Overview
Nearly everyone has experienced struggles when communicating with another individual, leading to misunderstandings, frustration or even hurt. Every individual has a different mode of communication, set of values, work-ethic or perspective on relationships, often originating from their primary culture and environment. When working in an international setting this can become an obstacle or it can be exploited as a strength. Gaining an intercultural competence by understanding, empathising and adjusting to interpersonal differences will not only lead to personal development but also foster ideas, innovation, and broaden perspectives on the subject at hand.
In the following case model an international consultancy firm was examined to understand how cultural differences are experienced and handled within the company. An interview was conducted with a consultant who focuses on “advising companies and IT transformation” (personal communication, 2024). Some of the interview inquiries focused on: What cultural limitations are present in the work environment? How is the right of fairness exercised in the multicultural environment? How is miscommunication mitigated? How is the decision process influenced due to differences in the Hofstede Value Dimensions? What are best practice examples of the organisation to ensure intercultural communication?.
To effectively analyse the interview findings, the Geert Hofstede Model and the Erin Meyer Culture Map have been used. The Geert Hofstede Model compares cultures across six dimensions: power distance, individualism, motivation towards achievement and success, uncertainty avoidance, long-term orientation, and indulgence (Hofstede Insights, 2024). The Erin Meyer Culture map is a system of 8 scales including: confrontation, evaluating, persuading, leading, deciding, trusting, disagreeing, and scheduling (Read, 2021). Every culture can be placed somewhere along the spectrum, thereby identifying how their tendencies may influence communication. Lastly the knowledge acquired at the International Criminal Court (ICC) concerning the Requirements of Fairness, will be applied to this case model. The Requirements of Fairness refer to the ICC ensuring a fair trial for both the accused and for the victim. In this case the notion of fairness will be examined in the organisation context.
The following case model will first examine the interview findings according to the Hofstede Model and Erin Meyer Culture Map, outcomes on how the organisation has addressed cultural differences and lastly the case will display possible solutions to intercultural communication issues within the company.
Hofstede Dimensions
The Hofstede country comparison (Fig 1) includes the Netherlands (green), as the interviewee resides and works in the Netherlands. The Dutch culture will be compared to the Indian culture (blue), as the interviewees current communication focuses on consulting a Indian business client.
Fig 1. (Country Comparison – Culture in the WorkplaceTM, 2024)
Power Distance:
Visible in Fig 1, the Netherlands display a low power distance (38) and India a high power distance (77). The interviewee’s Indian business client is a large customer with a rigid company structure, with a “very authoritarian working method” and formal power positions which are “difficult to break” (personal communication, 2024). From the onset the two parties are used to a different working environment when it comes to decision-making and leadership. Our interviewee claims his Dutch colleagues to be more “comfortable with a certain piece of their own authority and do not necessarily have to be dependent on someone else” (personal communication, 2024). According to Hofstede the Indian attitude within a corporate environment can be described as “dependent on the boss or the power holder for direction, with a acceptance of unequal rights between the power-privileged and those who are lesser down in the pecking order”, meaning that employees anticipate directions on their functions and responsibilities (Hofstede Insights, 2024). It is inhibitive for Indians to diverge from the instruction given to them from authority figures. Whilst the Dutch corporate culture is characterised by decentralisation, reliance on the team, managers consulting their employees and participative communication (Hofstede Insights, 2024). It is inhibitive for the Dutch to not consult their team before making a decision.
Individualism:
The Netherlands and our interviewee, exercises a high level of individualism (80), while India is focused on group orientation (48) (Fig 1). Our interviewee states that his Dutch colleagues are more likely to “take ownership” and “contribute new ideas” by offering ideas without being asked. This displays their tendency and appreciation for working alone on a task or project, making plans and taking action independently of their teammates or colleagues. According to Hofstede the Indian culture has a collectivist side with a “preference for belonging to a larger social framework”, being rejected by social groups leaves them “with a sense of emptiness” (Hofstede Insights, 2024). Therefore the recruitment within an organisation is often based on the relationship between individuals.
Time Orientation & Uncertainty Avoidance:
Hofstede describes Indian culture to be forgiving when it comes to punctuality whereas Dutch culture favour a long-term orientation with a score of 67 (Hofstede Insights, 2024). This goes hand in hand with the country’s uncertainty avoidance, India has a tolerance for ambiguity (40) and the Netherlands a need for certainty (53) (Fig 1). It is inhibitive for the Dutch to steer away from a plan or framework. Indians do not fear circumventing rules or plans and possible unknowns emerging after the fact, whereas Dutch individuals favour rigid codes and are intolerant to a lack of security (Hofstede Insights, 2024). This theory is reflected by our interviewee, who claims “one of the biggest challenges we have is setting certain deadlines and setting a time period in which a project must be completed” creating a “barrier that occasionally causes it to take a lot of time” (personal communication, 2024).
Erin Meyer Culture Map
Confrontation:
To further illustrate the differences in Dutch and Indian culture the Culture Map by Erin Meyer is used, specifically illustrating the type of communication. The Dutch are confrontational whereas Indians avoid confrontation. Our interviewee has indicated that consultancy projects are often impacted by the Indian “yes culture”, meaning they “will never really say no” (personal communication, 2024). Our Interviewee claims “If I ask if this could be done within 2 weeks, they will never say no, while in reality that 2 weeks is very difficult.” (personal communication, 2024). It is inhibitive for Indians to disagree, contradict or confront another individual. The underlying reason being that Indians believe it is inappropriate and possibly damaging to a groups dynamic to be confrontational (Kua, 2024). Contrastingly the Dutch colleagues tend to view disagreements or debates as positive and beneficial for an organisation’s culture.
Fig 2. Erin Meyer Culture Map – Confrontation (Kua, 2024)
Communicating:
According to Erin Meyer the Netherlands operates with a low context communication characterized by being “precise, simple and clear”, and the Indian culture with a high context communication that is “layered and nuanced” therefore “messages are often implied but not plainly expressed” (Kua, 2024). The interviewee reinforces this claim displaying an issue of miscommunication between the Dutch consultant and Indian client. The interviewee claims that statements (verbal/written), may result in multiple possible interpretations.
Fig 3. Erin Meyer Culture Map – Communicating (Kua, 2024)
Outcome
As evident in the previous analysis there are a multitude of cultural differences between the Dutch consultant and the Indian client. The interviewee has revealed their awareness for these differences and several strategies to address these differences in order to mitigate misunderstandings.
Empowering Fairness
The French consultancy firm favours a low power distance and welcomes individualism, in order to foster an equal and fair working environment. Their strategy is to lower the threshold of decision-making and authority by having informal conversations including questions “how are you or how was your weekend” (personal communication, 2024). This fosters an environment in which all parties feel comfortable. Likewise the interviewee divides the project “into short pieces, ensures that the organisation is more agile and that people simply take more authority themselves” fostering individualism by encouraging the client to take ownership (personal communication, 2024). Thereby the company ensures that everyone is able to contribute to the project regardless of their perception on authority, decision-making rights or procedures.
Stimulating effective Planning:
Furthermore the company is able to stimulate effective planning, although the two countries have different approaches to meeting deadlines. The interviewee’s strategy is to make 4 week plans of what should be achieved instead of a year-long plan, allowing to quickly respond to developments and enhance the ability to generate short term wins (personal communication, 2024).
Clarifying Communication:
Lastly the consultancy firm has experienced miscommunication due to low vs. high-context communication. The interviewee’s current solution is to “try to understand each other”, through continuous iterations of written or spoken text. The consultant describes this as “time-consuming”, thus a “framework for them so that they can do their work well” is the most efficient (personal communication, 2024).
Possible solutions
Although the international consultancy firm uses strategies to ensure an effective intercultural collaboration, there are aspects that could lead to a more efficient and fair working environment for all individuals involved.
Interpretation & Understanding:
The unsolved issue that the interviewee mentioned is that clients’ first language is often a different one than English, although their communication takes place in English clients often have a strong accent “which sometimes makes it very difficult” (personal communication, 2024). A translator or interpreter for the consultant and client communication is not available. A possible solution to understanding clients acoustically and the underlying meanings of their statements is to utilise an interpreter. Interpreters would be able to provide an accurate translation without altering the meaning or tone of the client as well as providing the information in a neutral and objective manner. This could enhance other areas which the interviewee struggled with such as setting deadlines and empowering individuals to take ownership.
Trust and Comfort:
Another method can be to organise a virtual ice breaker at the beginning of the project. Although the consultant and client are not physically present they can learn about their personalities via team with question rounds or mini activities. This will create a comfortable and trustworthy environment, enhancing decision-making and understanding amongst each other.
Authors
Dorothea Maria Rest
International Business Administrations (fast-track), Semester 4
Emma Misaljevic
International Business, Semester 2, Block 4
Natasja Vestering
Accountancy, Semester 2, Block 4
Fariq van der Stede
International Business, Semester 4
Zino Veldt
Bedrijfskunde, Semester 2, Block 4
Maximus Walther
International Business, Semester 2, Block 4