This post is part of an ongoing series to help readers leverage insights into the eight dimensions of culturally based work style differences, so you can raise your own global business productivity.
The Group Dimension is fascinating, especially when you work in a multi-cultural workplace with people from different ends of the spectrum: Individualistic or Group-oriented. I’m a culturally Individualistic American, but have been on global conference calls where the Japanese team put us on mute so they could privately come to consensus before giving us their opinion. After initial surprise, we learned rather quickly that it was to the benefit of all if we scheduled extra time to allow for our partners’ consensus-building.
As all businesses become increasingly global, you can see the effects of different group dynamics more frequently in everyday business interactions. Of course, once you gain some intercultural awareness, it becomes intuitive.
Without such intercultural awareness, however, the Group Dimension may pose some interesting challenges. Group orientation describes which takes priority in the culture: the group or the individual. So, consider the ramifications of questions like these, which are determined by Group orientation:
- · Whose rights are pre-eminent? Do people see their identity as part of a team or do they want to be seen as individuals?
- · How do organizations make decisions—via individual leadership or group consensus?
- · Is group harmony deemed necessary to achieve business goals?
- · How are people recognized and motivated—as individual performers or as teams?
Multi-Cultural Issues in Group-Oriented Global Teams
My colleague, Kris, had first-hand experience attempting to lead a multi-cultural team when she lived in Stockholm. As her team entered the final stages of developing an intensive business training program for management professionals, Kris worked hard to plan a meeting with all the decision-makers. Her credibility was riding on its success.
Ordinarily, she would have invited only the few people who had in-depth knowledge of the subject, but this time she included support staff because of complicated logistics for the event.
Familiar with the Swedish sense of Group orientation and strong egalitarian values, Kris was aware that everyone in the meeting who commented—from the most experienced, academically degreed peer to the newest intern—would expect their opinions to be seriously considered.
Today’s session was the only chance the team could get together for final preparation and Kris had a packed agenda where every moment counted. But at the start of the meeting, one young intern unexpectedly chimed in, “I don’t think you should do it that way. Someone might be offended,” and offered an alternative.
Other colleagues had additional opinions as well; suddenly, Kris’s carefully crafted agenda was falling apart because she hadn’t allowed time for the group to seriously engage in this discussion. She knew that every opinion needed to be explored, and in many cases consensus was necessary.
She couldn’t help but imagine how she would have handled this in the United States, an individualist culture where the discussion leader could end the dialogue and impose her will. Kris was accustomed to soliciting input from knowledgeable colleagues and then making a decision. But, she explained to me, when it works, this type of group dynamic allows you to benefit from the best thinking of many people.
Fortunately, Kris was cross-culturally competent and understood the importance of seeking full group participation. She solicited all the input that the group had to offer, and she slowed down her intense pace. All too often people from Individualistic backgrounds don’t allow for the consensus process. They will quickly lose patience, and while they may succeed in getting their point accepted, it is unlikely they will have the group support they need.
Group orientation, however, is not always intertwined with egalitarianism as it is in Sweden.
How to Recognize Cross-Cultural Differences
In Group cultures, people define themselves by their affiliation to a larger entity’s identity, values, and achievements. They believe that the group is always greater than the sum of its individuals. People look for consensus in decisions. Group societies believe that maintaining harmony in the workplace is both important and beneficial to all. Loyalty to the larger group is paramount and is considered appropriate because the individual is cared for by the group.
At the other end of the continuum, people in Individualistic societies define themselves by personal contributions. These societies encourage people to express their distinctiveness in the way they dress, the things they do, and the way they speak. Laws protect the rights of the individual, focus is on individual achievement, and people may prefer to work and spend time alone. When they’re part of a team, they’ll focus on their individual contribution. They are encouraged to “make it on their own” or to do it “my way.”
In both individualistic and group-oriented cultures, these values are introduced at the earliest stages of life. You can see how pervasive this attitude is when you examine heroes, folk tales, and look at the way children are raised.
The Individualistic culture of the US is a good example. There, kindergarten children are taught to stand in front of their class for “show-and-tell,” to talk about something special and important to them. This not only establishes that children should get comfortable calling attention to themselves, but also that their unique experiences are of interest to others. Contrast this with Japanese kindergartners, who will consult with each other when asked to draw their families.
American children are raised on the story, "The Little Engine That Could", a tale about a small locomotive engine that dreams of pulling a freight train over a mountain. The Little Engine wishes he could be big and strong, but he believes that if he tries hard enough—regardless of insurmountable odds—he can achieve his dreams on his own. One day, the other locomotives aren’t available to do the job. The Little Engine must pull all the cars laden with children’s toys and deliver them over the mountain.
“I-think-I-can. I-think-I-can. I-think-I-can” is the Little Engine’s mantra. Sure enough, he delivers the toys in time and the children are happy. The moral? For children in the US, if you believe in yourself and work exceptionally hard, you will succeed single-handedly. It teaches individuality, optimism, and self-reliance. By contrast, in the more Group-oriented French society, children’s stories featuring the little girl, Madeleine, show that her individuality and tenaciousness can sometimes get her into trouble. Only her cleverness saves her.
Group Dynamics in Cross-Cultural Business
Group orientation impacts the way people work together and how they can be motivated and rewarded. How do managers make assignments and how do people solve problems--individually or as a group process?
Multi-cultural recruiting, interviewing and interacting. It’s also crucial to understand Group orientation’s role in recruiting, interviewing, and interacting with management. Obviously, it would be inappropriate for someone in a group-focused society to talk about his or her individual, academic, or work-related achievements. Conversely, qualified candidates in an Individualistic culture will be clear, even outspoken about their own accomplishments and perhaps never acknowledge the contributing roles that others played. (I was once told by a Norwegian recruiter to help my US colleagues by telling them to “tone down” the self-promotion in their resumes.)
Culturally astute managers who have cross cultural competence will quickly recognize Group or Individualistic styles and find ways to determine the candidate’s or employee’s readiness to take on tasks in question or to join a particular Group-oriented or Individualistic team. For example, a recruiter must evaluate a Group-focused candidate in a Group context. You’ll want to explore how work was accomplished and successes achieved in their teams. (This isn’t easy for people from Individualistic societies.) If a recruiting manager doesn’t understand the Group Dimension, he or she can make profound errors, such as overlooking excellent talent because they’re too self-effacing to promote themselves at the expense of their team.
Incentivizing talent across cultures. In individualistic countries, employees are singled out for praise and recognition with employee-of-the-month programs, individual achievement awards, and individual incentive compensation. These employees serve as role models that motivate others and they’re proud to be singled out for acknowledgment. The shared belief is that individuals are responsible for their actions. Motivation in individualistic cultures is related to power and achievement. People are hired, fired or promoted because of their skills, past achievement and technical know-how.
The opposite holds true for cultures that are Group oriented. There, singling out an individual could be embarrassing and might demoralize the individual as well as the group. Since success is dependent on a cooperative effort, it would be completely inappropriate to single out one individual for praise or recognition.
Decision-making. To a large extent, business is based on the ability to manage risk and make effective decisions. Individualistic societies reward and value Individualistic decision makers—people who have the skill to evaluate risk and data, including input from others, and make quick decisions. Even when a decision cannot be made individually, these cultures are happy to go along with a majority decision, even if the minority doesn’t agree.
Group-oriented societies take time to be sure that all members of the team who will be impacted are considered. Since harmony among the group members is critical, they attempt to come to consensus so that everyone feels satisfied with the outcome.
In the end, though, it doesn’t matter whether you’re from a Group-oriented or Individualistic society. To make the most of your opportunities in global business, you must be cross-culturally competent and consider your colleagues’ needs in the context of multi-cultural diversity. To be most effective, take cues from your surroundings, observe the behavior of the people around you, and adjust your work style to meet the needs of any situation.
