to it, but after two hours, an anxious administrator came to get us and informed us that the African managers were having difficulties with the questionnaires. Perplexed, we returned to the room to find a number of them under considerable strain, sweating, and looking quite agitated. The group was treating these psychometric questionnaires – which merely tapped individual preferences and had no right or wrong answers – like an exam. What's more, word had got round that we were endeavoring to cross check responses across items as a test of honesty. Rather than reacting to each item naturally, the managers were going back each time over all their previous answers in an effort to avoid the inconsistency they thought we were trying to catch people on. Such cross checking was vaguely feasible at the start, but after you had completed about 50 or 60 items, it became a highly stressful kind of 10-dimensional Sudoku.
After the three-day program finished, we had the opportunity to visit some of those managers at their place of work – which was something of an eye-opener. Magically, it seemed that the collaborative and consensual leaders we had seen in the workshop who had had difficulty converging on a decision had transformed overnight into highly confident, driving, larger than life figures barking instructions furiously at their subordinates and conveying an impressive sense of decisiveness and efficiency. Often a certain degree of gratuitous insult was thrown in with the instructions: “Why did you do that, you fool?” or “Don't make such a stupid mistake next time.” This was our first encounter in Africa with what has been termed the Big Man syndrome – an expectation that leaders should be huge personalities conveying confidence and certainty at all times. The subordinates appeared to take this highly directive and less than fully respectful behavior from their leaders in their stride and, if anything, seemed to get some reassurance and comfort from it. The transformation was remarkable for its sheer scale and rapidity. It was also disorienting given that we were psychologists who were supposed to have been able to get under the skin of surface impressions and uncover such latent tendencies.
The point of the above story is clear. Many expectations about differences across cultures are simply not true and on occasion even the reverse of what one might expect. Like executives everywhere, the African leaders were motivated to be the best that they could be, and, if anything, more driven and keen to learn than their Western counterparts. The curious episode with the psychometrics was in fact partly a reflection of their desire to perform well. However, there also lurked profound differences beyond the surface similarities. There were radically different attitudes toward the application of institutional rules – as our experience at the airport had demonstrated – as well as a wholly different and complex approach to the exercise of power in different settings. Relationships and trust also appeared to be built in very different ways. In their own milieu, the behaviors and instincts of the African managers were also profoundly different from how they acted with us. Gradually, we got to know and understand better some of the similarities and sources of difference. However, after a week or so we left with the thought that one all too frequently experiences on holiday. You have had a great time, the locals have been welcoming and at one level you have connected with them, but you are nevertheless left with the feeling – driven by subtle cues that you can't quite put your finger on – that a completely different world exists outside your orbit of managed experiences. You are left wondering, “Have I understood this place at all?”
The Globalization Challenge for Business
At one level, many businesses – particularly multinationals – would feel that they have been operating globally with success for considerable periods of time. Yet if you scratch the surface, the new multipolar world that is emerging is creating significant challenges and asking deeper questions of businesses that consider themselves to be globally minded.
The first point is that there is no such thing as a global company. Every significant company that I come across operating on the global stage has a culture that is distinctly rooted in its place of origin. The senior leadership teams of such organizations are often literally a pale reflection of the geographies in which these companies operate. One sees an increase in diversity with the growth of emerging markets. However, even the individuals who make it up the hierarchy tend to be socialized into the dominant host culture. Genuine diversity, inclusiveness and the capacity to build ways of working that take the best from a range of global cultures have eluded just about every multinational.
A second point is that there can be a degree of common understanding between executives at senior levels in a business who have often been educated at elite universities or international business schools. However, there is also a tendency to underestimate the genuine differences in outlook and orientation at lower levels. International executives who do not develop a nuanced understanding of the cultures in which they are operating can exhibit significant blind spots about what is truly going on at deeper levels within the organization. How initiatives land and are executed in reality can be a far cry from what executives have intended or indeed what they think is happening. Governments and regulatory authorities also typically operate to the drumbeat of a local culture – presenting unforeseen barriers and developments that can catch many multinationals off guard.
Another point is that virtually all multinationals, particularly, Western ones, complain of significant and sometimes insurmountable challenges with regard to talent levels in different parts of the world. While there is some truth to this, the perception arises at least partially from applying a narrow set of lenses for looking at people. One of this book's intentions is to encourage executives to think more deeply and appreciatively about difference. Doing so in an authentic and genuine, rather than a platitudinous, manner requires real appreciation of some of the underlying causes of difference. Similarly, if your implicit notion of development is to inculcate executives into your dominant, core, cultural precepts, you are likely to be disappointed by the returns emanating from such investment. Releasing potential in different cultures requires nuanced and sophisticated interventions that go with the grain of the local cultural DNA.
Many of these issues point to a deeper challenge that global companies need to engage with: The ecology of the global business environment is changing fast. The analytical, process-oriented, organized, and structured approach that is the default setting of many Western multinationals may increasingly prove to be too slow moving, inflexible, and cumbersome in a dynamic and fast-moving world where the unpredictable currents of change require a more intuitive, emergent, and flexible set of responses. The frequent complacency around their core cultural values that many Western companies exhibit appears to emanate from a lack of realization of the depth and strength of the ecological changes in the global business environment. In fact, as will be explored later, some of the themes of this change may play to instincts that are more deeply rooted in non-Western cultures. However, companies from these emergent cultures also need to adjust their mindset as many step onto the global stage for the first time. A provocative and honest understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of one's cultural default settings in the new multipolar world is essential for all players.
Defining Cultural DNA
This book is about how the people in eight of the world's regions – Sub-Saharan Africa, India, the Middle East, China, Europe, North America, Latin America, and Australia – look at things, which I refer to as each region's cultural DNA. Before we go further, however, it is useful to say a few things about what is and what is not meant by the term DNA as used here. The first point to note is that in spite of the use of the biologically laden term, DNA, the focus is on the deeply grained aspects of a culture that are replicated over generations rather than biological differences. Occasionally, this cultural DNA springs from biological factors; but it arises more often from the environmental challenges that each culture faced historically or the predilections of the original founders who moved to that part of the world.
In fact, the idea of DNA comes from work in the area of organizational culture. Like many others, we discovered – after years of working with organizations to help evolve and change their cultures – that significant change requires time and is inherently a slow process. Over time, this has led to the idea of organizational DNA emerging as an explanatory concept for why things
