The Culture Map: Breaking Through the Invisible Boundaries of Global Business

Product Information

The principles-first reasoning uses general principles and deduction to draw conclusions by questioning the ‘why’. They are more inclined to the reasoning behind the request. The French and the Italians fall in the principles-first persuasion scale. Chapter 6 – Trusting: This is the most important scale and it’s also one of the most complex. Building trust across cultures is a delicate task and it requires a lot of cultural knowledge. The author describes the trust continuum as task-based on one end and Relationship-based on the other. task-based cultures are those where “Trust is built through business-related activities”, compared to relationship-based cultures that are “built through sharing meals, evening drinks, and visits at the coffee machine.” This is a very wide gap and failure to understand these differences can lead to difficulties in building fruitful relationships. Shortform note: So which one is better? Most people think that they'll prefer egalitarian leadership styles. But in actuality, one Stanford study suggests that people prefer hierarchical leadership styles because the familiarity of hierarchical relationships makes them easier to understand. Whereas egalitarian relationships can be confusing to navigate, in a hierarchy, everyone’s roles and level of authority are clear.)

Leadership Journeys [135] – Manish Kumar –“You never get enough time to spend with your loved ones” Shortform note: Meyer doesn’t explicitly cite the Hegelian influence on education as a factor in why countries other than France also disagree openly. However, many other countries that practice theoretical thinking (Germany, Italy, and Spain, for example) also disagree confrontationally. This suggests that these countries also disagree openly due to Hegel’s influence on their educational systems. This point is supported by the fact that the Anglo-Saxon countries which practice empirical thinking all lie in the middle of the disagreement spectrum.) Disagreement-Avoidant Cultures Defining Disagreement-Avoidant Cultures Unlike the egalitarian North, the East is strictly hierarchical : in Japan, it will be a mindless act to disagree with your superior. Big D or Little d: Who Decides, and How? Companies in egalitarian cultures tend to have a flat organizational structure. People speak as easily to the CEO as they do to the lowest-ranking employee. (Shortform note: Another feature of egalitarian cultures that Meyer doesn’t mention is that its members are more likely to act on their own and ask for forgiveness instead of permission.) Again, we could think that leading style and decision-making are overlapped, but it is not the case in several cultures. For example in Japan leading is hierarchical but decision-making is consensual.

PDF Summary Chapter 1: Communication Across Cultures

Low-context: Good communication is precise and straight to the point. Key messages are repeated several times, and the goal of communicating is explicitly expressed. (for example the USA) Relationship-based: Trust is built through getting to know each other, sharing meals, and going out for dinners. I have trust in your abilities because I trust you as a person (for example Saudi Arabia). Here it is the Scandinavians, the Dutch and the Israelis who are at the extreme egalitarian end of the scale. (The French for all their constitutional equality are more towards the hierarchical end) The East Asians, India, Saudi Arabia, Russia and Nigeria are at the hierarchical extreme. At this “upper” end of the scale, leaders are expected to lead from the front and status is important. It was Geert Hofstede, with his cultural dimensions, who first developed the concept of “power distance” Managers handling different cultures should be able to understand the differences between flexible and linear cultures and use culture schedules accordingly for individuals. At the same time, the manager should fix the schedule style for the team as a whole and adapt and change when necessary.

Leadership Journeys [128] – Marjukka Niinioja –“I had to learn to stop myself from speaking to listen more.” Considering the communication and evaluation scale together, we see that cultures can be divided into four categories –Generally speaking, countries that decide by consensus fall on the egalitarian end of the leadership spectrum. However, there are some exceptions. We can not disregard individual differences but we shouldn't ignore the range that culture sets either. Once upon a time several years ago, an Austrian management trainer told a group of us that using “with all due respect..” was a great way of gently pointing out a different opinion to a more senior staff member. I seized gleefully on this, feeling that I could use it to release my inner eye-roll whilst being perceived as constructive. Win-win! This is a point that can make collaboration within teams quite complicated if several nationalities are represented, but understanding the culture map can help you to avoid misunderstandings, reducing frustrations. Persuading in Asia Chapter 7 – Disagreeing: Finding ways to “disagree productively” requires in-depth knowledge of the cultural nuances and failure to understand them can lead to some significant misunderstandings. Confrontational cultures are those where “disagreement and debate are positive for the team or organization” while those cultures who avoid confrontation find that “disagreement and debate are negative for the team or organization.” While some cultures value open confrontation, many don’t. It’s important to understand which ones do and which ones don’t.

Cultural differences in leading styles, according to Professor André Lauren, are hugely affected by the history of the country/region. For example, the history of France shows the influences of the Roman Empire’s hierarchical structures and central political standing. On the other hand, hierarchical structures leading in countries such as Sweden are seen due to the impact of the Vikings. Here is an Interview with Erin Meyer on CNN discussing the challenges of culture and how the culture map can improve your cultural understanding. There – as well as in India and Russia – decisions are made by individuals, and the others simply follow. The Head or the Heart: Two Types of Trust and How They Grow

Leadership Journeys [121] – Sufiyan Sait –“The delta between your expectation and reality is inversely proportional to happiness” According to Nisbett, dialectical thinkers are more accepting of contradiction as a fact of life, so they often try to find the middle ground. Sounds great, right? But an acceptance of contradiction could be problematic in business. For example, you might have to convince dialectical thinkers that a problem needs solving at all. Consequently to put it in a nutshell, if you are looking to persuade within Asian cultures it’s important to begin by explaining the big picture. You need to make it clear how all the parts fit together and THEN you can begin to explain what you need specifically from your Asian partners or team members. How Much Respect Do You Want? Leadership, Hierarchy, and Power In 2017, Meyer was selected as one of the most influential thinkers worldwide by both “Thinkers50” and “HR Magazine.” Book Summary In terms of how to communicate (& disagree) as well as in preferring a flexible time approach the 2 countries are relatively similar, however there are huge differences in the way the 2 nations pref to lead and make decisions, as well as when it comes to persuasion. Russians generally favour a top down hierarchical approach (the General Manager is the “Direktor” who in the end can decide pretty much everything, whilst the Israelis prefer a more informal business culture with flatter hierarchies.

In this article, we’ll look at Erin Meyer’s culture map comprised of the eight axes of cultural difference. The Eight Axes of The Culture Map

4. Deciding: Consensual vs. top-down

The core concept here is whether cultures are low or high context. Do they state everything exactly as they mean (the most extreme example here is the USA) or do they infer this from the context of what is being said? In the highest context cultures of East Asia, children are taught to “listen to the air” so that they can infer what is going on from what isn’t said. Much of the communication in Japan, Korea or Indonesia is implicit and can lead to the perception that for example visiting US businessmen are rather childish and primitive in their approach. Having that said, Confucianism heavily influenced the way people deal with others within their own social circle but the ideology provides little guidance on how to deal with people who are not part of one’s own social circle. That’s why certain Asian cultures deal with outsiders, they might turn out to be confrontational, and sometimes even hostile but would never act in the same way with friends. 7. Scheduling: linear-time vs. flexible-time If you are working together with Asian partners you may need to be hyper-sensitive to even realise that any criticism has been voiced (although it can be different if you are working directly for a Japanese manager, due to the cultural attitude to hierarchy). WhyVersus How: The Art of Persuasion in a Multicultural World Shortform note: For example, people in cognitive cultures might consider hiring a relative or somebody who you were introduced to through a relative to be a conflict of interest. But in other cultures, this might be the only way you got the interview in the first place.)