tma world viewpoint 13 taking off the mask

Taking off the Mask:

Cultural RISK and Virtual Teams

TMA World Viewpoint

Taking off the Mask: Cultural RISK and Virtual Teams

From phone interviews with members of a global virtual team (I’ll call them the Z-team)

I knew that most of the work to be done with them was related to

recognizing and managing the impact of cultural differences.

RECOGNIZE

the

IMPACT of cultural differences

and

STRATEGIZE best options while applying

self-management

KNOW-HOW

They were all smart people and they knew the

fundamentals of good teamwork,

but they were lacking in an awareness of how

unexamined cultural orientations were

influencing their interactions for the worse.

The distance and lack of physical contact among

the members was masking – but not eliminating

– cultural differences.


My task was to lead them toward a higher level of performance. Here’s how.

I define the cultural RISK process as a four-phase approach to cross-

cultural management.

First, you must be able to Recognize the cultural differences at work in a

situation.

RECOGNIZE

the


and


self-management

KNOW-HOW

Secondly, you need to understand the actual or

potential Impact of those differences on how

you work together.

Third, you need to Strategize about the best

way forward, and lastly you need to apply

Know-How for implementing your strategy.


Let me illustrate this process by using the Z-team as an example.

RECOGNIZE

Worldprism™ dimensions

JAPANESE members

FRENCH members

RELATING Group focus Implicit communication Formal social etiquette

Individual focus Explicit communication Casual social etiquette

REGULATING Risk-avoiding Punctuality Bottom-up

Risk-taking Flexibility Top-down

REASONING Concrete, fact-based thinking Linear process Preference for high level of detail

Conceptual, logical thinking Spiral process Preference for general principles

RECOGNIZE

IMPACT

STRATEGIZE

KNOW-HOW

Utilizing the Worldprism™ Profiler model of cultural

differences, I saw several areas that were creating havoc.

Let me summarize some of the major differences in the chart

below:


Before working with the team to identify cultural differences, many of the internal

tensions were seen as personality-based. By de-personalizing many of the differences and

putting them into the culture arena it was possible to discuss the tensions in a more

objective and productive way. Individuals didn’t need to feel under personal attack.

RECOGNIZE

the


and


self-management

KNOW-HOW

IMPACT

It should be obvious that there were significant

cultural differences on the team. The next step

in the process was to identify the actual and

potential impact of these differences on team

collaboration.

For example, on activities like participation,

problem-solving and decision making, running

meetings, information sharing, goal setting and

planning, conflict management, and

communication


IMPACT

One area in which I could see a major problem on the Z-team was in

goal-setting and planning.

At the end of a team-building session, the French were very happy

to set objectives and milestone dates.

For them, the dates would only be a guideline; there was always room for some

flexibility.

The Japanese members became very uncomfortable. First, all the stakeholders

impacted by the decisions were not present and, therefore, no consensus could be

reached.

RECOGNIZE

IMPACT

STRATEGIZE

KNOW-HOW


IMPACT

Given a lack of consensus, it was also, impossible to commit to any date.

Once a date had been agreed to – in their eyes – it was fixed.

It would cause great loss of face to miss the date. There was a completely

different perception of risk.

The reality on the team was that the Europeans would set goals and make plans

while the Asian members would avoid, withdraw, be vague and non-committal.

Conversations would go around in circles with each side thinking the other was crazy.

RECOGNIZE

IMPACT

STRATEGIZE

KNOW-HOW

Taking off the Mask: cultural RISK and Virtual Teams

STRATEGIZE

In any cross-cultural interaction, there are always strategic

options. One side can:

Accommodate to the other (“I’ll make these adaptations to work

effectively with you.”)

Assimilate (“I’ll do it your way.”) Blend (“Let’s mix both approaches.”) Create (“Let’s find a new way that can work for both of us.”) Separate (“You do it your way, and we’ll do it our way.”)

RECOGNIZE

IMPACT

STRATEGIZE

KNOW-HOW

The key criteria when choosing an approach should be which strategy offers

the greatest potential for creating value for the business


STRATEGIZE In terms of the Z-team, the chosen short-term strategy for moving

forward in goal setting and planning was to assimilate – the French

to the Japanese approach.

There was no way the Europeans were going to change the very deep-rooted, consensual

approach in the Asian business.

To fight against it would simply increase resistance.

The medium term strategy was to work together to find

a good blend of approaches – one that handled lower risk

items differently from the higher risk ones (ones needing

a higher level of consensus and planning).

RECOGNIZE

IMPACT

STRATEGIZE

KNOW-HOW


KNOW-HOW

The last stage in the process was to develop

the skills needed to implement the strategies

successfully.

Some of this skill-building on the Z-team had

actually begun in the Recognize phase,

particularly developing cultural perceptiveness

and empathy.

Additional skills needed on the Z-team included

spoken and written cross-cultural

communication, and win-win negotiating.

RECOGNIZE

IMPACT

STRATEGIZE

KNOW-HOW


KNOW-HOW

As global companies seek to leverage their

internal or outsourced distributed talent, global

virtual teams are becoming the norm.

So much goes unobserved and unspoken on

cross-border virtual teams; differences tend to

hide under a mask created by distance and

impersonal technology.

Opportunities for discussing the actual or

potential impact of cultural differences on team

success are often only created after damage

has already been done – when the silence is

recognized to be resentment rather than

agreement.

RECOGNIZE

IMPACT

STRATEGIZE

KNOW-HOW

Being proactive with the cultural RISK process can help reduce the risk.

To learn more about how TMA World can

help your organization, please contact us at

[email protected]

or visit

www.tmaworld.com/our_solutions.cfm

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.tmaworld.com/our_solutions.cfm

tma world viewpoint 13 taking off the mask

Business

virtual teamsknow

cultural differences

cultural risk

goal setting

differences

risk

impact

process