BACKGROUND
It was in 2011 when, as a business analyst at an FMCG organization, I began using Microsoft Excel. My boss was proficient at it and he never failed to remind me the importance of organizing the data in a neat manner before attempting to analyze it. Once I became familiar with the scope & utility of this popular spreadsheet software, I was drawn towards it & enjoyed operating it.
Excel's cell-based layout was an attractive framework to organize datasets into chunks of interpretable information and very soon, I began to look at objects in the real world with a similar mindset. For example, a multi-storeyed building became an assemblage of neat cells comprising windows and balconies, laid out symmetrically in rows and columns.
The approach of using a framework to break down complexity into something understandable has held me in good stead - I can attribute many of my positive moments, be it personally or professionally, to this trait. Perhaps, my affinity for Supply Chain and Mapping stems from this too.
ABOUT THE FIRM
Intelloc Mapping Services | Mapmyops.com is based in Kolkata, India and engages in providing Mapping solutions that can be integrated with Operations Planning, Design and Audit workflows. These include but are not limited to - Drone Services, Subsurface Mapping Services, Location Analytics & App Development, Supply Chain Services, Remote Sensing Services and Wastewater Treatment. The services can be rendered pan-India, some even globally, and will aid an organization to meet its stated objectives especially pertaining to Operational Excellence, Cost Reduction, Sustainability and Growth.
Broadly, our area of expertise can be split into two categories - Geographic Mapping and Operations Mapping. The Infographic below highlights our capabilities.
Our 'Mapping for Operations'-themed workflow demonstrations can be accessed from the firm's Website / YouTube Channel and an overview can be obtained from this flyer. Happy to address queries and respond to documented requirements. Custom Demonstration, Training & Trials are facilitated only on a paid-basis. Looking forward to being of service.
SECTION HYPERLINKS
So, can there be a framework to understand something as abstract as 'cultural behaviour' better?
Making sense of human behavior is a crucial aspect as we navigate our lives. It helps us understand and interpret everyday happenings, the ones where we are directly involved in as well as others which we view from our screens. As much as each human being is a distinct entity, groups of culturally-connected people tend to behave similarly. And because the human race finds itself in a position of strength due to the power of its collective, it becomes all the more vital to understand these common behavioral traits - i.e. Culture to decode not only isolated occurrences but also events of larger magnitude. While behavior forms a significant part of culture, the latter also includes ideas, norms, habits, attitudes, beliefs, customs and laws as well.
My first tryst with the meaning of culture in an Indian context would've most likely come from this pocket-sized silver booklet (Figure 3) where Nani Palkhivala defines Indian culture and Dharma as a combination of three virtues a) self-discipline, b) self-restraint and c) self-development. As profound as this is, the use of an individualistic term to describe a group phenomenon appeared striking to me. It is as if culture amalgamates the multitudes of us into a singular living entity.
When outsiders encounter India and Indian culture, they label it as 'diverse', 'spiritual', 'advanced', and 'multi-faceted'. Having exposure to some of the other cultures of the world, let me share why I think this is the case-
The geography of Bhāratavarṣa (historical name of this landmass) has contributed enormously to the growth of civilization and to the development of our rich heritage. Much of the subcontinent's landmass is interspersed with flowing water bodies - carriers of nutrients - which make the soil arable and the vegetation lush. The Chinese (Yangtze), Egyptian (Nile) and Mesopotamian (Tigris-Euphrates) civilizations among others are testament to the tendency of humans to congregate and settle around flowing bodies of water. A wide variety of food crops & cash crops have traditionally been cultivated here besides the naturally abundant forest resources, medicinal herbs & spices. Naturally, this had a profound impact on health, prosperity and general well-being of the group of people who chose to call this place their home. Additionally, a majority of those who reside on this subtropical landmass have the good fortune to live in stable climes devoid of extremities that are prevalent across other regions on the globe. Also, the terrain on the country's perimeter - be it the Himalayan mountain range, the Indian ocean or the Thar desert, served as excellent protection from both, nature's fury and human invasions. All in all, this landmass became a Petri dish of sorts, having the right ingredients for human culture to evolve and thrive - a microcosm of knowledge and development. As a result, I do surmise that those living in the subcontinent were quicker to transition from being small tribes of hunter-gatherers living in survivalist mode to a more advanced society steeped in agrarian practices, in residential planning, in education & learning, in social customs, in the Sanskrit language & in Sanskriti, the beautiful word for Indian culture. Soon enough, the residents were knowledgeable enough to harness the natural barriers into a source of economic prosperity - through the Uttarapatha land trade route, the many Mountain-passes as well as through Maritime trade routes. No wonder, this land became a beacon of cultural broadcast which attracted scholars, traders, spiritualists and invaders alike. What transpired over the last millennium has not only undone the landmass' economic prosperity but also tarnished a once remarkable culture, whether irreversibly so remains to be seen. Not only were external influences able to capitalize on internal divides but they also ensured that the very foundations of the country's culture were pummeled - be it literary texts, places of worship, local customs, and even food. The world order had changed drastically too, in parallel, stemming from the advent of European-origin phenomena such as Colonialism, Renaissance, the English Language, Industrial Revolution, Scientific Research, Green Revolution, Electronics, Automobiles and Computing, all which propelled the cultural evolution of the first-movers. The role of geography as a catalyst for cultural evolution is already diminishing - we are now able to develop settlements in hostile environments, grow crops without soil and natural climate, work remotely from anywhere, and mingle with different cultures in quick time, either in person or from the comforts of our screens.
What I'm curious and just as concerned about is how cultures would evolve in the times to come. Would the human race find a way to limit its greed, utilize resources wisely and live harmoniously? Or are we hurtling towards a dystopian future where humanity surrenders itself to a technology-driven albeit vision-less world? Frankly, the latter does not seem implausible given how we are setting ourselves up today, with all our divides, conflicts and vitriolic tendencies. Hence, it is all the more important that we aim to understand our cultural tendencies, similarities and differences better and strive to reach a consensus to sustainably progress our time on this planet.
I do believe that India has an important role to play in the new world order - maybe not as a protagonist, but as a guide. A lot of people, especially the youth, do feel conflicted about the stance they should adopt - whether to continue mimicking the West's capitalist mode of development (despite its inherent flaws) with the hope of surpassing it someday or to somehow connect with and embrace the country's cultural past (I'm afraid much of it is irretrievable) or to pursue the aggressive form of nationalism that dominates the landscape today, driven more by rhetoric than by the actual strengthening of the foundations (not an attractive proposition). Perhaps, it would be a hybrid of all of the above or maybe even something completely different... only time will tell.
Grappling with these thoughts and true to my profession, I immediately think 'can Mapping help chart the way forward?'. If Mapping is a good way to a) lend structure to thinking, b) use as a framework to organize & understand reality, and c) embark on an explorative adventure to reach a magical destination, then it could very help mankind to understand each other better, bridge the divides and journey together into a bright future...
THE CULTURE MAP - AN INTRODUCTION
It was in this situation that I happened to encounter an audio version of the book - The Culture Map - Breaking Through the Invisible Boundaries of Global Business. The book provides a useful framework to assess cross-cultural behaviors at a workplace and I feel it could serve as a valuable reference material to be used, in particular, for b) as a framework to organize & understand reality because it is vital that we have a good understanding of the situation 'as-is' before we even begin to chart an ideal 'to-be'.
The Culture Map book was published in 2014 - it's author, Erin Meyer, is a professor of Management Practice at INSEAD in the Organizational Behavior Department and the book is a manifestation of her research on human behavior and similarities and differences in management styles in cross-country, cross-cultural environments. At the core of the book lies the 8-Dimensions of Culture framework where each dimension encompasses a spectrum of cultural tendencies adopted by nations. Erin draws from her research and shares several real-life examples to put forth a compelling case for understanding, accommodating and leveraging cultural nuances to get things done effectively at the workplace. Readers with cross-cultural experiences at work or otherwise are likely to relate to it and exclaim - 'this has happened to me!' and 'had I known this, I could've handled the situation better '.
As you will observe, the eight dimensions of cultural behaviours are relevant in an organizational context - (Style of) a) Communicating, b) Evaluating, c) Persuading, d) Leading, e) Deciding, f) Trusting, g) Disagreeing & h) Scheduling. Each dimension has contrasting traits at either end of the continuum - for example, the 'Leading' dimension (Figure 5) ranges from an egalitarian style of corporate leadership to a hierarchical style of corporate leadership. Erin maps the cultural tendency of a particular nationality relative to other nationalities on this scale - so while Australians advocate equal rights for all employees irrespective of designation (highly egalitarian), Indians desire preferential rights as they climb the corporate ladder (affinity for hierarchy). The British style of leadership is neither as egalitarian as the former nor as hierarchical as the latter.
Now to elaborate each of the eight cultural dimensions developed by Erin Meyer-
Note:
Read the features in the comparison cards horizontally
You'd be right to assume that the exact opposite of each statement holds true for the contrasting tendency, even if not mentioned explicitly.
Some of the examples used are directly paraphrased from the audiobook while others are based on my personal experiences and interpretation
Erin's output from her research for the 'Communicating' dimension (Figure 7) indicates how countries fare relative to each other on the scale from a low-context to a high-context form of communicating-
You may perceive that if countries are clustered together on the scale, then they are likely to gel well because of similar cultural tendencies and vice versa. While this holds true in general, it is not always the case. For example, here in the 'Communicating' dimension - the greatest scope of misunderstanding is actually between nationalities who are clustered towards the right of the scale i.e. those who use the high-context style of 'Communicating' (conveying messages in an indirect manner, often through non-verbal cues). A conversation between two such nationalities - for example, between the Chinese and the Japanese, would be ripe for misunderstanding - imagine a situation where a Chinese employee conveys a subtle message to a Japanese employee who interprets it in a different way influenced by his own cultural tendencies. Even the latter's response may be misinterpreted by the Chinese recipient! This is akin to the 'encryption - decryption' loop in electronic communications - just that it doesn't function well in human exchanges! Coming to think of it, this aspect could very well be a contributing factor to the bitter rivalry that exists between these two proud nations.
Erin also insists that we take into account the relative positions of the nations on the continuum. For example, while USA & Germany are both located towards the left of the 'Communicating' dimension, which indicates their affinity to use a direct and clear style of messaging, an American may not be able to grasp the little subtleties that a German may use in his interactions by virtue of being a more low-context culture than the latter.
While Erin has placed nations on the 'Evaluating' continuum just like she did for 'Communicating' in Figure 7, some useful insights can be obtained from this 2x2 matrix representation (Figure 9) featuring both the 'Evaluating' dimension and the 'Communicating' dimension. You'll observe that some nations such as US & Canada who communicate in a low-context manner i.e. very directly, surprisingly tend to adopt an indirect approach to evaluating i.e. sharing negative feedback in a mild manner. The opposite is also evident - take the case of Israel & France, for example.
In a cross-cultural workplace, a direct 'Evaluating' culture of the superiors may demoralize subordinates from an indirect 'Evaluating' culture who may perceive them to be cold and emotionless. The opposite can also be problematic: if the superior shares positive feedback initially to mellow down the impact of the succeeding negative feedback, the subordinates may feel that their boss is not being transparent enough. According to Erin, based on her consulting experience and research findings, adopting a balanced approach slightly tilting towards indirect evaluation tends to work best in cross-cultural interactions.
'Persuading' is a very important behavioural trait, especially in a business context. It is not restricted to the Sales team alone but is applicable to the multiple forms of selling that occur in a corporate environment - be it that of products, services, ideas, knowledge or beliefs, and is applicable to a wide range of stakeholders. Aspects like career progression, project buy-ins & fund sanctions hinge on the person or the team's ability to win over the decision-makers. It therefore helps to map nationalities in this dimension as different cultures adopt differing styles of persuasive behaviour - it could be a principles-first approach, an applications-first approach or eben somewhere in between (exactly in-between is Holistic Thinking as per Erin).
As an Indian-origin student exploring higher education, the idea of studying Global Supply Chain Management struck to me as an interesting option. Supply Chain involves observing dependencies and linkages in a systems-view rather than from a nodal, organizational-view. Having listened to Erin's explanation of 'holistic thinking behavior and its prevalence in Asian cultures' made me introspect - there was a growing realization that quite possibly, my cultural roots had influenced my academic pursuits subliminally.
Typically, Indians do tend to evaluate the pros & cons in depth, see the larger picture and then proceed to build a solid, winnable case. This is in stark contrast to Western nationalities who adopt a 'first do, then think' approach (Applications-first) as well as the Middle-Eastern nationalities who strictly interpret actions and frame laws based on what is indicated in Islamic texts (Principles-first).
I must emphasize here that Erin doesn't espouse cultural 'stereotyping'. Rather, she suggests that these deep-rooted 'cultural tendencies' should be factored in to determine best-practices for leadership and management in a cross-cultural environment. The inability to recognize these tendencies could tantamount to workplace conflicts, lack of motivation among staff and project delays.
For all I know, you may have formed deep-rooted tendencies on how to deal with people - assessing each person in isolation based on the perceived merits and demerits and responding accordingly. The author indicates that this may be a wrong approach - because you are judging the person not in his/her cultural context but from your own culture's prism. Instead, what Erin suggests is that managers and leaders should become familiar with the cultural backgrounds of their workforce and design the policies, processes and communication methods accordingly so as to be more accommodating of them and their values.
As a best-practice across dimensions, Erin proposes that the leadership conveys the behavioral approach that will be adopted in the organization in advance to the multicultural workforce. For example, 'this is how your performance evaluations will be done', 'this is how we'll look to handle grievances', 'this is what would be considered acceptable and this is what wouldn't', and so on. And instead of directly conveying the plan, the use of cultural bridges would be more effective - conveying the message through locals or from seasoned professionals.
Erin credits her mapping output pertaining to the 'Leading' dimension to Geert Hofstede in particular, a famous Dutch social psychologist who recently passed away. Hofstede's research work in the field of cross-cultural behavior is held in very high regard among peers and beyond. For instance, his 'Six Dimensions of National Culture' is taught at management schools. This is how India fares in it-
To understand Hofstede's cultural framework better and what these scores for India mean, refer to the summary page on his website.
After listening to the 'Deciding' dimension in the audiobook and merging the author's views with my world-view, I drew an insight - three of the top countries renowned for the quality of their products & processes - namely Japan, Germany & USA - adopt a contrasting approach towards 'Leading' and 'Deciding' dimensions. Let me elaborate-
The Japanese & Germans, known for their operational efficiency in manufacturing, adopt a hierarchical 'Leading' but a consensual 'Deciding' style. When it comes to consensus, as Erin indicated, the Japanese prefer using the Ringi system where each layer of the management, starting from the bottom, discuss and arrive at a consensus for a proposal and then transfer their feedback to the next level of management above them in the hierarchy who, in turn, adopt the same approach. This process continues till the feedback from the second rung reaches the leader of the pack. Not only everyone gets to have a say, unnecessary meetings are done away with using this clever, consensual system of decision-making. In a similar vein, USA, widely-regarded as a torch-bearer in innovation and management, adopts a fairly egalitarian style of 'Leading' but a more top-down approach to 'Deciding'. Incidentally, a video on Facebook, which I viewed just as I was typing out this section, brings this contrast between 'Leading' and 'Deciding' to the fore 😊-
A child fiddling with the blazer and asking questions to the then former Vice-President Joe Biden, who humbly obliged, signified an egalitarian 'Leading' style to me. Nonetheless, he was quick to gesture with his hands the top-down nature of 'Deciding' - 'No. 1: Obama followed by No. 2: himself.
Funny how a random trending video gives clues about the cultural tendencies of a country!
As you may have observed, I designed the comparison card (Figure 15) for the 'Trusting' dimension in a different way - using a storyline. The moral of this story is simple - trusted relationships pay more dividends than trustworthy transactions. Realistically speaking, I feel most nationalities adopt a flexible approach towards this dimension based on the country they are dealing with rather than fixating on a singular approach anywhere in the continuum.
Erin indicates that relationship-based 'Trusting' places significant importance to forging associations at a personal-level, connecting socially, and the use of network-based references in business dealings - this approach is prevalent in Middle Eastern, South Eastern and Latin American cultures even to this day. However, the importance of task-based 'Trusting' as practised by USA and Germany should not be undermined because it is a more practical and efficient approach, the rules of the game tend to be fairer, and the decisions are based on merit.
Erin derived the concept of 'Trusting' dimension from the 'Cognitive' & 'Affective' modes of Trust. In simple words, do you trust with your head (cognitive / task-based) or do you trust with your heart (Affective / Relationship based)?
Would you feel comfortable if you are questioned at the workplace about a decision of yours or your performance in general in front of everyone - your superiors and subordinates? I wouldn't - as per my belief system, 'Disagreement' is better conveyed sincerely in a private setting. However, as I've learnt from this section of the audiobook, many cultures do actively try to foster a confrontational method of 'Disagreeing' at workplaces as to them it is a sign of a healthy, involved and a motivated workforce.
The fact that Erin chose 'Disagreeing' and not 'Agreeing' as a behavioral dimension to map was an implicit indication about the author's own confrontational cultural background. To lend more credence to my belief, I referred to her 'Disagreeing' continuum eager to see the positions that France and USA occupy-
And as I had suspected, the French influences in Erin's life (professionally at INSEAD and personally through her husband's nationality) plus her own upbringing in USA may have prompted her to chose 'Disagreeing' as the behaviour to map after all!
Given my own background in Operations and having spent considerable time working for & with USA-origin organizations here in India, personally I do rely on the linear-time approach in the 'Scheduling' dimension. I like to form a workday schedule, prefer to break down complex tasks into achievable activities, and sincerely plan for and attempt to complete projects on a timely basis.
As a business owner operating the venture, I often get furious (implicitly) with customers and suppliers when they don't respond as scheduled, give vague timelines, do not read my reference material, come unprepared and late for meetings or interrupt the flow with needless bottlenecks.
Yet, at the same time, I do admire (implicitly, again) these same folks because they tend to accomplish so much more in their given time, assume responsibility for multiple projects, and somehow are able to deliver results too. Despite this, I do believe that managed success should not be a go-to approach as it is steeped in low probability and hoping that things go right. Linear-time behavior is a form of a planned success and organizations in India should transition to itin order to be consistently competitive in the global arena, be it business, sports or any other field.
Efficient operations, processes & systems rely on linear-time principles as well. With Mapmyops, I hope to assist organizations in making this transition.
While I do believe that humans are not meant to be mechanical beings, watching race-car maintenance happen in a matter of few seconds during Pit Stops is a sight to marvel at and a testament to the benefits of adopting a linear-time culture. This is not to say that this behavioural tendency is without flaws - it is often deemed to be rigid and impractical in the VUCA world we live in. Yet, to me personally, its benefits far outweigh its failings.
CONCLUSION
With this I come to the conclusion of this post. I hope you found this framework of mapping cultural tendencies to be useful. Each country can be mapped and compared on this continuum, in isolation for a dimension or across multiple/all dimensions and one can think of ways and means to minimize the scope of conflicts by understanding the differences between two or more cultures and determining policies and best-practices at the workplace accordingly.
Erin's website seems to have some useful (and possibly updated) Culture mapping tools which can be used to build individual, team, corporate and country-level behavior-maps and I'm sure many leaders and organizations operating in cross-cultural environments could benefit from it.
I loved listening to The Culture Map audiobook and you may choose to listen to it as well or buy a copy. If anything, this book could've been even better if it had assessed culture using some other parameters other than just on the basis of nationality. This is because large countries such as India, China, USA or Brazil house a wide range of diverse cultures within, so I'm not sure if her country-level generalization would be an accurate representation of ground-reality. Perhaps, the cultural cake could've been sliced in on the basis of religion, age, gender or profession.
Also, Erin's interpretation of culture largely focused on behavioral traits which is a slightly narrow take, although to be fair to her, she did try to bring in historical and attitudinal aspects with examples occasionally. Nonetheless, behavioral aspects of culture are more dominant at workplaces and hence, one can understand why she chose to dwell on it in her book.
Thank you Hachette Book Group, publisher of the audiobook 'The Culture Map' for advising me on the copyright rules.
Regards,
Arpit Shah