Managing

Across Cultures
Meenakshi Aggarwal-Gupta
Sessions 5-10

Communica<on in Organiza<ons
Cultural preference for hierarchy,
formaliza<on and par<cipa<on is reected in
The kind of informa<on sought or heeded
How informa<on circulates
What informa<on is shared
With whom

Cultural Underpinnings

High Context Vs. Low Context

Contextual
Plenty of background informa<on helps us to
understand things beNer

Direct
We move directly to the proposal, handling
context ques<ons later

Structure of communica<on

background

mainpoint
A

B
B

Neutral Vs. Aec<ve

Contained
Embarrassment and fric<on can come from
displays of emo<on

Emo2onal
Few inhibi<ons about expressing joy, anger, fear,
passion, regret ...

Percep<ons - Cross Cultural Mispercep<on,

Misinterpreta<on & Misevalua<on
Using categories and stereotypes
Cultural blinders extending own cultural
values to assess other cultures e.g. projected
picture from an experiment on the accuracy of
communica<on

Forms of Communica<on
Verbal/ Oral
Non Verbal/ Sociolinguis<cs
WriNen

Verbal communica<on
First language/ second language
Verbosity and silence
Accent and Speed

Communica<ng Across Cultures

Speak clearly and a liNle more slowly than you usually do.
Paraphrasing is key!
Use an even tone of voice.
Pronounce your words clearly and enunciate carefully.
Use the simplest and most common words in most cases.
Avoid slang and colloquial expressions.
Pay special aNen<on to language during phone calls and
when leaving voice mail messages.

Telecon - CA
Asymmetries of par<cipa<on

Shared understanding and listenership/ hyper-

explana<ons
Hierarchies

Cohesion and ow of conversa<on

Turn taking, latching, probing, style of logic

analy<cal vs. intui<ve

Organiza<on of conversa<on
Need for mediators to translate communica<on
problems
Deec<on and the meaning of yes/ no

Non verbal communica<on

Distance
Touching
Body posi<on
Gestures
Facial expressions
Eye contact

Non-Verbal Cues
Kine<cs study of body movements
Nodding the head and/or saying yes
Hand and nger gestures
Feet and toes

Paralanguage how things are said

Expression of emo<on in tone and facial expression
Silence

Proxemics
Study of personal and social space

 Culture and the Way of Saying Things

Forms of address
Gree<ngs and farewells
Compliments and responses to compliments
Taboos and euphemism

Intercultural Conict

Intercultural Conict: Cultural

Background Factors
Intercultural conflict:
The implicit or explicit emotional struggle or
frustration between persons of different cultures
over perceived incompatible values, norms, face
orientations, goals, scarce resources, processes, and/
or outcomes in a communication situation.

 Conict is culturally grounded-the way we

aNempt to resolve conict is learned from the
groups we grew up in during our forma<ve
years

Individualistic conflict lens

Outcome-focused
Content-goal-oriented
Doing-centered
Use personal equity norms
Self-face concern
Low-context conflict style
Competitive/dominating
behaviors
Conflict effectiveness

Collectivistic conflict lens

Process-focused
Relational goal-oriented
Being-centered
Use communal norms
Other-face concern
High-context conflict styles
Avoiding/obliging behaviors
Conflict appropriateness

Face
Face refers to a persons sense of favorable
self-worth or self-image experienced during
communicative situations. It is an emotional
extension of the self-concept.
Self-face, other-face and mutual-face
Ones face can be threatened, enhanced,
undermined, and bargained over both
emotionally and cognitively.

Facework
Facework refers to the various ways people
deal with conflict and face. It refers to the
communicative strategies employed to manage
ones own face or to support or challenge
anothers face.
Face work can be employed to initiate, manage
or terminate conflict.

Conict Management Styles

Dual Concern Model
Cultural Model

A ve-style conict grid: A Western

approach
HIGH domina<ng/ integra<ng/
compe<ng collabora<ng

concern
for compromising
self-interest

avoiding obliging/
accommoda<ng
concern for others interest
LOW

HIGH

Intercultural Conict Style

Direct

Discussion

Engagement

Emo<onally
Restrained

Accommoda<on

Emo<onally
Expressive

Dynamic
Indirect

Intercultural Conict Style

Direct

Emo<onally
Restrained

Discussion

Engagement

Na2ve American, Mexico,

Costa Rica, Peru, China,
Japan, Thailand, Indonesia,
Malaysia
Accommoda<on

Kuwait, Egypt, Saudi

Arabia, Lebanon,
Pakistan
Dynamic

Indirect

Emo<onally
Expressive

U.S. (European American),

Canada, U.K., Sweden,
Norway, Australia,
Germany, Denmark

U.S. (African American),

France, Greece, Italy,
Spain, Cuba, Puerto Rico,
Russia, Israel, Rumania

BoNom Line
4 dierent intercultural
conict styles

Discussion

Engagement
Dynamic
Accommoda<on

4 very dierent ways of

handling conict

Many possibili<es for
misunderstandings!!

Decision Making Across Cultures

Decision Making

Ra<onal vs. emo<onal vs. intui<ve

Time taken to arrive at decisions
Contract may be binding OR seen as a star<ng
point for agreement.
Problem Recogni<on
Informa<on search
Construc<on of Alterna<ves
Choice individual vs. group, speed of DM,
hierarchical
Implementa<on

Managing Mul<cultural Teams

Cultural Dimensions That Aect Team

Behavior, Expecta<ons and Decisions
Hierarchy/ egalitarianism dictates how mee<ngs will
be run
Collec<vism need for agreement and consensus,
importance of trust and small talk
High/low context how messages are sent and
received
Time orienta<on how deadlines will be established
Uncertainty avoidance management of risks and
detailing of plans
Masculinity/ femininity conduc<ng mee<ngs outside
work hours, willingness to compromise on personal
<me

Mul<cultural Teams (MCT)/ Global

business Teams (GBT)/ Virtual Teams (GVT)
Movement towards greater team work in
individualis<c cultures
Movement towards greater individualism,
entrepreneurship and personal ini<a<ve in
collec<vis<c (esp. communist cultures)
Some eec<ve team formats
Quality circles Japan
Self Managed Teams - Yugoslavia

Why Mul<cultural Teams

Increased crea<vity
Diverse and beNer ideas and perspec<ves -
beNer at iden<fying problem
Less groupthink
BeNer alterna<ves
BeNer solu<ons
Crea<ng lateral networks

Advantages of Diversity

Highly ineec<ve

Average eec<veness

Highly eec<ve

Biggest Challenge for MCT

Inability to cul<vate trust among team
members

Trust
A psychological state comprising the inten<on
to accept vulnerability based upon posi<ve
expecta<ons of the inten<ons or behavior of
another.

Rousseau, D., Sitkin, S., Burt, R., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so dierent aker all: A
cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23, 393-404.

Virtual Teams
Exponen<al need for trust
Role of communica<on, status etc.

Managing a virtual team

Create a team charter for working in a virtual environment.
Use web-based project management tools in order to share informa<on
easily.
Do regular video-conferencing at dierent levels.
Create measurable objec<ves and clear hand-o points.
Clarify roles and responsibili<es.
Use electronic discussion boards to capture all discussions and decisions.
Work on rela<onship development through increased face-to-face
communica<on.
Place a special focus on milestone events {ie; kicko events).
Employ simple measures that promote eec<ve <me u<liza<on {ie: prior
sharing of the agenda and objec<ve of a mee<ng or teleconference).
Be crea<ve in fostering team-building opportuni<es (ie: pizza par<es via
teleconference)

Team Iden<ca<on
Cri<cal glue that holds teams together
(Wiesenfeld, Raghuram, and Garud, 2001)
Imbalanced numbers may also lead to social
categoriza<on, less iden<ca<on and conict
(OLeary and Mortensen, 2009)

Challenges for a MCT

Direct versus indirect communica<on
Lack of cohesion
Mistrust and stereotyping
Miscommunica<on barriers of geography,
language, culture

Trouble with accents and uency

Adler; Govindarajan & Gupta (2001); BreN, J., Behfar, K., and Kern, M.C.
(2006). Managing mul<cultural teams. Harvard Business Review, 2-8.

Nego<a<ng Across Cultures

Nego<a<on
The process of bargaining between two or more
par<es to reach a solu<on that is mutually
acceptable

The Nego<a<on Process

The Goal
Arrive at a solu<on acceptable to all par<es
Distribu<ve outcome - Amount of resources available for
nego<ators to divide is xed
Integra<ve agreement - Transform xed resources into
something valued dierently by each party, and then
distribute the resources to the party that values them
most

The 5 Stages of Nego<a<on

Prepara<on
Plan how to approach the actual nego<a<on and try to learn as much as
possible about nego<a<ng partners
Rela<onship-Building
Par<es get to know one another
Informa<on Exchange
Each party states ini<al posi<on, followed by ques<ons, answers, and
discussion
Persuasion
Par<es try to convince their counterparts to accept their proposals
Agreement
Par<es come to a mutually acceptable solu<on

Interests, Priori<es, and Strategies

Interests

Reect the underlying need or reason for a nego<ator's

posi<on

Priori<es

Indicate the importance of dierent alterna<ves

Strategy

Overall approach to nego<a<on that establishes the set of

behaviors that the nego<ator believes will lead to goal
accomplishment

Cultural Inuences
Oken explain dierences in interests and
priori<es
Create dierences in nego<ator behavior

Cultural Characteris<c & Typical

Behaviors
Individualis<c
Sets high personal goals
Rejects acceptable but subop<mal agreements
Has high self-interest, liNle concern for other par<es'
interests

Collec<vis<c
Coopera<ve with in-group members, willing to search
for mutually sa<sfying agreement
With out-group members, may be more compe<<ve

Cultural Characteris<c & Typical

Behaviors (contd.)
Egalitarian
Refers to BATNA and other sources of power
infrequently if nego<a<on is moving towards
agreement
Prefers to focus on issues, sharing informa<on on
priori<es and interests, no<ng similari<es and
dierences

Hierarchical
More likely to accept and use all types of power
status, BATNA, persuasion

Cultural Characteris<c & Typical

Behaviors (contd.)
Low-context
Prefers direct informa<on sharing

High-context
Prefers indirect informa<on sharing

BreN, J.M. (2000). "Culture and Nego<a<on," Interna?onal Journal of Psychology, 35, 97-104.

Situa<onal Factors
Geographical Loca<on
Advantageous to conduct the nego<a<ons in your
home oce

Room Arrangements
Shape of the table and where the nego<ators sit
can create greater compe<<on or coopera<on

Situa<onal Factors (cont.)

Selec<on of Nego<ators
Number of people and which ones will represent a
team oken reect culture

Time Limits
Real or presumed deadlines

Verbal Tac<cs
Spoken nego<a<ng behaviors
Nego<ators can increase their prots by
Asking more ques<ons
Making fewer commitments before the nal
agreement stage
Increasing the amount of the ini<al request, that
is, seller asking for more and buyer oering less

Nonverbal Tac<cs
Nego<a<ng behaviors other than the words
used
Oken send a louder message than verbal
behaviors

Ten Factors that Aect Nego<a<on

Agreements General or Specic?
Building Agreements Induc<ve or Deduc<ve? Building Down
or Building Up?
Team One Leader or Consensus?
Risk Tolerance High or Low?
Contract or Rela<onship?
Nego<a<ng A{tude Zero sum?
Communica<on Direct or Indirect?
Time Sensi<vity High or Low?
Emo<onal Display High or Low?
A{tude Formal or Informal?

Managing Cross Border Nego<a<ons

Who are the players?

Who decides what?
Informal inuences?
Individual styles

Leading Globally

What is leadership
The ability to inuence other people to strive
willingly to achieve a common goal
In order to lead, you need to be able to
understand the mo<va<on of those being led
their willingness to exert eorts towards a
goal

High
Achieving
Socie<es

Mo<va<ng People
Equity vs. Equality
Do we accept inequity?
Do we take ac<on against inequity?

Goal se{ng par<cipatory or assigned?

Expectancy
More suitable where people have high internal
LOC and more control over their environment

Leadership

Meaning in dierent contexts

Poli<cal versus corporate leaders
Leadership theories and styles
Global leadership competencies

Leadership Styles and Preferences

Vision Global vs. local?
Par<cipa<ve leadership?
High PD socie<es - Managers as strong leaders,
discomfort with discre<onary decisions

Experts vs. problem solvers

Unity of command vs. matrix
American style highly individualis<c yet
par<cipa<ve unique or common?
Gender dierences in leadership styles?

Leadership Styles and Preferences:

Results from the GLOBE Project
Six Culturally implicit theories of leadership

Charisma<c/ value based leader is visionary, inspira<onal, self

sacricing, integrity, decisive and performance oriented
universally most desirable
Team oriented leader is collabora<ve, team integrator,
diploma<c, not malevolent, administra<vely competent
generally desirable
Par<cipa<ve not autocra<c generally desirable
Autonomous individualis<c, independent, autonomous and
unique neither desirable nor undesirable
Humane modest, compassionate neither desirable nor
undesirable
Self protec<ve self centered, status conscious, conict
inducer, face saver and procedural - undesirable

House et al. 2004. Culture, Leadership and Organiza<ons. Xvii-xviii, Pg. 14

Middle East An Outlier

Self protec<ve leadership is seen as less of a
problem than in other parts of the world
Charisma<c and team oriented leadership
were not perceived as highly as in other parts
of the world
Local cluster of desirable aNributes of
leadership such as familial, humble and
faithful