assess their personal response, we have therefore extended the original forced-choice questions to include options to reject reconcil - 44 BUSINESS ACROSS CULTURES The car and the pedestrian You are a passenger in a car driven by a close friend. He hits a pedes - trian. You know he was going at least 35 miles per hour in an area of the city where the maximum speed allowed is 20 miles per hour. There are no witnesses. His lawyer says that if you are prepared to testify under oath that he was only driving at 20 miles per hour it may save him from serious consequences. How would you act in this case? 1. There is a general obligation to tell the truth as a witness. I will not perjure myself before the court. Nor should any real friend expect this from me. 2. There is a general obligation to tell the truth in court, and I will do so, but I owe my friend an explanation and all the social and financial support I can organize. 3. My friend in trouble always comes first. I am not going to desert him before a court of strangers based on some abstract principle. 4. My friend in trouble gets my support, whatever his testimony, yet I would urge him to find in our friendship the strength that allows us both to tell the truth. 5. I will testify that my friend was going a little faster than the allowed speed and say that it was difficult to read the speedo- meter. iation (answers 1 and 3), compromise (answer 5), and reconcile from the universal to the particular (answer 2) or from the particular to the universal (answer 4). In this way we can assess both the cultural orientation of the individ - ual in the way that they approach dilemmas (more universalistic or more particularistic) and their propensity to reconcile. Let’s stress again that the central aim of this book is to help readers to improve and develop their ability to deal with dilemmas at both the personal level (dilemmas faced when working with other people) and at the level of the organization. As we’ve said, the capacity to reconcile dilemmas is how we define intercultural lead- ership competence and is a direct measure of leadership potential relevant to the twenty-first century. Thus the early model in which we would place a respondent along a conventional linear profiling scale: Figure 2.5 Linear profile is replaced by a two-dimensional assessment which shows the degree to which they choose the universalistic or particularistic approach when facing dilemmas, and the degree to which they achieve the reconciliation of these dilemmas (see Figure 2.6). Whilst the above enables you to recognize your own orientation for how you start to approach dilemmas, you now need to consider how you “finish” in dealing with them. Do you end by rejecting other ori - entations (low competence) or end by successfully reconciling opposite orientations (high competence)? 45 THE ORGANIZATION OF MEANING By combining questions that follow the logic of the above example, we have produced scales of intercultural leadership competence for each dimension, and this is the basis of our new ILAP InterCultural Leadership Assessment Profiling instrument (see www.cultureforbusiness.com). It is likely that the degree to which you reconcile is not the same for each cultural dimension. So consider those dimensions where your propensity to reconcile is lower. This model gives you a strategy to focus your attention on which dimensions you need to consider first to increase your effectiveness. If you can achieve this successfully, you are well on the way to a shared understanding with new busi- ness partners and a framework for developing your leadership competence. Our research evidence from these instruments in our new reconcilia - tion database confirms that intercultural competence, as defined by the propensity to reconcile dilemmas, correlates directly with 360° peer assessment of bottom line business performance and is a key characteristic of effective leaders. Organizations that have leaders with this competence at the individual level are effective at the cor - porate level in growing and surviving across the world in the global marketplace. 46 BUSINESS ACROSS CULTURES Figure 2.6 Non-linear profile We can now follow this same logic through the remainder of the value dimensions. INDIVIDUALISM VERSUS COMMUNITARIANISM The second of our dimensions covering how people relate to others concerns the conflict between what each of us wants as an individ - ual, and the interests of the group to which we belong. Do we relate to others by discovering what each one of us individually wants and then trying to negotiate the differences, or do we place ahead of this some shared concept of the public and collective good? The 65,000 managers who have answered the following question have revealed their response to this dilemma. Two people were discussing ways in which one could improve the quality of life. a: One said, “It is obvious that if one has as much freedom as possible and the maximum opportunity to develop oneself, then the quality of one’s life will improve as a result.” b: The other said, “If the individual continuously takes care of his fellow human beings the quality of life will improve for everyone, even if it obstructs individual freedom and individual development.” With which of the two answers do you agree most? Figure 2.7 shows the percentage of people who chose answer “a” (individual freedom) We all go through these cycles, but starting from different points and conceiving of them as means or ends. The individualist culture sees the individual as the end and improvements to collective arrange - ments as the means to achieve it. The communitarian culture sees the group as its end and improvements to individual capacities as a 47 THE ORGANIZATION OF MEANING means to that end. Yet if the relationship is truly circular the decision to label one element as an end and another as a means is arbitrary. By definition circles never end; every end is also the means to another goal. The effective international leader or manager will recognize that individualism finds its fulfillment in service to the group, while group goals are of demonstrable value to individuals, only if those individuals are consulted and participate in the process of develop - ing them. The reconciliation is not easy, but it is possible. INDIVIDUALISM AND COMMUNITARIANISM BY RELIGION As can be observed there are major differences around the globe. Data mining shows that country is again the most discriminating variable. 48 BUSINESS ACROSS CULTURES Figure 2.7 Individualism versus communitarianism (collectivism): percentage opting for individual freedom Entropy Individualism– Communitarianism Lowest (most important variable) Country Religion Industry Education Age Gender Job function Highest (least important variable) Corporate Climate/Culture During our entropy analysis we found that religion was the second major variable that explained the variance of the Individualism score. Differences are not surprising, with Judaism and Protestantism scoring as the most individualistic and Hinduism and Buddhism the most communitarian. Again, the nationality of the person cannot explain all the differences (see Figure 2.8). An alliance of the R&D activities of a large international oil company operating in the Netherlands with their Japanese counterparts led to an interesting discussion on how to implement a reward structure. The alliance involved predominantly Dutch, British, American, Ger - mans, and Japanese who all needed to work in multicultural teams. Let’s review the options. An individual bonus scheme could be implemented which would stimulate the Americans and British to be even more competitive. The communitarian Japanese and Germans would be severely demotivated by this type of reward system. Alternatively we could design and implement a team bonus. Great for the Japanese. But would it motivate the Anglo Saxons? No way. 49 THE ORGANIZATION OF MEANING So why not take a compromise and have a mixed system of 50 per- cent variable pay based on team performance and 50 percent on individual bonus? Half of the group might still go for one end while the rest might go for the other one. However, in this actual case, the leadership successfully sought and achieved reconciliation. For the first time in its history, the organiza - tion installed a reward structure where a mixed system of team and individual performance were included, but individuals could only get a bonus when teams voted them as the best team players. Addi - tionally, teams were asked to make presentations on how they had nurtured individual excellence. The audience voted on the best team. This system was successfully installed and is an example of co-opetition, the art of both competing for cooperation, and cooper - ating for better competition. Figure 2.9 summarizes this reconciliation. 50 BUSINESS ACROSS CULTURES Figure 2.8 Individualism by religion: average score by religion On a macro-level, we have seen this philosophy of co-opetition happen at Sematech, the American Institute for Semiconductor Industries. It was originally established by the US Ministry of Defense, which was worried that South East Asian companies would become leaders in high end microchips. The institute that was formed forced the American sector to cooperate to beat the Japanese and Korean semiconductor industries. To cut a long story short, within five years Intel, AMD, and National Semiconductor almost destroyed the South East Asian semiconductor industry and yet they were originally competitors. It became possible to cooperate amongst the highly competitive organizations. Cooperation was an effective strategy in the then current conditions, in which they could later compete. The beauty of the story is that the former competitors in Asia were invited to join, which they did with great joy. An even greater example of how you can compete to cooperate. 51 THE ORGANIZATION OF MEANING 10/1 Me, Myself and Witholding Information 1/10 The Mediocre Team Developing team co-operation Developing individual competition 0 10 10 Rewarding individuals for team contribution and teams for supporting individual excellence Figure 2.9 Co-opetition NEUTRAL VERSUS AFFECTIVE In relationships between people, reason and emotion both play a role. Which of these will dominate depends on whether we are affective, i.e., display our emotions, in which case we probably get an emo - tional response in return, or whether we are emotionally neutral in our approach. We are still emotional, but don’t reveal it to others. Typically, reason and emotion are of course combined. In expressing ourselves we try to find confirmation of our thoughts and feelings in 52 BUSINESS ACROSS CULTURES International computer chip project Two large companies, one American and the other Japanese, decided to work together to develop a computer memory chip 16 times more powerful than those already on the market. As the joint venture was the brainchild of the American company, it was decided that the Japanese researchers would move to the USA for the duration of the project. One of the first problems that arose was one regarding working space. While the Japan - ese were accustomed to working together in large, open rooms conducive to team work and the sharing of ideas, the American workspace was carved up into small individual offices. The Japanese were uncomfortable with this arrangement because they felt that the exchange of information was cut off, severely limiting the creative ideas that come from working in a group. Although they asked for an open workspace, the Americans were not very responsive and the Japanese ended up getting together in the hallways to discuss their ideas. If these two companies had been able to reconcile their value differences by combining individual work and group work, they could have learned from each other. the response of our audience. When our own approach is highly emotional we are seeking a direct emotional response: “I have the same feelings as you on this subject.” When our own approach is highly neutral we are seeking an indirect response: “Because I agree with your reasoning or proposition, I give you my support.” On both occasions approval is being sought, but different paths are being used to this end. The indirect path gives us emotional support contingent upon the success of an effort of intellect. The direct path allows our feelings about a factual proposition to show through, thereby joining feelings with thoughts in a different way. Here is an example of one of the diagnostic questions exploring this dilemma. In my society, it is considered unprofessional to express emotions overtly. Please select your position on the statement above: (a) Strongly agree (b) Agree (c) Undecided (d) Disagree (e) Strongly disagree Figure 2.10 shows the results we got. Again, country was the single most discriminating variable. The expression of opinions in an open and often passionate way is frequently compounded by the strong personalities of the individu - als concerned into fairly fixed opinions and a sometimes adversarial communication style. It is often necessary to restate the importance of basic communication skills such as listening. 53 THE ORGANIZATION OF MEANING [...]... being ice-cold with no heart; the affective individual is seen as out of 55 BUSINESS ACROSS CULTURES Emotional Americans and grumpy Germans at AMD Neutral cultures often see affective cultures as somewhat childlike and irrational, full of generalized enthusiasm and superficial sloganeering And affective cultures often see neutral cultures as secretive and difficult to read and believe So this difference.. .BUSINESS ACROSS CULTURES Figure 2.10 overtly Neutral versus affective: percentage not expressing emotion This scenario reveals more than the different degrees to which different cultures display emotions It also shows that some cultures prefer to show positive emotions or negative emotions, praise or complain, more readily AFFECTIVE AND NEUTRAL CULTURES ACROSS FUNCTIONS The differences... significant differences across countries SPECIFIC AND DIFFUSE CULTURES ACROSS AGE CATEGORIES There are issues of convergence of cultures (what we have called, for example, “eurovergence”) and differences between generations In addition, we must allow for what simply happens as we grow older and more experienced in dealing with diversity, and presumably have traveled more, for both business and pleasure... than just what you have in the office With which statement do you agree? Again, we find large variations across cultures from 91 percent who would not help the boss in Sweden to 32 percent in China (i.e., 68 67 BUSINESS ACROSS CULTURES percent would help their boss there) Some scores, such as that for Japan, where 71 percent said they would not help, didn’t appear on the face of it to have validity,... such cultures meet, the first essential task for the international manager is to recognize the differences, and to refrain from making any judgments based on emotions, or the lack of them Then the manager must respect that the other person has the right to behave the way that they do Different cultures give different meaning to the display of emotions, which explains why there are differences between cultures. .. OF MEANING Figure 2.11 Average “neutral” score across functions Variety in value differences Entropy Neutral–Affective Lowest (most important variable) Country Industry Job function Religion Corporate Climate /Culture Age Gender Highest (least important variable) Education RECONCILING AFFECTIVE AND NEUTRAL CULTURES Overly affective (expressive) and neutral cultures have problems in relating to each other... 63 BUSINESS ACROSS CULTURES Figure 3.1 Specific versus diffuse: what is public and what is private? Fons writes: When I was in America, I had a friend who was a typical American and who helped me move apartments At the end of the day we were both tired and I said “Bill, would you like a beer?” I turned around, but he was already in my refrigerator For an American a refrigerator is a public space, for. .. specific-oriented cultures, a manager segregates out the (specific) task relationship she or he has with a subordinate and isolates this from other matters But in some cultures, every life space and every level of personality tends to permeate all others An example might help If you asked someone why they had got married, they might answer “to get the best tax advantages.” They would be from a specific culture, ... Doktor” at the butchers That is the opposite model 65 BUSINESS ACROSS CULTURES So we can see the problems faced by Americans going to Europe or Asia and how the meaning they give to initial relationships stops at the border In Europe and Asia, privacy is important You are addressed as “Sie” and not “Du”; “vous” rather than “tu.” But if you’re in, you’re in for life, and this is a diffuse relationship “Herr... their relative neutrality into consideration Their neutrality did not of course mean the were not experiencing the thrill; it’s just that they were trying to control it by lowering their heads 57 BUSINESS ACROSS CULTURES Kodak introduced an ad trading on “memories” which Americans love, but which the British saw as overly sentimental Michael Porter said that Germans didn’t know what marketing was about . way that they do. Different cultures give different meaning to the display of emotions, which explains why there are differences between cultures. 56 BUSINESS ACROSS CULTURES Emotional Americans. AMD Neutral cultures often see affective cultures as somewhat childlike and irrational, full of generalized enthusiasm and superficial sloganeering. And affective cultures often see neutral cultures. assess their personal response, we have therefore extended the original forced-choice questions to include options to reject reconcil - 44 BUSINESS ACROSS CULTURES The car and the pedestrian You are