Intercultural management
“Mi casa es tu casa”
A few weeks ago, during a remote session with one of my Mexican clients, I casually asked him if he was at his office. To my surprise, he responded, "Estoy en tu casa" (I am at your house). This unexpected reply carried a profound meaning deeply rooted in Mexican culture. In Mexico, the phrase "mi casa es tu casa" (my home is your home) embodies a sense of hospitality, warmth, and inclusion. It signifies that he not only felt comfortable in his own home but also wanted me to feel welcomed and at home in his presence.
This interaction served as a heartwarming reminder of the strong connection and rapport that can develop between people in Mexican culture. It highlighted the importance of building trust, fostering a sense of belonging, and creating an environment of openness and genuine care. The phrase "Estoy en tu casa" encapsulated the spirit of Mexican hospitality and reflected the client's desire to extend that same hospitality to me as his coach.
Of course, it goes without saying that no one really thinks of claiming the keys and moving in. However, this kind of conversation can shock people from some cultures more than others. This is what Erin Meyer calls ‘contextual communication’, and whether or not we notice it conciously, it pervades all of our conversations. For example, when we point out to someone that it's getting late, they know it's time to go home without needing it to be stated expcility.
In a culture with strong contextualization, communication is more often unspoken or subtextual than in a culture less dependent on contextualization. In other words, people are used to reading (or listening) "between the lines"; what the Japanese call "listening to what the air says". This can lead to confusion when either the speaker or listener is not used to this practice. On the other hand, someone accustomed to this contextual communication may look for hidden messages where there are none.
This often-unnoticed component of conversation can lead to miscommunication. In a now-famous gaffe, John F. Kennedy uttered the words "Ich bin ein Berliner" ("I am a Berliner" -- or so he thought) during his famous speech in West Berlin during the Cold War in an effort to show solidarity with Berliners. Little did he know, his words would be interpreted much differently, and accidentally led the German-speaking crowd to believe he was a chocalate donut (a ¨berliner¨).
Kennedy’s words (at least the ones he meant to say) show how Americans in general have very direct and explicit communication, in contrast to others such as the Japanese or Koreans. The French and Spanish speakers are in between.
Cultural factors
In addition to the different levels of contextualization in different cultures, there are many cultural factors that can complicate communication and cause confusion.
This article highlights essential steps to building a fulfilling intercultural relationship. Next, we will explore the three fundamental pillars that build strong intercultural relationships.
Trust
The first crucial step is to establish a relationship built on trust. Trust is the foundation of any relationship, and in an intercultural context, it is essential not to jump to conclusions in the face of cultural misunderstandings, which can often lead to divergent perspectives and behaviors.
Trust itself is built differently in different cultures. In some cultures, it is established through emotional experiences such as sharing a meal, participating in social events, or having interactions based on personal connections. Shared experiences, marked by a high level of emotional closeness, are the basis for establishing mutual trust. This is why some foreigners, whether French or American, may not understand the need of their Spanish or Latin American correspondents to take the time to have lunch. What may seem like a waste of time to some is perceived by others as a necessary investment to build trust.
In other cultures, such as French culture, trust is cognitive in nature and is built on the basis of concrete results. Some companies have grasped this difference and adapt their web pages according to the target audience. For example, a multinational corporation that promotes diversity, equity, and inclusion will offer different content in the U.S. and France. In the United States, there will be photos of events focused on these themes, moving testimonials from employees, as well as a simple message from a leader with his photo, highlighting the importance of this movement.[GU1] On the other hand, in France, the same company will opt for a simple generic photo, followed by a detailed text on the subject, accompanied by many graphs and figures illustrating the results obtained. It is therefore essential to know how to adapt your message according to the people concerned.
Another key factor that can influence trust is punctuality. While the French may complain about the lack of punctuality of Mexicans, they are perceived as unreliable by the Germans, the Swiss and the English. This example highlights another observation concerning cultural factors: these are not valid in absolute terms but rather should be understood in a relative sense, compared to the behaviors of other cultures.
Punctuality is closely related to the perception of time. For some, time is a malleable entity, we take it, we lose it, we give it, we earn it... While others perceive it as a rigid and sequential flow.
Conflict management
Conflict management is the second major step in establishing and managing intercultural relations, and it can be complex. Two factors that can aggravate conflicts instead of resolving them are the influence of hierarchy and the different methods of evaluating individuals.
The impact of hierarchy.
Many foreigners are often caught off guard when they arrive in Mexico and discover the custom of answering "mande" or "mande usted" (at your command, command me sir) when called or when they did not hear a message. Until recently, parents used to correct their children by saying: "We don't say 'what?', we say ‘command me’, so don't be disrespectful'.
It is believed that this expression originated in colonial times, when the Spanish established a caste system in which the lower castes (indigenous and mestizo peoples) were forced to show their submission to the upper castes (white and Creole) that ruled during the viceroyalty. Although this expression has over time become a display of politeness or deference, a nuance compared to direct answers such as "what?", it is nevertheless a manifestation of a servile attitude that, fortunately, tends to disappear.
This attitude shows us first the impact of history on the current values of a culture. And in the case of Mexico, it makes us see the importance that a person's hierarchical position, his status, can have on behavior.
Hierarchy is also of great importance in Asian cultures such as Japanese or Korean. Malcolm Gladwell, in his book Outliers, emphasizes the importance of hierarchy in the Korean language that uses honorific terms to address individuals based on their social status. This cultural heritage was implicated in a Korean airline horrific plane crashes, where it contributed to communication problems and a reluctance to challenge authority in the cockpit.
In a culture where the leadership style is highly hierarchical, the leader is expected to adopt an authoritarian approach that guides his subordinates. On the other hand, in egalitarian cultures such as those of the Nordic countries, the role of the manager is that of a facilitator among equals. Hierarchical gaps are reduced, and it is not uncommon to see communication bypass established levels of hierarchy.
It is easy to understand the conflicts that can arise when an overly egalitarian approach is applied in a hierarchical culture, or vice versa. For example, bypassing the hierarchical ladder to give or receive instructions can deeply offend a manager from a hierarchical culture. As a result, subordinates may be reluctant to follow instructions received directly for fear of offending their superior and suffering the consequences.
Assessment of people
These management styles, whether egalitarian or hierarchical, have an impact on how to provide an assessment to a team member. In a hierarchical culture, the status of the person plays a key role in the construction of his identity. Thus, any action likely to call into question this status is perceived as an attack on his personal value. While direct, clear, and public criticism is not a problem in an egalitarian culture, it may cause embarrassment and make the person feel devalued in hierarchical cultures. A person confronted in this way will be convinced, for instance, that he is about to be fired, which could encourage him to take the lead and resign. It is therefore crucial to be cautious when providing feedback in such cases, taking a subtle, courteous and, above all, private and confidential approach.
The three pillars of intercultural relations
In this article, we present an innovative method based on three fundamental pillars for building fulfilling, trust-based and non-conflictual intercultural relationships. By recognizing and integrating these key elements into intercultural interactions, mutual understanding, effective communication, and fruitful collaboration can be fostered.
Open-mindedness
The first pillar of this method is to develop an attitude of openness and curiosity towards people from other cultures. This involves taking a caring perspective and demostrating sincere respect for different cultural values, beliefs, and practices. By cultivating this open-mindedness, we are better able to recognize and respect cultural differences, which fosters a climate of trust and mutual respect. By actively listening, we can truly understand other people's perspectives and needs, avoid misunderstandings, and create strong bonds based on empathy and authentic communication.
Self-awareness
The second pillar is based on an awareness of our needs, our own values, biases, and beliefs and thus allow us a better understanding of other cultures. It is through discovering our own biases that we can avoid projecting our cultural norms onto others, thus fostering inclusive intercultural communication. By understanding our own cultural influences, we are better prepared to navigate cross-cultural interactions by avoiding hasty judgments and fostering true mutual understanding.
Alliance
Finally, the third pillar of this method is based on the establishment of an alliance which consists in agreeing on common rules for all members of the group. This defines a culture specific to the relationships between team-members. The alliance is a mutual commitment between the participants, establishing practices that allow open, clear and harmonious communication while respecting and valuing cultural differences and in working towards common goals. This includes creating a safe space where everyone feels free to express their ideas, concerns and needs, without fear of judgment or discrimination, as well as establishing mechanisms for effective conflict resolution. Indeed, it is not a question of avoiding conflicts. On the contrary, it is essential to address and resolve them.
For example, if we take the case of punctuality, the alliance should include a common rule regarding the "acceptable" delay for a meeting within the team: 5 minutes, for example. Thus, even if some people will continue to arrive early, they will no longer be offended by other members arriving a few minutes late.
By integrating these three pillars – open-mindedness, awareness, and relational alliance building – into our intercultural interactions, we are able to build trusting and non-confrontational relationships with people from different cultures. This method offers a comprehensive and proactive approach to navigating cultural diversity and taking advantage of the opportunities it presents.
