Be Aware of Different Preferred Styles and Cultural Norms

"Employees saw the general manager as the 'family head.' In return for the respect and loyalty of subordinates, superiors are expected to 'take care of' staff as a matter of obligation. For Smith this meant watching out for their career advancement and protecting them from blame when they made mistakes."^[]

^[] Difficulties with and Tips for Taking Advantage of Cultural Preferences

This example would be less effective in the U.K., which shows just how important it is to reconcile a wide array of norms, practices, and world views so that a manager can respond appropriately around the world. One's attitude about the possibility of solving problems rather than leaving the outcome to fate or how one openly participates in meetings rather than being deferential influences the dynamics on a global team. In order to avoid misinterpreting behavior, and in order to take full advantage of all the differences available to a team, an understanding of the role of culture in shaping behavior is imperative. It allows team members to recognize that our programming is deep and formed early. Culture is subtle yet powerful. It becomes less subtle when very clear national cultural differences exist on a team, such as those between high-context Japanese and low-context Americans. The differences can be more subtle when people share a common language and culture, like the U.K. and the United States. Wide cultural differences can create a strident environment. All participants can adapt and develop a wider repertoire of behaviors once they understand that culture is a critical underpinning of their individual behavior and collective success. Having this knowledge opens team members to both the idea and reality that multicultural teams offer distinct advantages if they capitalize on their differences.

See Preferences as a Two-Sided Coin

The ideas (1) that all norms cut two ways and (2) that no cultural norm is intrinsically good or bad are helpful in creating an appreciation of differences. Each cultural norm we experience offers advantages in some ways and can be harmful in others. Take the issue of time-consciousness. If a team decides that deadlines are set and nonnegotiable, the advantage of a fixed time frame is that deadlines will most likely be met. On the other hand, an immovable time line compromises the amount of incubation and exploration on complex problems and can compromise the quality of the solutions suggested. Results will not necessarily be effective just because the timeline is met. Trying to determine when deadlines need to be exact and when there is room for flexibility requires good judgment, leadership, feedback, and communication. As in the example with time, other norms also cut two ways.

Use Skills in Conflict Resolution and Group Dynamics

Knowledge about group dynamics and conflict resolution is often underrated. They are invisible but make a huge difference in the development of group trust and achievement of honest, productive communication. There are numerous models that characterize the stages of group development, but Bruce Tuckman's classic model^[] of forming, storming, norming, and performing is among the most frequently cited. According to Tuckman, any effective team is a dynamic entity that has life cycle stages. The leader's knowledge of group dynamics makes an enormous difference in whether or not a group matures into increasing effectiveness as a unit. A few tips that help minimize conflict and enhance positive group dynamics follow:

• Pay attention to nonverbal cues;

• Build good relationships across cultures where appreciation, empathy, and sensitivity are demonstrated;

• Be patient and willing to not always have things go your way;

• Show interest in other people; ask appropriate questions that indicate a sense of knowing and caring who and how a person is;

• Monitor how decisions are made and how people participate;

• Keep a record of who is participating in the meeting, either in person, e-mail, or phone; and

• Use technology to reinforce relationships.

The use of effective structured processes online or in person can also minimize conflict as a group works to solve problems together. The kind of structured processes presented in this chapter will be very helpful.

Have a Shared Vision and Clarity About the Parameters of the Team

Global teams exist within the context of their global organization and they exist to get a job done. In the case of functional teams, they may produce goods or deliver services. A project team, however, may refine processes for functional teams. A task force may be set up to offer recommendations for ways in which functional teams can improve in defined areas, or they may be brought together for a short time to do fact finding and data collection. Whether a team is an ongoing part of an organization's operations or whether it exists as a short-term task force, in order to be effective it has to know its charge. Why does it exist? For what and to whom is it going to be held accountable? Is the vision one around which there is not only agreement, but also positive energy?

Any ambiguity about boundaries can spell trouble and disruption of task accomplishment. This ambiguity can be more noticeable on dispersed teams, where the usual nonverbal cues are in short supply. The distance and lack of personal contact make communication and verbal feedback about the group's purpose even more critical. However, remote team members do learn to interpret pauses and silence in conversation on the phone and patterns and phrases in written communication. Clarity helps generate energy and move the group forward. Confusion and ambiguity dissipate purpose and direction.

Use a Feedback Mechanism to Assess and Improve Both Product and Process

The expectation of give-and-take, particularly valued in the West, involves dialogue about how team members work together. This exchange is very helpful in creating high trust that also meets work objectives. Give-and-take is not an expectation in Asia. Clearly, paying attention to cultural norms across borders is imperative. What is viewed as a critically important question in one culture may be seen as a challenge and an attack in another. If all team members agree that communication and feedback matter, they can decide how feedback is handled to take different norms into account. For example, on one global team, a member from Cameroon made a statement about the availability of necessary supplies. He was asked a question by a team member from the United States, who wanted clarification regarding the availability of materials needed. However, some team members from Brazil and Japan took offense at the question, which they saw as a challenge, not a way to verify information. Without conversation about these different reactions, a rift might have developed that hindered effective group functioning.

Work Consistently and Intentionally on Developing Trust

Western psychology teaches us that trust builds through self-disclosure and feedback. We also know that trust builds more quickly or slowly in various cultures and that self-disclosure is not universally appreciated. In highly relational cultures (Latin, Asian, and Middle Eastern), a relationship between two people starts the trust-building process and it deepens with reciprocal fidelity. This book offers countless examples of how self-disclosure, communication, and feedback are culturally influenced. In the United States, people presume a much quicker trust-building process than do those in Singapore or Vietnam, for example. As the only non-Vietnamese person in her organization, one U.S.-American thought relationship building outside of work would accelerate trust and cohesion. To this end, she invited her Vietnamese co-workers to her house for dinner Sunday night. They all either said "Yes" verbally or nodded their heads affirmatively. She cooked all day Saturday. Sunday came and went, but no guests arrived. At first, the hostess assumed she had the wrong date. Further exploration into the issue showed that her fellow employees would never be rude enough to verbally turn down an invitation to her home, but their history with her was so short that it would have been inappropriate for them to go. What she learned in hindsight was that trust in Vietnam builds more slowly than she was used to. They didn't have enough history and trust to go to her home, nor did they have enough history and trust to tell her why they could not go.

There must be education and development of awareness across a whole continuum of norms, trust building being one. If understanding exists, when trust builds more slowly, team members won't be branded as standoffish, and where trust is desired or presumed more quickly, team members will not be labeled as shallow or insensitive.

Invest Time in Building Team Relationships and Interpersonal Knowledge

Many Westerners struggle to lead Chinese teams because of differences in team-building practices. The confusion comes about because, for most Chinese, team membership means a group has strong interpersonal bonds focused on respect for the leader, usually older and more experienced. Westerners tend to be less hierarchical and more egalitarian. The Western focus is also more on tasks, with groups brought together to collaborate on specific objectives. This often necessitates giving direct feedback and using conflict-resolution techniques. Note the differences in Chinese and U.S.-American emphasis on relationships. In the example that follows, General Manager Smith is savvy about the importance of relationships in China and he uses this knowledge to build cohesion:

When one group of employees banded together to ask for a refrigerator for their lunchboxes, he let the line manager take care of it and play off the indigenous group behavior as the core of team building. The focus on teamwork was reinforced by having group pictures marking important events, such as the conclusion of training initiatives, visits by important guests, and extracurricular gatherings. Group competition against groups, rather than individual competition, is encouraged, ensuring each group wins something (for example, meeting quality production targets or safety goals). After work Smith sometimes takes the group to karaoke or to a bowling alley.^[]

Is this how team building would be done in your organization? If not, what are the differences? How would this approach work in your organization?

Most teams can develop into productive, cohesive entities if they are given the time and a process to have individuals get to know one another and learn about the strengths and idiosyncrasies of each team member. One of the key determinants to this happening is time. Organizations are often reluctant to spend the resources to bring people together, even though it is critical to do so with dispersed multinational groups. The initial face-to-face contact where a relationship is born and bonds are formed is a high payoff venture essential to high performance. According to George Simons, an international diversity consultant and author whose expertise lies in building virtual teams, not only do all teams need this initial investment, but highly effective teams are brought together every three months to nurture and maintain the connections. Doing so requires investment of both time and money, but it is also well worth the expenditure. Allocating the resources speaks volumes about commitment from the organization, and in a practical sense it becomes the glue that holds a group together.

In one Chinese-Finnish venture, the more individualistic Finns balked at spending one of their vacation weeks going to a beach resort, which was seen as a perk for their Chinese colleagues. Only when the week was repositioned as a team-building experience and not billed as vacation time were the Finns willing to participate. In much of the world, relationship building does not only happen in the office or plant. In Japan, it happens after hours socializing with co-workers over drinks. In China, families take vacations as a work team, and in the United States bonding on the golf course is common. Finding inclusive ways to nurture the interpersonal connections is key.

Share Knowledge, Skills, and Information

Knowledge provides opportunities for team influence and power. On teams where there is more competition than collaboration and where there is more jealousy than support, it is common for people to hold onto their power and information as a way to gain influence and dominance. Many Chinese management books talk about holding back information as a bargaining chip to gain something else. On healthy teams, there is an expectation that information, knowledge, and skills are appropriately shared as a matter of course. It becomes standard operating procedure. In collectivist cultures, it is a way to ensure team success. For example, U.S.-American employees were upset when they found that the Japanese engineers on their project were regularly taking plans off their drafting tables and faxing them to Japan without asking permission. When confronted, the Japanese engineers were surprised at the Americans' reactions. They responded that the project belonged to the whole team and that all work was shared by the team members, giving each other access to others' work designs and plans. All companies have norms and parameters around sharing. It helps to clarify and understand the national and situational norms so that a trusting environment is built.

Have a Leader Who Is Adept and Flexible at Crossing Cultures

On multinational teams, as with any team, leadership sets the standard and reinforces expectations. If an organization has team members from different regions and nations as part of its operations, members will take clues from their leadership about valuing different norms, respecting various perspectives and being adaptive themselves. The quote by Ralph Waldo Emerson which states, "I can't hear what you're saying because who you are rings so loudly in my ears," shows us the importance of looking to people's behavior for the truth rather than listening to their words. Modeling respect for differences and adaptability is essential on high-performing teams in order to leverage the strength of diversity.

Develop and Use Both Formal and Informal Communication Processes

There is no leaving communication to chance or happenstance on effective teams. When teams initially set norms, they must discuss ways, means, and frequency of communicating. Some people may like phone calls, while some prefer e-mail. Across multiple time zones, e-mail is a must. Is communication always initiated by one person who starts the feedback and check-in process, or can it begin with anyone at any time? There are no right answers regarding communication, but having a process in place that is talked about, discussed, reviewed, agreed to, and refined is essential. Without it, confusion and bad feelings cause dysfunction. Within what time frame is one expected to respond to e-mail or phone messages? Is it twenty-four hours? Does the sender indicate the promptness of the response desired, which may vary depending on urgency, and does twenty-four hours mean the sender's twenty-four hours and not the receiver's twenty-four hours? What is the expectation around who should be included in e-mail? Is it just those directly involved in implementing a policy? Is it those who will be impacted by a new policy? Discussions around these precise kinds of issues will pay dividends in lessening opportunities for conflict.

Each of these ten factors plays a strong role in creating an effective team. Managers will help teams grow and develop if they take meeting time to have a discussion about how the group is doing in all areas. Just having the assessment and the dialogue will help team members realize they can shape team functions in positive ways. Strengths will surface as well as areas that need to be developed. Sharing and reconciling different perspectives will help the team grow. Use the following tool, "Factors That Enhance Effective Global Teams," to consider each of these ten factors on your team and note collective areas of strength as well as opportunities for team development. It is best used when a team has at least some history to draw on and can be reused at intervals to check progress.

The more "Almost Always" checks that exist, the more effective the team is. The value in this tool is to begin conversation around the factors that can intentionally and strategically enhance team performance. This is by no means an exhaustive list. Rather, it is the beginning point of dialogue. Team members may add factors that they think are important. For any of the items that have a strong "Almost Never" response, the first step is to discuss the consequences of this behavior on the team's productivity and dynamics. Have the group determine some changes they will commit to and agree to a follow-up discussion in three months to check the team's progress.