8.4. THE FIVE-FOCUS PERFORMANCE DIALOGUE MODEL
The nucleus of a global performance review remains the real-time interaction between the manager and the employee. The Five-Focus Performance Dialogue Model takes the SSI Model of Chapter 2 and applies it to the context of a face-to-face performance review. Skill in cross-cultural communication, as outlined in Chapter 3, is fundamental for both the manager and the employee when conducting any GPMS. Each of the five areas of the Five-Focus Performance Dialogue Model will support global diversity. During each stage, the manager and employee identify parts of the diversity dialogue that will support a strong understanding of diversity.
8.4.1. Interpersonal Focus
The first focus acknowledges the manager and subordinate's cultures of origin and the complexity of their personal global identity, as identified in their SSI personal profile. Before a performance review, both rater and ratee should use the SSI Model to construct their own SSI profile and thus create a baseline from which they can openly acknowledge and communicate their diverse perspectives. Managers and subordinates should acknowledge their cultural dissimilarities before discussing any work-related issues. Managers frequently believe that sharing a common corporate culture precludes global diversity disconnects. They may also believe that sharing identities drawn from the internal and external dimensions of diversity, that is, sharing the same gender, race, nationality, school affiliation, and so forth, brings an immediate level of comfort. There is only limited truth to that belief. The English-speaking French manager needs to put the Korean subordinate at ease by demonstrating not only an understanding of their shared hierarchical heritages but also a respect for the differences in social behaviors between managers and subordinates. The American and the Brazilian who both received their MBAs from Wharton need to discuss a way to talk of the things they "do," that is, their performance and accomplishments—the American model in which they were both trained. They also need to talk about who they are, their "being," that is, their families and cultural interests—the Brazilian model of relationship and jeito.
Using appropriate greetings, monitoring the pacing of information, and setting an appropriate physical distance between manager and subordinate are a few strategies for setting the necessary tone. However, the need goes beyond external civilities. Managers and subordinates, during the opening moments of the review, need to acknowledge workplace biases and strengths that are drawn from different national performance standards. Each brings a different and valid perspective. The manager's role is to validate differences drawn from an employee's uniqueness and position them in the corporation. The employee's role is to communicate his or her experience for it to be used effectively in the company. During the initial focus of the interview, articulate and discuss the value of difference. One cannot be culturally inclusive in the global workplace without talking of difference. A tool that has been helpful is to describe a range of behaviors and state the positive outcome those behaviors have had for the company. People can communicate directly with one another whether those behaviors and outcomes are similar or different in their cultures. This type of dialogue opens the door for identifying and using differences as well as increasing the confidence of managers and subordinates to talk of difference. A manager might ask a subordinate if American directness can frequently sound like criticism in Thailand; an Indian subordinate might inquire how being quiet will be interpreted in the German-headquartered corporate culture.
8.4.2. Global Focus
The manager's obligation is to position the employee's work in the broader global context of the company. Many operating units and businesses have developed their own nation-centric and function-focused performance models. The best qualities of those models are frequently patched together by corporate HR in conjunction with the headquarters' model into a "global" system. Rarely do corporations have a truly global design, since the phenomenon of global companies is relatively new and little research has been done on the overall structure of global companies, much less on performance tools. Many performance management systems do not reflect the employee's contribution to the global organization per se. Instead, they emphasize the immediacy of a specific contribution to the local environment, be it a factory, a region, or a nation. This may be due to the manager's inability to identify a specific contribution or an employee's lack of interest in the importance of a contribution to the broader corporate context. When corporations fail to connect local performance with global performance, they unconsciously perpetuate intra-company regionalism and nationalism.
A manager can stimulate diversity of thought and practice. The manager first identifies a specific subordinate's contribution to the local organization. Then he or she highlights the value of that accomplishment for peers who are working in similar functions but different global settings. Doing so allows the manager and subordinate to discuss significant accomplishments, with their inherent styles, processes, and thought patterns, and consider their global application. Through this process, a manager transforms nationally generated knowledge into a potentially global intellectual resource. This is also a two-way street. The employee, by listening to other national approaches to his or her position, learns alternative performance standards that enrich the job. Applications too often stop at national borders. The inclusion of this rather simple step within a performance review will do more good than a host of global awareness programs, since it specially targets an employee's work and its transborder impact. A user-friendly data-collection system is needed to process this information across regional and national borders.
8.4.3. Functional Focus
The functional focus of the Five-Focus Performance Dialogue Model centers on the specifics of the employee's current position as seen in a national context. Managers who come from different cultural backgrounds or who are using material from performance management systems for promotions must understand the performance standards and styles of a specific country of operation. They must understand the context in which the performance was generated. Performance styles and outcomes are influenced not only by cultural context but also by the differences in organizational infrastructure that affect productivity. Knowing context, both hard and soft, is necessary. A line manager's projection quotas may be down, not because of management skills, but due to continued electrical outages, be they in California or Guangzhou, China. It would be unfair to label this worker "underperforming," although that's true from a numbers perspective. In actuality, the manager may have performed above the standard with limited infrastructure supports. Local managers would know this information. Global managers may not. One breakdown in global diversity thinking can occur because we assume that our home infrastructure, with its levels of education, technology, and organizational capability, exists elsewhere.
8.4.4. Integration Focus
The manager's goal is to highlight the way an employee has integrated his or her distinctive diversity advantage into the workplace. An open dialogue enables employees to talk about their specific contributions as expressions of their diversity. The manager and employee will discuss the most appropriate subsets of the employee's SSI profile as they relate to performance and the manager/subordinate relationship. Key to this model is the belief that one's diversity profile is an asset to the organization. The tone of the presentation is important. (Refer to Chapter 2 and the Continuum of Diversity Development.) Clearly, the manager and employee are attempting to strategically use the value of diversity in bringing out the uniqueness of the employee. The dialogue is not intended to discuss why the person's diversity has been excluded but rather to verbalize the positive assumption of inclusion. The manager encourages the employee in
Articulating the values of the core civilization that have influenced his or her work;
Listing effective expressions of preferred national business styles that have enhanced his or her performance;
Communicating fulfillment of the norms and standards of the greater corporate culture;
Linking specific skills and unique competencies learned through the employee's societal formation;
Empowering specific social, genetic, and ethnic perspectives in the workplace; and
Acknowledging the contributions of the employee's individual personality.
A word of caution to the manager. Before and during this focus, a manager should identify the subordinate's goals, understand the employee's SSI diversity profile, and understand where they can be reconciled within the organization. A manager is required to model and communicate commitment to global diversity. By monitoring his or her own personality, individual identification, and societal dimensions, he or she will be able to effectively engage in a performance management session.
In global companies, no one has sufficient intuitive understanding or self-knowledge. That is why being a global manager is so difficult. Managers and employees are always learning and making mistakes. They will need to rely on the constructs contained in the SSI Model to discern where biases as well as cultural strengths exist. To prepare for a performance review, each manager should identify a peer who understands the different core civilizational and national diversity of his or her subordinates. This could be a peer within the company or someone in a professional association who can serve as a coach. For example, a female Finnish white manager of a male African American employee has developed her understanding of "whiteness" based on the historical context of Nordic Europe. Before entering the performance session, she needs to speak to a white American to understand how color is understood in the United States. The Finnish manager would need to understand what "whiteness" means from the perspective of a black American before engaging in this process. Cultural context for gender would also need to be understood. For example, a Cantonese-heritaged American manager who supervises a People's Republic of China employee would need to understand why his subordinate does not consider him Asian, but rather American.
8.4.5. Recognition and Development Focus
Recognition mechanisms need to reflect not only national standards but also global ones. Collective societies such as Korea and Japan require group-based recognition for team members. Strongly individualistic societies such as the United States seek impersonal objective criteria for measuring success, as long as a person is recognized as succeeding or "winning." The American at a recognition meeting proudly stands to receive an award; the Chinese stands reluctantly and acknowledges the contribution of others.
Countries that are "masculine" in tone, that is, countries that are oriented toward assertiveness and materialism, such as the United States, Australia, and the U.K., encourage competitive careers and aggressive workplace performance. The employee who wins the game gets the trophy. Monetary incentives and career-advancing promotions are common recognition tools.
Countries that are more "feminine," that is, those that focus on relationship and social interdependence, such as Sweden and France, shy from competition in favor of cooperative workplace behaviors that foment stability. Rewards that support quality-of-life and work/life balance are highly valued. Flexible time, varied workplace locations, club memberships, and holiday reward trips are important. Recognition systems must be aligned with the national and cultural orientation of employees, balancing the individual and collective, masculine and feminine. Using a principle-based orientation, managers and human resource professionals need to assure the suitability of corporate reward systems.
Some nationals are comfortable with a written or oral statement of recognition and are content to manage their own development. Other employees feel affirmed when their manager sets specific goals so they know what needs to be done in a coming year. For example, a French employee may feel recognized by inclusion in an elite group, which guarantees future advancement. A Hong Kong manager may be affirmed when offered a club membership that signals to his peers that he is valued by the corporation. Employees in individualistic organizations feel rewarded by receiving higher levels of training and development that support their self-managed professional development. Employees who are collectivists value a mentoring relationship with their boss as their reward. Understanding the preferred national reward system will enable managers to provide appropriate recognition.