Book Review: The Culture Map by Erin Meyer – Decoding how people think, lead and get things done across cultures (Diversity and cross-cultural intelligence)

There are some excellent models and resources about cross-cultural intelligence. (I particularly like the Hofstede Country comparison tool). But this book – recommended to me by one of my clients – was a revelation and is my favourite resource so far. I recommend it to leaders, human resource professionals or employees in global or multicultural organisations or teams. And for those who work in a culture different to their homeland or anyone doing business in a multi-cultural environment. The explanatory model is elegant and provides a practical tool to assess and improve cross-cultural communications. It will also help coaches, counsellors and therapists who work with clients from different cultures in support of their understanding of diversity.  Book Review: The Culture Map by Erin Meyer.

Overview

The 2015 book is full of entertaining and relatable workplace stories and anecdotes showing how miscommunication and misunderstanding occur in multi-cultural settings. The information is based on many interviews with businesspeople although the author doesn’t elaborate on her research methods or detailed results.

There is a chapter exploring each of the eight cultural dimensions on which the model that maps the world’s cultures is based:

1. Communicating (low context vs high context)
2. Evaluating (direct negative feedback vs indirect negative feedback)
3. Persuading (principles first vs applications first)
4. Leading (egalitarian vs hierarchical)
5. Deciding (consensual vs top down)
6. Trusting (task-based vs relationship-based)
7. Disagreeing (confrontational vs avoids confrontation)
8. Scheduling (linear time vs flexible time)

Each scale positions 20 to 30 countries along a continuum and guides you on how to apply the scale to the dozens of situations commonly arising in our increasingly global business world.

The book demonstrates the impact of cultural differences on a wide range of activities including: decision making, leading a team, team meetings, building trust, delegation, providing feedback, presenting, decision-making, persuasion, scheduling, project management, conflict management, building trust and relationships and designing organisational structures. And even negotiations for mergers and acquisitions (M&A).

The author promises to provide a step-by-step approach to understanding the most common business communication challenges that arise from cultural differences. She delivers. And offers steps for dealing with them more effectively in the future.

Key ideas in The Culture Map

• Anxiety and miscommunication are common in work events and environments where there are people from different cultures. Simply articulating what you are doing can be helpful to avoid misunderstandings. But when you are in a culture, it is often difficult or impossible to see that culture

• “If your business success relies on your ability to work successfully with people from around the world, you need to have an appreciation for cultural difference as well as respect for individual differences. Both are essential”

• Cultural relativity is important. It is not a country’s absolute position on scale but one culture’s position on the scale relative to another. KPMG is mentioned here – it created global teams to standardise the implementation of management software systems. In one team the British found the French to be “disorganised, chaotic and lacked punctuality”. On another team the Indians complained that the French were “rigid, inflexible and obsessed with deadlines and structure”. The French fall between the British and Indians on the scheduling scale. The Germans – further along than the British – found the British “disorganized, chaotic and always late”!

• Listen to the air – In the US and other Anglo-Saxon culture people are trained to communicate as literally and explicitly as possible. By contrast, in many Asian cultures messages are often conveyed implicitly, requiring the listener to read between the lines. Edward Hall (American anthropologist) originally developed the concept of high and low context culture while working on Native American reservations in the 1930s. He used the metaphor of marriage – newlyweds need to be explicit while those who have been married for decades have shared the same context for years and can pick up messages by simple gestures

• A solution to minimising misunderstandings uses three levels of verification:
  • One person to recap the key points (rotate the role)
  • Each person to summarise what he or she would do next
  • One person to send a written recap

• The evaluating scale provides insights into how to give effective performance appraisals and negative feedback in different parts of the world. Guidance:
  • Low context and indirect negative feedback
    • Be explicit and low-context with both positive and negative feedback
    • Try, over time, to be balanced in the amount of positive and negative feedback you give
    • Frame your behaviour in cultural terms
  • High context and indirect negative feedback
    • Don’t give feedback in to an individual in front of a group
    • Blur the message (a. give the feedback slowly, over a period of time, so that it gradually sinks in b. use food and drink to blur an unpleasant message and c. say the good and leave out the bad)

• Our ability to persuade others depends not simply on the strength of our message but on how we build our arguments and the persuasive techniques we employ. Principles-first reasoning (deductive reasoning) derives conclusions or facts from general principles or facts. Applications-first reasoning (inductive reasoning) reaches general conclusions on the pattern of factual observations.

• Although Aristotle, a Greek, is credited with articulating applications-first thinking (induction), it was British thinkers who popularized the methodologies among modern scholars and scientists. Philosophy on the European continent has been largely driven by principles-first approaches (e.g. Descartes and hypotheses, German dialectic model of deduction). The British and American systems are based on common law, in which a judgement is one case sets a precent for future cases – a clear example of applications-first thinking. By contrast, most EU states use the civil law system (originating in Roma law and the Napoleonic Code) where a general statue or principle is applied on a case-by-case basis (principles-first).

• Hofstede developed the term power distance in the 1970s: “the extent to which the less powerful members of organizations accept and expect that power is distributed unequally”. In a more recent study Professor Robert House conducted interviews across 62 counties as part of the Globe Project. How can I improve my cross cultural communication. This is the basis for the leading scale – egalitarian (low power distance) and hierarchical (high power distance).

• German culture places a higher value on building consensus as part of the decision-making process, while in the US decision-making is largely invested in the individual. Most cultures that fall as egalitarian on the Leading scale also believe in consensual decision making. The US breaks the mould by combining an egalitarian ethos with a more top-down approach to decision-making. The differing styles of decision making have a dramatic effect on the timeline of a typical project.

• There are two forms of trust – Cognitive trust is based on the confidence you feel in another person’s accomplishments, skills and reliability. This is from the head. And task based. Affective trust arises from feeling of emotional closeness, empathy or friendship. This is from the heart. And relationship based. (I – and some models – refer to these as rational trust and emotional trust). Americans draw a sharpy dividing lines between cognitive trust and affective trust. Whereas amongst Chinese executives there is a stronger interplay between cognitive and affective trust 

• Kurt Lewin was one of the first social scientists to explain individual personality as being partially formed by the cultural system in which the individual was raised. Authors Fons Trompanaars and Charles Hampden-Turner later expanded on Lewin’s model to explain how different cultures have different layers of information that they divulge publicly or reserve for personal relationships. (These models are summarised here: How can I improve my cross cultural communication) These models are frequently referred to as the peach and coconut models of personal interaction
  • Peach cultures (e.g. United States or Brazil) people tend to be friendly (soft) with others they have just met. But after a little friendly interaction you may suddenly get to the hard shell of the pit where the peach protects his or her real self. In these cultures, friendliness does not equal friendship.
  • In Coconut cultures (e.g. Polish, French, German or Russian) people are more closed with those they don’t have a friendship with. They rarely smile at strangers, ask casual acquaintances personal questions or offer personal information to those they don’t know intimately. While relationships are built up slowly, they tend to last longer. 

• Building relationships requires you to invest time together. Sharing meals is a common method of doing this across the world. Where communication is digital, you need to choose your communication medium (phone, emails or wasta) carefully. This is an excellent guide on digital communications across genders, generations and cultures: Book review: Digital Body Language – How to build trust by Erica Dhawan 

• In more confrontational cultures, it seems quite natural to attack someone’s opinion without attacking that person. In avoid-confrontation societies these two things are tightly connected. There’s an enlightening matrix considering confrontational against non-confrontational and Emotionally expressive vs Emotionally inexpressive on page 204 which would be a considerable help to international negotiators. 

• One of my favourite topics is the cultural difference of monochronic (British) and polychronic (Arab, Caribbean) time from anthropologist Edward T Hall. Monochronic vs polychronic time: What’s the difference? | Indeed.com UK. Psychologist Robert Levine went on to note that some culture measure time in five minute intervals while other cultures barely use clocks and instead schedule their day on “event time” (e.g. before lunch, after sunrise). The final dimension explored in the book are scheduling and cross-cultural perceptions of time

Favourite quotes in The Culture Map

• Chinese people leave a few more seconds of silence before jumping in than the West

• In a French setting, positive feedback is often given implicitly, while negative feedback is given more directly. In the United States, it’s the opposite

• Russia favours a hierarchical approach, while Israel prefers an egalitarian one

• There are seven times more words in English (500,000) than in French (70,000)

• High context cultures tend to have a long, shared history – usually they are relationship-oriented societies where networks of connections are passed on from generation to generation

• In Chinese culture, children are taught not to just hear the explicit words but also to focus on how something is said and on what is not said

• Multicultural teams need low-context processes

• Managers in different parts of the world are conditioned to give feedback in drastically different ways

• The Anglo-Dutch Translation Guide and the four quadrants of the communication (low context/explicit and high context/implicit) and evaluation (direct negative feedback and indirect negative feedback) matrix were eye openers

• Presenting to Londoners or New Yorkers? Get to the point and stick to it. Presenting to French, Spaniards or Germans? Spend more time setting the parameters and explaining the background before jumping to your conclusion.

• Asians have what we refer to as holistic thought patterns, while Westerners tend to have what we call a specific approach…The Americans focus on individual figures separate from their environment, while the Asian give more attention to the backgrounds and to the links between these backgrounds and the central figures. Chinese people think from macro to micro whereas Western people think from micro to macro.

• In an egalitarian culture, an aura of authority is more likely to come from acting like one of the team while in a hierarchical culture, an aura of authority tends to come from setting yourself clearly apart

• Events that took place thousands of years ago (the Roman Empire, Vikings, religion) continue to influence the cultures in which individuals are raised

• In Chinese families, children are generally not spoken to in the family by their personal names but rather by their kinship titles (older sister, second brother etc)

• The really remarkable exception is Japan, which although strongly hierarchical is one of the most consensual societies in the world.

• Ringi is the management technique where low-level managers discuss a new idea among themselves and come to a consensus before presenting it to managers one level higher. The process of informally making a proposal, getting input and solidifying support is called nemawashi (literally: “root binding”)

• In China, you need to take the time, energy and effort to build a personal (emotional) connection (“Guanxi”). In China, business relationships are personal relationships. The loyalty is to the individual and not to the company.

• Different cultures have different social cues that mark appropriate behaviour with strangers as opposed to cues that indicate a real friendship is developing. As a general rule, investing extra time developing a relationship-based approach will pay dividends when working with people from around the world. One productive way to start putting trust deposits in the bank is by building on common interests.

• One strategy, if you need to contact someone you don’t know is to use in Arabic what is called wasta (loosely translated to mean something like “connections that create preference”, “relationships that give you influence” or “who you know”) 

• In just about every culture, when you make a telephone call, you are likely to start with a period of social talk. What differs from culture to culture is how many minutes you spend chatting before moving to business. As a general rule, the more relationship-based the society, the more social conversation surrounds the task. 

• Research suggests that the more you mimic the other person’s email style, the more likely your collaborator is to respond positively to you 

• A word in German “Sachlichkeit” is closely translated in English as “objectivity”. With Sachlichkeit we can separate someone’s opinions or idea from the person expressing that idea 

• In both Korea and China, behaviour toward those with in-group status may be very different from behaviour toward those with out-group status. Confucius provided very clear instructions about how to behave with people you have relationships with. But he provided almost no guidance on how to behave with strangers In-group and out-group – Wikipedia 

• Bahamian proverb: “To engage in conflict, one does not need to bring a knife that cuts, but a needle that sows” 

• A first strategy for dealing effectively with the Scheduling scale is to increase your own ability to work in different ways. Style switching is an essential skill for today’s global manager

 

Communicating
Low Context		High Context
·         USA, Canada, Australia, Netherlands, Germany and UK ·          Effective communication must be simple, clear and explicit ·          Messages understood at face value ·          Repetition is appreciated if it helps clarify the communication ·          More likely to put things in writing		·          Japan, India, China, Korea, Indonesia, Kenya, Saidi Arabia, Iran ·          Good communication is sophisticated, nuanced and layered ·          Strong oral tradition (written summary may be construed as a lack of trust) ·          Messages are both spoken and read between the lines – they are often implied ·          Based on unconscious assumptions about common reference points and shared knowledge ·          Many words can be interpreted multiple ways ·          Learn to listen to what is meant instead of what is said – and ask open questions
Evaluating
Direct negative		Indirect negative
·          Netherlands, Israel, Germany, France, Norway, Denmark ·          Honest and give message straight ·          Frank and blunt ·          French trained to criticise passionately and provide positive feedback sparingly ·          Use upgraders – absolutely, totally or strongly ·          In Russia there is no reticence about expressing your negative criticism only		·          Ja[am, Thailand, Indonesia, Ghana, Korea, Saudi Arabia, China ·          Soft, subtle, diplomatic. ·          Never criticise a colleague openly or in front of others ·          US wraps positive messages around negative ones ·          Use downgraders that soften criticism e.g. kind of, sort of, maybe, a little
Persuading
Principles-first		Applications-first
·          Italy, France, Russia, Spain, Germany ·          Want to understand the why behind a request ·          Trained to first develop the theory or complex concept before presenting facts, statement or opinion ·          Preference to start a message or report by building up a theoretical argument before moving to a conclusion ·          Conceptual principles underlying each situation are valued		·          US, Canada, Australia, UK, Netherlands ·          Focus less on the why and more on the how ·          Trained to begin with a fact, statement or opinion and later add concepts to back up or explain conclusion as necessary ·          Preference to being a message or report with an executive summary or bullets ·          Discussions in a practical, concrete manner ·          Get to the point quickly and stick to it ·          Provide practical examples up front ·          Theoretical or philosophical discussions avoided in a business environment
Leading
Egalitarian		Hierarchical
·          Denmark, Netherlands, Sweden, Israel, Australia, Canada, Finland ·          Ideal distance between a boss and subordinate is low. ·          Best boss is a facilitator among equals. ·          Organisational structures are flat ·          Communication often skips hierarchical lines		·          Japan, Korea, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, India, China, Russia, Peru, Poland, Mexico ·          Ideal distance between a boss and subordinate is high ·          The best boss is a strong director who leads from the front ·          Status is important. ·          Organisational structures are multilayered and fixed ·          Communication follows set hierarchical lines ·          East Asian societies have a paternalistic view of leadership
Deciding
Consensual		Top down
·          Japan, Sweden, Netherlands, Germany ·          Decisions are made in groups through unanimous agreement		·          Nigeria, China, India, Russia ·          Decisions are made by individuals (usually the boss)
Trusting
Task-based		Relationship-based
·          US, Netherlands, Denmark, Australia, Germany, Finland ·          Trust is built through business related activities ·          Work relationships are built and dropped easily, based on the practicality of the situation ·          You do good work consistently, you are reliable, I enjoy working with you, I trust you		·          Saudi Arabia, India, China, Nigeria, Brazil, Thailand, Turkey, Japan, Russia, Mexico ·          Trust is built through sharing meals, evening drinks and visits at the coffee machine ·          Work relationships build up slowly over the long term ·          I’ve seen who you are at a deep level, I’ve shared personal time with you. I know others well who trust you. I trust you.
Disagreeing
Confrontational		Avoids confrontation
·          Israel, France, Germany, Russia, Netherlands, Spain, Denmark ·          Disagreement and debate are positive for the team or organisation ·          Open confrontation is appropriate and will not negatively impact the relationships		·          Indonesia, Japan, Thailand, Ghana, China, Peru, Saudi Arabia, India ·          Disagreement and debate are negative for the team or organisation ·          Open confrontation is inappropriate and will break group harmony or negatively impact the relationship
Scheduling
Linear-time		Flexible-time
·          Germany, Switzerland, Japan, Sweden, Netherlands, Denmark, US, UK ·          Project steps are approached in a sequential fashion, completing one task before beginning the next ·          One thing at a time. No interruptions ·          The focus is on the deadline and sticking to the schedule ·          Emphasis is on promptness and good organisation over flexibility		·          Saudi Arabia, India, Nigeria, Kenya, China ·          Project steps are approached in a fluid manner, changing tasks as opportunities arise ·          Many things are deal with at once and interruptions accepted ·          This focus is on adaptability and flexibility is valued over organisation

Book contents – The Culture Map by Erin Meyer

Introduction: Navigating cultural differences and the wisdom of Mrs Chen

1. Listening to the air (Communicating across cultures)
2. The many faces of polite (Evaluating performance and providing negative feedback)
3. Why versus how (the art of persuasion in a multicultural world)
4. How much respect do you want? (Leadership, hierarchy and power)
5. Big D or Little d (Who decides, and how?)
6. The head or the heart (Two types of trust and how they grow)
7. The needle, not the knife (Disagreeing productively)
8. How late is late? (Scheduling and cross-cultural perceptions of time)

Related articles on cross-cultural communication and navigating difference

International business negotiation – The Majalis approach January 2025

Confidence – How to get a word in when people keep talking July 2024

fixed views and closed to new ideas (dealing with stubbornness) July 2024

What do you do when your boss is a micro-managing control freak? March 2024

What do you do when a male colleague doesn’t like women? (gender bias) February 2023

Mediation and dispute resolution – Contemporary issues by Tony Whatling June 2022

Non-Verbal Communication (NVC) – the basics (Video) August 2021

Book review: Digital Body Language – How to build trust by Erica Dhawan June 2021 (KEY REFERENCE)

Dealing with resistance to change March 2021

Cross-Cultural Leadership: Leading a Diverse Workforce | Maryville Online November 2020 (Infographic)

Future Marketing Manager – Eight steps to manage virtual teams November 2019

DACRIE – A model to enhance business relationships April 2019

Change management – Change Catalyst book review by Kim Tasso September 2018

How to Get Better at Reading People from Different Cultures Harvard Business Review by Kasia Wezowski on September 18, 2018

Better Business Relationships – book by Kim Tasso July 2018

International relationship management October 2017

change management and organisational change January 2017

What the Best Cross-Cultural Managers Have in Common Harvard Business Review – Linda Brimm June 2016

Managing teams and virtual teams – 13 top tips – Kim Tasso May 2016

Cultural Differences Are More Complicated than What Country You’re From Harvard Business Review Andy Molinsky January 2016

Getting to Si, Ja, Oui, Hai, and Da Harvard Business Review Erin Meyer December 2015

Intercultural working – some insights – Kim Tasso July 2015 (KEY REFERENCE)

Future Marketing Managers need Finnish “sisu” for success April 2015

Building Relationships in Cultures That Don’t Do Small Talk Harvard Business Review April 2015 Andy Molinsky and Melissa Hahn

Why You Need Cultural Intelligence (And How To Develop It) Forbes March 2015

Map Out Cultural Conflicts on Your Team Harvard Business Review September 2014 Erin Meyer

How can I improve my cross cultural communication January 2013

Cross cultural communication – Kim Tasso December 2013