The prospect of employment in the year 2020 and beyond

In 1990, Charles Handy predicted in his book “The Age of Unreason” that by the year 2000 there would be less than fifty percent in full time employment. November 2011, Gallup released data that indicated less than forty-five percent were in full time employment. Estimates for the year 2020 indicate a trend of less than forty percent in full time employment with the remaining sixty percent of the population either: unemployed (too young, too old, or incapable of working), underemployed, (working more than one job) or self-employed. Seemingly in agreement is a December 2011 article by Ryan Kim which argues that by 2020, independent workers will be the majority.

This is not great news for those who are looking for full time employment. Research indicates that currently there are roughly 16 million freelancers, consultants and other independent workers and by the year 2020, that number will exceed 65 million comprising of more than half of all employees in the marketplace. For those remaining in traditional full time employment, they must learn to work with consultants; do more with fewer resources; and change the way they view their work. Employees who are traditionally territorial in nature will have the most difficulty in this new reality. Looking for work will require individuals to develop marketing skills needed to compete in a new arena. By nature of the competitive field, consultants and freelancers will become more educated and creating market advantage. Cottage industries will develop linking consultants and freelancers to organizations and staffing agencies will increase market share as they develop divisions catering to consultants and freelancers.

Organizations must prepare for the eventuality of a changing landscape in the engagement of human capital. With an event horizon of less than 8, much needs to be done to understand the implications of these changes. Leaders must begin to create new perspectives on these emerging issues and ask questions to prepare for the changes that are sure to come. Organizations will likely trend toward employees and consultants bidding on project work rather than receiving assignments. Research exposes a general consensus of anticipated acceleration in changes, leaving little stability and great increase in demands, conflicts and stressors on the workforce. Employees likely will feel instability in their job security. They may feel replaceable by consultants or freelancers. Organizations are less likely to be compelled to keep full time employees as payroll taxes increase and government imposed healthcare emerges.

Organizations must learn to develop solutions to meet the demands of a fluid future. Leaders must begin to think about the implications of these changes. What will the office of the year 2020 look like? With the expansion of open systems and networks, organizations will likely be forced into flatter more open organizational structures. Overhead costs of company benefits and office space will shrink. Virtual offices and telecommuting will be the norm as consultants are no longer bound by geography. It will be common for consultants and freelancers to be spread out around the globe. Organizations will compensate based on new measurements such as keystrokes, projects completed and time logged into company systems creating solutions for the organization. Consulting and freelancing will not be left to the rank and file. Organizations will begin to develop fractional leadership in which executives are also consultants within the organization. Flatter, more open organizations and telecommuting creates new challenges for organizations. Concerns over trade secrets and overall company security will increase. Organizations will require all employees to sign confidentiality clauses. Government laws will also need to catch up with the changes in the employment. Leaders should ask questions such as: will companies be required to offer contract labor health insurance and 401k retirement plans; will companies be required to offer workers compensation; and what rules and regulations will be developed to avoid discrimination in hiring consultants? As the new realities of employment emerge, organizations will become mindful of the implications of making these changes. Because organizations are no longer bound by localized geography in hiring employees, other implications will emerge such as payroll taxes. Will hiring consultants located in other countries create a form of tax evasion and will government change the laws to secure tax revenues?

While we don’t yet know what to expect economically, politically or geopolitically, we do know change is happening before our very eyes. How we prepare for and maintain our competitive edge will mean everything. With these changes on the horizon, there comes a great need for leaders and organizations to be ready for the future. Preparing for the future removes certain levels of uncertainty. Organizational leaders must understand the potential implications of moving to a predominant consultant and freelancer driven economy. Preparing for the eventualities will help organizations gain a better competitive advantage.

Organizational leaders must prepare. Trends already indicate that these changes are on their way. We are eight years from a very important event horizon. The way organizations engage human capital is on a rapid course that will forever change the landscape of the organizations of the future. Now is the time to consider a very simple question. A question all leaders should be asking every day. What if…While the question is very important to all aspects of how an organization develops future opportunities, it is how we answer this question that matters the most. The trend is well on its way to a freelancing economy. How we prepare for it and how we deal with it remains to be determined. Competitive advantage is rooted in how we approach the question of what if.

———————

Philip A Foster, MA is Founder/President of Maximum Change Inc. Elevating leaders and their organizations to the next level since 2005. Master Certified Coach, Philip A Foster, MA and his associates facilitate effective positive change by helping organizations, leaders and individuals in high demand — design and implement strategies that maximize focus and deliver results. Specializing in Organization and Strategic Leadership.

Email | LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Web | Skype: philip.a.foster | 615-216-5667

Connecting with Culture | What leaders need to know.

As cross-cultural matters become calibrated to a deeper understanding of how important communication and conflict resolution are to a global leader. Each step along the path I unpack my own worldviews and assumptions of how things area rather than how they should be (Sire, 1997, p 16). Our understanding of geography, language, customs, values, traditions, laws, ethics, and national psychology are all considerations to whether someone is a global leader (Foster, 2012). It then becomes imperative that global leaders understand the impact their approach to relationships has on differing cultures (Prichard, 2012). Culture is composed of individual interpretations of the world and the activities and artifacts that reflect these interpretations (Mintzberg, Ahlstrand and Lampel, 2005, p 265). When we embrace these interpretations rather than extinguish them, we connect deeply to the intrinsic needs of those within the culture we wish to operate (Foster, 2012). In my estimate, the secret to becoming a global leader is rooted in our ability to not only understand the complexities of the culture but also the art of connecting with those who reside within the culture as well.

References:

Sire, James W. (1997). The Universe Next Door. Third Edition. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press

 

 

Foster, Philip (2012). Retrieved from his posting: Blackboard Dialogues for Doctorate in Strategic Leadership, Regent University, Virginia Beach, VA.

 

 

Prichard, Skip CEO of Ingram Content Group. Personal Interaction on February 2, 2012, LaVergne, TN.

 

Mintzberg, H., Ahlstrand, B., Lampel, J. (1998). Strategy Safari. New York, NY: First Free Press.

———————

Philip A Foster, MA is Founder/CEO of Maximum Change Inc. Elevating leaders and their organizations to the next level since 2005. Master Certified Coach, Philip A Foster, MA and his associates facilitate effective positive change by helping organizations, leaders and individuals in high demand — design and implement strategies that maximize focus and deliver results. Specializing in Organization and Strategic Leadership.

Email | LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Web | Skype: philip.a.foster | 615-216-5667

Press Release – Senior Partner Joins Maximum Change, Inc.

Maximum Change, Inc., a leadership coaching and consulting firm welcomes new Senior Partner.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

April 3, 2012

Murfreesboro, Tennessee – Maximum Change, Inc. a Leadership Coaching and Consulting firm has named William H. Bishop as a Senior Partner.

 

Mr. William, ‘Bill,’ Bishop joins Maximum Change with over 24 years of combined experience in business administration, project management, leadership training, mentoring, and curriculum development. Bill is a veteran of the United States Navy, where he ascended to the rank of Chief Petty Officer in seven years. During his naval service, he successfully formed, trained, coached, and led integrated, cross-functional teams across a variety of platforms and combat situations to achieve complex mission objectives in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation Enduring Freedom, and assigned national tasking.

 

Bill served as a leadership facilitator and later as a program manager for one of the Navy’s three enlisted leadership development programs at the Center for Naval Leadership, where he designed, developed, and revised the Navy’s enlisted leadership curriculum taught at 25 sites worldwide with an annual throughput of 30,000 service members. His dynamic and energetic style made him a highly sought and engaging facilitator. He is a prolific author and has been featured in Talent Management Magazine, Leadership Advance Online, and Proceedings. Mr. Bishop holds an MBA from Regent University; was educated through Harvard University’s Executive Education Program; and is presently a Doctoral student at Regent University with an anticipated graduation in 2015. He is a Certified Master Training Specialist and a Lean Six Sigma Yellow Belt.

 

Philip A Foster, President/CEO of Maximum Change, Inc. said “Adding William to our team expands our service offering in the key areas.”

 

Maximum Change is a full service coaching and consulting firm dedicated to elevating individuals and leaders to the next level since 2005. Maximum Change offers leadership development, critical and strategic thinking, team building, training, communication, short and long term projects, talent management, planning and much more. Maximum Change serves clients around the globe offering services that create Maximum Change and growth in the organizations they serve.

 

Organizations seeking a consult may contact Maximum Change, Inc. via the company website at http://www.maximumchange.com, email: info@maximumchange.com or call 615-216-5667.
# # #

Cultural Conflict Management Styles

Several conflict styles are used to manage conflicts: factual-inductive, axiomatic-deductive, and affective-intuitive (Gudykunst & Kim, 2003, p 299). Factual-inductive style, typical of the United States, focuses on facts and inductively moves toward a conclusion (Gudykunst & Kim, 2003, p 299). This aligns with the universalist culture which prescribe consistent standards irrespective of cultural norms (Lanier, 2012). The axiomatic-deductive style relies on general principals and deduces implications for specific situations (Gudykunst and Kim, 2003, p 299). The affective-intuitive style is based on the use of emotional or affective messages (Gudykunst and Kim, 2003, p 299). Axiomatic-deductive and affective-intuitive styles are synonymous with countries like the Soviet Union (Gudykunst and Kim, 2003, p 299) and are aligned with the universalist or collectivist cultures (Lanier, 2012).

Conflict can be managed if not averted altogether through a familiarity of the culture (Lanier, 2012). Literature predicts cultural differences are based on five styles: integrating style, compromising style, dominating style, obliging style, and avoiding style (Gudykunst and Kim, 2003, p 300).

The integrating style focuses on managing conflict out of high concern for self and others (Gudykunst and Kim, 2003, p 299). The compromising Style focuses on moderate concern for self and moderate concern for others (Gudykunst and Kim, 2003, p 300). The dominating style represents a high concern for self and a low concern for others and is typically used to control or dominate (Gudykunst and Kim, 2003, p 300). An obliging style presents a low concern for self and a high concern for others and is present when we give in to others to avoid conflict (Gudykunst and Kim, 2003, p 300). Finally, the avoiding style involves low concern for self and others and the topic of conflict is avoided by all at all times (Gudykunst and Kim, 2003, p 300).

References

Lanier, John (2012). Retrieved from his posting: Blackboard Dialogues for Doctorate in Strategic Leadership, Regent University, Virginia Beach, VA.

Gundykunst, William B. and Kim, Young Yun (2003). Communicating with Strangers – 4^th edition. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Philip A Foster, MA is Founder/CEO of Maximum Change Inc. Elevating leaders and their organizations to the next level since 2005. Master Certified Coach, Philip A Foster, MA and his associates facilitate effective positive change by helping organizations, leaders and individuals in high demand — design and implement strategies that maximize focus and deliver results. Specializing in Organization and Strategic Leadership.

Email | LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Web | Skype: philip.a.foster | 615-216-5667

 

Developing a Cultural Hermeneutic to Conflict Resolution

In dealing with conflict, leaders should develop a cultural hermeneutics that assist the leader and organization to function successfully within a given culture (Branch, 2012). The essence of the hermeneutic should be to develop processes whereby the source of conflict is understood and where possible avoided. To develop a cultural hermeneutic we must first understand the nature of conflict in what Eisenberg and Goodall (2004) define “as the interaction of interdependent people who perceive opposition of goals, aims, and values, and who see the other parties as potentially interfering with the realization of these goals” (p 288).

Literature argues that conflicts should be understood as a portion of a broader network of interdependencies that produce wider and wider impact within the culture (Eisenberg and Goodall, 2004, p 169). Language is used to frame and work through the context of conflict is often invaluable in assisting individuals understanding of dealing with disputes (Eisenberg and Goodall, 2004, p 169).

While conflict avoidance is typically preferred, some recognize the benefits of conflict and its role in generating different ideas and perspectives as well as facilitating the sharing of information (Eisenberg and Goodall, 2004, p 288). Therefore, some degree of conflict is essential to achieving higher levels of productivity and effective communication (Eisenberg and Goodall, 2004, p 288).

It can be argued that developing a cultural hermeneutic should include an understanding of cultural context and language as well as the impact of conflict within the culture and its use as a lubricant to information sharing and productivity.

References:

Branch, Chester (2012). Retrieved from his posting: Blackboard Dialogues for Doctorate in Strategic Leadership, Regent University, Virginia Beach, VA.

Eisenberg, Eric M. and Goodall, Jr., H.L. (2004). Organizational Communication. Fourth Edition. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin.

———————

Philip A Foster, MA is Founder/CEO of Maximum Change Inc. Elevating leaders and their organizations to the next level since 2005. Master Certified Coach, Philip A Foster, MA and his associates facilitate effective positive change by helping organizations, leaders and individuals in high demand — design and implement strategies that maximize focus and deliver results. Specializing in Organization and Strategic Leadership.

Email | LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Web | Skype: philip.a.foster | 615-216-5667

Cross-Cultural Conflict Avoidance

While avoiding allows conflict to go unresolved or projects responsibility on to others for solving the problem (Fletcher, 2012), it does not allow these individuals to preserve important goals, values and ideas – nor does it allow them to preserve relationships (Elmer, 1993, p 36). From a Westerner point of view, the ideal that avoiding conflict somehow causes it to go away most often creates the dynamic in which the individual ends up with weak or superficial relationships and little to no influence on important decisions (Elmer, 1993, p 36). However, Elmer (1993) does argue that strategic withdrawal can be a wise choice when emotions are running high and if the confrontation may cause someone to act unwisely or lose control (p 39). Conflict avoidance is also wise when the potential consequences of confrontation are too serious (Elmer, 1993, p 39). As Elmer (1993) puts it, avoiding conflict can be a sign of wisdom and maturity in some cases and in others it may signal an unwillingness to discuss important issues or a refusal to take a stand on a given decision (p 39).

Compromising within conflict resolution in fact seeks to set a middle ground between two parties (Fletcher, 2012). However, Elmer (1993) argues many simply give in to accommodate or smooth over the differences (p 39). Some may see most issues as negotiable and differences not worth fighting about (Elmer, 1993, p 39). Those who are more apt to accommodate are most often willing to forfeit personal goals and values and can be taken advantage of since they are most likely unable to say no (Elmer, 1993,  p39). Contrary to the Western view of conflict resolution, our Asian counterparts are more likely to work to prevent conflicts or avoid them altogether (Fletcher, 2012).

References:

Fletcher, Juanita (2012).  Retrieved from her posting: Blackboard Dialogues for Doctorate in Strategic Leadership, Regent University, Virginia Beach, VA.

Elmer, Duane (1993). Cross-Cultural Conflict. Building Relationships for Effective Ministry. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

———————

Philip A Foster, MA is Founder/CEO of Maximum Change Inc. Elevating leaders and their organizations to the next level since 2005. Master Certified Coach, Philip A Foster, MA and his associates facilitate effective positive change by helping organizations, leaders and individuals in high demand — design and implement strategies that maximize focus and deliver results. Specializing in Organization and Strategic Leadership.

Email | LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Web | Skype: philip.a.foster | 615-216-5667

Leading Cross-Cultural Conflict Resolution

Interpretive misunderstanding is central to cross-cultural conflict resolution. When dealing with Asian culture, for example, Westerners often interpret their silence as consent (Lindo, 2012). However, the Asian culture employs an indirect method of handling conflict which is often misinterpreted as “(1) lack of courage to confront the person (2) unwillingness to deal with the issue, (3) lack of commitment to solve the problem or (4) refusal to take responsibility for one’s actions” (Elmer, 1993, p 52). Asian managers interpret Westerners as unreasonable and lack respect (Lindo, 2012) which is rooted in the Asian cultures shame based cultural mechanics. To interpret a culture we must begin to understand the very patterns of thought are culturally based and vary from culture to culture because they are culturally constructed (Zweifel, 2003, p 14-15). In the case of the Asian culture, honor and shame becomes an integral part of the cultural patterns of communication. These patterns serve to: preserve smooth interpersonal relationships, maintain harmony, minimize potential conflict, restore community solidarity and facilitate communication between the various levels of society (Elmer, 1993, p 54). The practical foundation to overcoming cultural conflict is rooted in the concept of developing friendships over issues of profit and politics. Westerns view relationships as less important than in other cultures (Zweifel, 2003, p 44), while Easterners pay more attention to relationships (Zweifel, 2003, p 15). Stagich (2001) argues “the fundamental values essential for effective collaboration include reciprocal benefit, mutual respect, appreciation of diverse contributions, and a shared understanding of how these values work in the collaborative group process (p 16).

Zweifel (2003) said we must learn to interact with people as individuals and not as culture” (p 36). Only when we connect with the person do we begin to understand and connect with their culture.

References

Lindo, Navon (2012). Retrieved from his posting: Blackboard Dialogues for Doctorate in Strategic Leadership, Regent University, Virginia Beach, VA.

Elmer, D. (1993). Cross-cultural conflict: Building relationships for effective ministry. Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity.

Zweifel, Thomas D. (2003). Culture Clash. Merging the Global High-Performance Team. New York, NY: SelectBooks.

Stagich, Timothy (2001). Collaborative Leadership and Global Transformation. ISBN: 0-75965-148-5.

———————

Philip A Foster, MA is Founder/CEO of Maximum Change Inc. Elevating leaders and their organizations to the next level since 2005. Master Certified Coach, Philip A Foster, MA and his associates facilitate effective positive change by helping organizations, leaders and individuals in high demand — design and implement strategies that maximize focus and deliver results. Specializing in Organization and Strategic Leadership.

Email | LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Web | Skype: philip.a.foster | 615-216-5667

Sell with your story!

I have come to the conclusion that the best marketing tool a small business can use is their story. I’m not necessarily speaking of your personal story but it might be inclusive of such. What I am talking about is the story of HOW the product, service or even the company came into existence. I will illustrate this by telling you one of my stories. In early 2000 I was to be married and we were looking for party favors for the tables. We came across the idea of small glycerin soaps. The soaps would be adorned with ribbons and a label that had our names and the wedding date on them. We found a soap making kit in a hobby store and set out to try and make these favors. While making the samples we realized the ease of the product and I ended up saying… this is so easy, I wonder if we could make a business out of these. Soon we launched a small soap business out of a 900 square foot apartment. We had absolutely no customers and very little product. Our entire stock of completed merchandise and raw materials fit in a linen closet in our apartment and the production was done in our kitchen. Our first client was a Bed and Breakfast on the East coast. They became a long time customer of the company. Within 3 years the company grew from a small apartment to a 1000 SF manufacturing facility where product was shipped daily around the world. We were soon being featured on QVC, Redbook Magazine and in Newspapers around the world. We were even listed in the Fortune 500 “Up and Coming Franchise” edition. We produced natural products at a reasonable price and this catapult our business. We were on a fast track to take the business big when circumstances led us to sell the company. I often asked myself why did the product sell? For one we offered a desirable product at a competitive price. But what I discovered was that what people really bought into was our story. A story of starting a business from a true ground up enterprise. We amazed everyone we talked to about it. Now, before you think I am some kind of super hero let me tell you that owning your own business is tough work and can bee a strain on a relationship. While I would often wonder what the company would or could have been if we kept it, I shall never know. As far as I know, the person who purchased the company didn’t take it anywhere and at this moment the website is no longer in service.

I believe that anyone with an idea and a desire to work hard can make something of themselves. Create a story worth telling, worth hearing, and worth buying into. Go for it!

———————

Philip A Foster, MA is Founder/CEO of Maximum Change Inc. Elevating leaders and their organizations to the next level since 2005. Master Certified Coach, Philip A Foster, MA and his associates facilitate effective positive change by helping organizations, leaders and individuals in high demand — design and implement strategies that maximize focus and deliver results. Specializing in Organization and Strategic Leadership.

Email | LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Web | Skype: philip.a.foster | 615-216-5667

Interpreting culture and its impact on conflict resolution

To interpret the culture and its impact on conflict we must begin to understand inquisitiveness is at the core of effective global leadership (Black, Morrison, & Gregersen, 1999, p 27). To best bridge the gap of conflict it becomes important to consider one’s own cultural literacy. We must start with our own core values and beliefs and then be able to clearly communicate them to our followers (Rosen, 2000, p191). Yet, understanding one’s own core values is only the start. We must understand the culture from which we operate. Literature argues that Westerners will often misinterpret cultural responses specifically in the area of cultural indirectness. Such indirectness, such as found in high-context polychronic cultures, is seen as “(1) lack of courage to confront the person, (2) unwillingness to deal with the issue, (3) lack of communication to solve the problem or (4) refusal to take responsibility for one’s actions” (Elmer, 1993, p 53).

Literature argues that personal transformation is needed in doing business across cultures (McCall & Hollenbeck, 2002, p 215). Stanford (2009) argues transformation begins with leaders who are able to manage their mindset as it relates to: themselves (the reflective mindset); organizations (the analytical mindset); context (the worldly mindset); relationships (the collaborative mindset); change (the action mindset) (p 225).

Conflicts are inevitable. Understanding conflicts are most likely to occur when a person or a group feels that their social, psychological, emotional, physical, or other space is threatened (Stanford, 2009, p 235). We must transcend our own cultural defaults and look beyond the horizon to other ways of thinking to begin to understand cultural conflicts. The application of adaptation and an ability to separate the person from the problem (Lanier, 2012) is essential to a leaders overall effectiveness in cross-cultural communication and conflict resolution.

References

Black, J. Stewart, Morrison, Allen J., and Gregersen, Hal B. (1999). Global Explorers. New York, NY: Routledge

Rosen Robert (2000). Global Literacies. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster

McCall, Morgan W. and Hollenbeck, George P. (2002). Developing Global Executives. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Stanford, Naomi (2009). Guide to Organisation Design. London, England: Profile Books, Ltd.

Lanier, John (2012). Retrieved from his posting: Blackboard Dialogues for Doctorate in Strategic Leadership, Regent University, Virginia Beach, VA.

———————

Philip A Foster, MA is Founder/CEO of Maximum Change Inc. Elevating leaders and their organizations to the next level since 2005. Master Certified Coach, Philip A Foster, MA and his associates facilitate effective positive change by helping organizations, leaders and individuals in high demand — design and implement strategies that maximize focus and deliver results. Specializing in Organization and Strategic Leadership.

Email | LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Web | Skype: philip.a.foster | 615-216-5667

Considering high-context vs. low-context cultures and its impact on cross-cultural leadership communications.

The Global Communicator

Communicating in your own native language is difficult enough. Add to this the nuances of differing cultures and we have a rather complex matter. Such nuances create certain barriers to communicating in a cross-cultural setting. Today, more than ever, leaders must find ways to influence people in varying cultures. Further, leaders must begin to understand the implications of globalization and how the very patterns of thought are based on the individual’s culture of origin.

Edward Hall, considered one of the fathers of cross-cultural communication, wrote that human communication is non-verbal and always follows cultural and contextual patterns. In his book The Silent Language he introduced the concepts of high-context vs. low-context and polychronic vs. monochronic communication.

 

High-Context and Low-Context Cultures

Hall presented the argument that in high context cultures ideas are not spelled out nor defined in detail and that in low-context cultures require details. High-context cultures assume that the people we speak to understand the context of our message and that the implied ideas of our message are not spelled out in any detail. High-context cultures such as China and Japan receive information about the meaning of messages based on the setting in which the message is communicated. In high-context environments individuals who share common implied meanings prefer communicating in more indirect or covert ways through nonverbal communication and meanings. A low-context culture would consider high-context cultures to be somewhat passive aggressive in their communication styles.

Hall defined high-context cultures as: covert and implicit; messages are internalized; strong use of nonverbal coding; reserved reactions to messages; distinct in-groups and out-groups; strong interpersonal bonds amongst members; high commitment among members and time is open and flexible.

Low-context cultures such as Great Britain and Germany use their words to embed greater meaning and their messages are more direct when speaking. Hall defined low-context cultures as: overt and explicit; messages are plainly coded; message detail is direct and verbalized; message receivers reactions are on the surface; flexible in-groups and out-groups; interpersonal relationships are more fragile; commitment is low; and time is highly organized.

Polychronic vs. Monochronic communication

In a polychronic culture we find individuals more likely to engage in multiple activities at the same time. They are more likely to become restless in the absence of differing stimuli. Typically Latin, African and Asian cultures are seen as polychronic. According to Hall, polychronic cultures are evident by: fixed appointments at short notice; individuals allow for plenty of time between appointment; agendas are determined at the start of a meeting; participants avoid rushing meetings; and they do not restrict themselves or impose self-imposed deadlines.

Conversely, a monochronic culture will most likely have specific precisions related to time, agendas, and dealing with one thing at a time. The United States, Canada, Australia, UK and any other Anglo-Saxon countries are considered monochronic. Hall’s monochronic cultures include: fixed appointments weeks in advance; agendas are sent in advance of meetings; individuals arrive on time; meetings begin at the agreed and appointed time; meeting participants keep to given schedules, deadlines and agendas; and it is common for individuals to interrupt in order to obtain clarity and understanding of something.

When leaders fail to understand the communication styles as presented through the high-context and low-context cultures, serious difficulties can arise for them when dealing with individuals from differing cultures. Global leaders must begin to find ways to understand and improve their communication skills.

 

Improving Communication Skills

To improve communication skills we must first understand the mechanics of communications. In 1967, the now famous research by Mehrabian and Ferris noted that communication is typically 7 percent verbal (words), 38 percent vocal (Para verbal) and 55 percent facial (body language).

When considering both high- and low-context cultures, they each hold different delivery and receptions of verbal and non-verbal messages. Considering the Mehrabian and Ferris research, high-context cultures rely heavily on facial/body language to interpret messages while low-context cultures are more likely to utilize all coefficients of the communications process. Add to these mechanics the polychronic and monochronic communication processes and you’ve added an additional layer of complexity to the messages being communicated.

For example: in a monochronic culture would presume that a polychronic culture was disinterested in the message being sent because they are multitasking while the message is presented. Likewise a polychronic culture might believe a monochronic culture to be strict in their approach to communication. Additional considerations would be in how the culture approaches appointments and time. While some may find chronic lateness to be on time, other cultures might receive this as rude. Understanding these deeper nuances as the sum of the communication process is important to interpreting the messages being presented.

Given these complexities, we cannot simply define communication as the act of conveying information through the combined effect of simultaneous verbal, vocal, and facial attitude communications. Listening skills are essential to good communication, but we must consider how the interpretations of such conveyed information is achieved. When we consider the nonverbal dimensions of intercultural communication we much confront the differing cultural behaviors. These cultural nuances become essential to the overall success of the leader from within the culture they operate.

 

Conclusion

How we view and interpret culture is based predominantly on how we see the culture through our own cultural lenses. Cultures are defined by the very filters and lenses by which we base our decisions. Considering the lenses by which we view the world we can begin to consider the worldview of others. It becomes essential for global leaders to adjust their filters and lenses to include other cultural attributes. Because thought is understood to be culturally based, we begin to view members of the culture differently and notice that they do not think the same way we do. When global leaders begin to adjust these filters they find that language is not just about communicating with individuals but becomes the very reflection of the culture from which they operate.

At its most basic level, becoming a cultural leader is about human relationships and less about economics, finance and productivity. To best integrate into a given culture, global leaders must apply certain competencies to their approach to global expansion. Becoming a competent global leader requires vigilant study and understanding of culture and its many attributes. These complexities of geography, language, customs, values, traditions, laws, ethics and national psychology are interpreted through varying lenses of cultural bias and the leader’s ability to understand and connect with the cultures in which they operate.

The secret formula appears to begin and end with the leader’s ability to connect and build trust with those in which they may have need to influence. Building trust, while a complex matter, is achievable in most all instances. Trust begins with an understanding of power distances and the defining of the culture as either high- or low-context.

 

When we begin to develop our intellectual and emotional competencies for cultures we open endless possibilities for connection and expansion into markets and cultures otherwise not possible decades ago. It becomes clear that understanding cultural nuance is essential to success in any culture. The greater challenge is in understanding what those nuances are and how to effectively utilize them.

———————

Philip A Foster, MA is Founder/CEO of Maximum Change Inc. Elevating leaders and their organizations to the next level since 2005. Master Certified Coach, Philip A Foster, MA and his associates facilitate effective positive change by helping organizations, leaders and individuals in high demand — design and implement strategies that maximize focus and deliver results. Specializing in Organization and Strategic Leadership.

Email | LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Web | Skype: philip.a.foster | 615-216-5667