette as he continued chatting about the surprise birthday party for Maria. Tom tried to work out who she could be. Finally Dr. Augillo hung up at 9.17 and asked Tom about his journey as he fumbled for a prospectus while lighting up a second cigarette. ‘What a terribly rude man,’ thought Tom.

On that very same day in London, Adam Wilson, a director of the bank, sat waiting in his area of the bank’s open plan office for Masssimo Augillo. It was 9.15 and Adam began wondering if this exchange with his Italian friend was such a good idea. At 9.19 Adam warmly greeted Augillo junior and waited for an apology for his lack of punctuality. Massimo explained to the bank’s director that he had been held up chatting to someone by the lift. A rather miffed Adam Wilson explained to Massimo that he had to leave for a meeting at the solicitor’s and that they would have to reschedule their twenty-minute appointment for another time. ‘What a terribly rude man,’ thought Massimo.

This example illustrates one of the most common continuums in which different cultures can vary considerably – that of time. The different assumptions we make about time have a major effect on the way we interpret events and people’s behaviours.

Different cultures lie on different points on a monochronic-polychronic time continuum. In Northern European and Anglo-Saxon cultures the attitude to time can be described as monochronic – time is a limited resource, structured in a linear fashion. Therefore, people tend to do one thing at a time and start times are important. In Latin Europe and Middle Eastern cultures, time is seen as polychronic – an unlimited resource and not linear. Thus, a person can deal with several issues simultaneously and start times are not rigid. As Italians tend to the polychronic end of the continuum, Dr. Augillo was happy to start the meeting late, and do other things while he was talking to Tom. Even though Tom understood Italian as a result of having lived in Switzerland this does not necessarily mean that he understood the culture – Tom still felt Dr. Augillo to be rude.

Asking someone to describe their own culture is a bit like asking a fish what it is like to swim. It is a futile task unless one has something to compare it to. When making comparisons people look for similarities and differences based on their own experience and values. In the words of Takeo Fujisawa, co-founder of Honda Motor Company: ‘Japanese and American management practices are 85 percent the same, and differ in all important respects.’

It is natural to make comparisons based on our own stream of life experiences, assessing people, material possessions and values in comparison to our own experiences. With cultural differences, because people tend to operate within one culture, the absence of alternatives makes these comparisons harder and hence we see things as different rather than as on a different position on a continuum. Thus, while we may recognise that there are varying degrees of types of behaviour such as extroversion, generosity and directness, we may not understand that these are based on more fundamental differences on a continuum of time and space which we see as given entities.

It is these fundamental differences in perception which drive different behaviours, thus, when people from different cultures work together it is crucial to explore these differences, and their consequent effect. A useful tool for this exploration is the Johari window adapted from S.Jourard ¹. This illuminates what we know about ourselves and what others know and don’t know about us. Through structured discussions and feedback it helps people see themselves as others see them.

The Johari window is an effective tool for increasing awareness. For example, on an interviewing skills programme I ran, an Asian delegate was told by a close colleague that her lack of eye contact made him feel that she was insincere. Conversely she described his high level of eye contact as arrogant. He did not trust candidates that did not look him in the eye and she felt uncomfortable with candidates who insisted on high levels of eye contact. After 18 months working together this was the first time they were able to address this shared blind spot, which, it transpired, was in fact a common cross-cultural issue and the cause of disagreements about selecting candidates. In England we use expressions such as ‘shifty eyes’ to describe a lack of eye contact whereas in Asia people generally have a minimal level of eye contact with people they do not know. Cross-cultural awareness is necessary at three different levels (individual, organisational and market) and appropriate interventions can be designed at each level.

Individual level

Cross-cultural awareness at an individual level may be developed through formal systems such as induction training and team building or informally in a discussion over lunch or through a mentoring relationship. Running training sessions on cross-cultural differences for delegates from different countries can also be effective. For example I ran a session for a group of delegates from an American Telecomms organisation in which many of the delegates described the practical exercises as surprisingly effective at addressing real issues that in the course of a working day seem petty. Some of the key issues which arose included the openness of communication, style of management and above all, how to motivate people in different parts of the world so that they feel part of the same organisation.

Organisational level

At an organisational level there are a number of cultural factors which are integral to the structures of organisations that can effect the perception of information and communication. These can be mapped on a number of different dimensions, but perhaps the most well-known and important are the dimensions developed by Geert Hofstede ². One of the dimensions he identified was that between Individualism and Collectivism. This refers to the extent to which people prefer to take care of themselves and their immediate families, remaining emotionally independent from groups and organisations.

 
Within a highly individualistic country, autonomy is more important than in highly collectivist countries where security is more important. In individualist countries, specific friendships are more important than being part of an ‘in group’. The different dimensions have a number of practical implications in areas ranging from understanding the structure of organisations and how to get things to happen through to implementing processes that will be effective across different cultures, e.g. competency frameworks, surveys etc.

Market level

Cross-cultural awareness of the markets in which organisations are operating is critical if organisations are to be successful. Here knowledge of both the product and labour is crucial. Although this may appear confined to legal issues such as product requirements and employment laws which are of course essential, there are other very important cultural attitudes which need to be taken into consideration.

ER Consultants were recently asked to evaluate the pros and cons of developing a section of an American business in one of four European locations. One of the interesting findings was that in England some people will travel over 100 miles a day to work, whilst in Holland 15 miles was seen as excessive (cycling was the preferred method). Thus the potential labour market in Holland was considerably smaller than in the UK.

Raising awareness of difference

One of the beauties of exploring cross-cultural issues is that anyone who has worked with or spent time in different cultures has their own experiences to draw on. However, establishing norms in a cross-cultural once environment is quite complex and the misunderstandings can be prolific. These can take place at a fundamental level such as:

• Perceiving weaknesses in speaking or writing a language as a lack of ability
• Overvaluing or undervaluing a person or comment as a result of an accent
• Interpreting behaviours using the value system of another culture and hence perceiving a person as being deliberately rude when it was not their intention

It is these, and many aspects of cross-cultural differences which on a day-today basis can be so detrimental and yet when taken in abstract can appear so insignificant. How do you say to someone at work that:

• their lack of eye contact is making you suspicious of them (English perception of Asian behaviour)
• that they should say hello to each individual person in the once not everyone at once because it is rude (French perception of English behaviour)
• that a weak handshake is a sign of a weak character (American perception of English behaviour)
• that yes can actually mean no (Japanese understanding of language)

The essence of good cross-cultural communication is to ensure that differences are not viewed as negative behaviours. It is only by raising awareness of these differences explicitly, at their fundamental levels that we can begin to tackle such misunderstandings. The spectrum of possibilities for failure is enormous. However, in practice, by learning general rules we can transfer our understandings to different situations, a bit like the rules of grammar. But as with rules of grammar it is also important to learn the exceptions. An awareness and sensitivity to the main areas that are open for misunderstandings, ways of promoting trust and managing relationships will help minimise the negative effects on teams and organisations. Furthermore, the rewards for maximising cross-cultural differences can lead to increased job satisfaction, motivation, understanding of purpose internally and externally, improved trading relationships, trust and therefore greater profitability.

¹ Jourard,S., The Transparent Self. 1964 Van Nostrand Reinhold, Princeton,NJ.
² Hefstede,G. Cultures and Organisations.1991. McGraw Hill