Many, perhaps most, companies operating globally don’t address the impact of cultural differences on cross-border collaboration. But even if they did, they would have difficulty finding competent support. Let’s take a look at the options:
Consulting Firms
We know the names of the major strategy consulting firms. BCG, McKinsey, and others. And we know of the so-called Big Four: Deloitte, EY, KPMG, PwC.
They come into companies, analyze the situation and recommend change: direction, structure, products, services, business models, and internal processes. But none of them help global companies to address culture. There are reasons for this:
First, the so-called soft factors are not in their DNA. If you can’t quantify something, then it is not relevant. Second is scalability. If they did take culture into account their methods would have to be modified based on the country where applied.
Third is implementation. If strategy consultants were to assist with post-merger integration, they would have to transition from interacting with executive management to interacting with employees on the working levels, where collaboration succeeds or fails.
Business Schools
We all know the big-name business schools: Harvard, Stanford, UPenn, and many other top-tier schools. And in Europe there are the elite universities: HEC, IESE, Insead, London Business School, Mannheim, St. Gallen.
None of them address the influence of culture on cross-border organisations. Neither in their executive education programs, nor in their consulting services. And rarely do the MBA programs touch the subject of culture. Like the strategy consultants there are reasons:
The first is lack of expertise. Professors lack country culture expertise. Let’s think about it, how does one develop that expertise? Not with the help of theory. There is only one way. It is a very long and arduous path. There are no shortcuts. You have to go deep and broad. And over a long period of time.
The second reason is their business model. If global companies have difficulties addressing national culture, how much more will the business schools struggle with it? And then there is the practical question about what cultures to build expertise? Which countries should be chosen?
Change Management
Most change management experts have studied business or psychology or the humanities. Many have lived and worked abroad. They have experienced cultural differences.
Their skill set is valuable. They grasp quickly the change needed within the companies of their clients. They are familiar with how companies operate. They are good at structuring the conversation.
However, they have a major weakness. They, too, lack country-culture expertise. They don’t focus on culture, but on the process of change. They are discussion moderators.
Organizational Development
Organizational development is a generic term which includes change management. Like their colleagues in change, the OD approach depends on methodology. It is also their hope that people – the client – will talk about culture in order to understand each other.
Unfortunately, like their colleagues in change, OD-experts simply don’t have the required country-culture expertise. Neither in the differences between countries nor in understanding the impact of those differences on cross-border collaboration.
Intercultural Trainers
Intercultural trainers remain on the theoretical level. It is not enough to describe Germany as a so-called low-context communication culture and the U.S. as a high-context communication culture. Their analysis is rather shallow, often flat out wrong. In some cases both, shallow and wrong.
Under certain circumstances intercultural trainers can be helpful as an introduction, but they are of no help with specific problems. Companies should become very nervous when interculturalists begin talking about cultural dimensions such as power distance, individualism vs. collectivism, masculinity vs. feminity.
If cultures were so simple that it was enough to describe a few dimensions then there would most likely be an app on every smartphone which magically allows culture to understand each other and to collaborate. That app does not exists. Nor will it ever exist.
Language Instructors
Of all of the groups thusfar mentioned only the language instructors can be of assistance. Because they build the bridge via words. It is words, and the thought behind them, which enable insight.
But language instructors also have a deficit. They can’t go beyond words. Word history is a great tool of analysis. It can give valuable insight. And is certainly fascinating.
These folks are educators and not businesspeople. They seldom understand companies. And seldom do they understand the international environment in which the companies are operating.
Back to Thoughts.
