Archives for September 2016

Having been a part of two multi-country, family-owned companies over the past five years, I have seen firsthand two distinctly different management mindsets toward doing business in another country or countries. Based on my experience, I concur with Perlmutter (1969) that these mindsets are not fixed mentalities, rather that they represent points on an evolutionary march toward progress.

As Moran, Abramson, and Moran (2014) describe, a company chooses to expand into another country in order “to find greater competitive advantage” than those opportunities which are present in its native location. (P.107) This desire to expand and to grow into other markets to support overall growth was certainly the original impetus for both companies in which I worked and work. However, their perspectives differ at this juncture.

In the first organization, a Dutch-based professional services firm chose to enter the US market almost fifteen years ago. From the perspective of increasing their scope, the firm recognized that the US market represented a large opportunity for spending in market research, their offering, and far larger than the Dutch market. (D. Huisman, personal communication, May 2011)

When I joined the organization in August 2011, the US office (in New York) was not succeeding as the firm hoped–even after almost ten years in business. Whether assessed on revenues, profit, retaining employees or other measures, the firm was not thriving. The approach up until then was one that Perlmutter (1969) would describe as an ethnocentric mindset. Managers in the US office were Dutch. Decision-making authority (hiring, strategy, budgets) rested in the home office in Rotterdam. Even in those ten years, the “administrative heritage” Moran, Abramson, and Moran describe (2014) was virtually impossible to change in spite of poor performance.

In 2013, the first very senior local (US-based manager) was hired, and the US division of the firm began to operate from a more polycentric mindset. In the intervening three years, the senior manager in the US began hiring and developing local staff as well as continuing to incorporate Dutch staff within the US operations. Further, the US division’s revenue base has changed and reflects the company’s doing business with a preponderance of US-based companies, rather than only US divisions of European companies. In addition, the US division now has offices in San Francisco and Atlanta, in addition to New York.

By hiring an experienced American at the very top of the organization in America, the cultural mores of the US began to supplant Dutch mores in the American organization. At this stage, the company remains in this polycentric mode–Dutch management of the Dutch and other European branches, and American management of the now three American branches. At this point, the organization as a whole acknowledges that local branches are best poised to move forward with local talent. At this stage, the senior US manager does not believe there is a world-wide approach to best practices, or a geocentric model. (M. Mabey, personal communication, August 2016)

Contrast this evolution of one organization with the current position of the organization I am part of now. An American company in business for more than 40 years, two years ago we opened an office in Amsterdam. I, as an American having lived in Europe for six years and the first employee, perceive our current organization state as distinctly ethnocentric.

While staffing includes two Dutch salespeople, both instructors who deliver the company’s products are American. Perlmutter would refer to this aspect of ethnocentric mindset as recruiting and staffing people of the home country for key positions in Amsterdam. The Managing Director of the Amsterdam office, while Dutch, does not control the finances of the Amsterdam office. The decision-making authority and the organizational evaluation and control (Perlmutter, 1969) for the Amsterdam office rests in Atlanta. Credit cards for staff use are issued through the American office. Our European headquarters reflects more of an ethnocentric American mindset than any real identification with the Netherlands or the European Union.

What buoys me is, again, the concept that this evolution toward a geocentric mindset simply takes time. If, in the fifteen years it took my former employer to progress to a polycentric mindset, my current employer could also do so, I would consider this serious progress.
References

Moran, R. T., Abramson, N. R., & Moran, S. V. (2014). Managing cultural differences. Routledge.

Perlmutter, H. V. (1969). The tortuous evolution of the multinational corporation. Columbia Journal of world business, 4(1), 9-18. Retrieved from: http://s7f8147710141dd57.jimcontent.com/download/version/1359499033/module/7238636686/name/Master%20DMU%20%20Howard_V_Perlmutter_-_The_tortuous_evolution_of_the_multinational_enterpri%20se.pdf

People tend to fear what they do not understand. This can come with changes in a company as people can become accustomed to their daily routine. I see this quite often in my workplace where a new manager will present new ideas that will clash with the old way of doing things and both sides fight for their own reasoning. A common phrase we’re trying to steer away from “This is how we’ve always done it.”

“People are often resistant to change in general” (Pennsylvania State University). A company I worked for was moving from Microsoft’s Sharepoint to Epicor’s ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning). ERP 10, the latest version, was just released so we were one of their guinea pigs. As with all latest and greatest advances, there are many bugs and issues yet to be resolved. Being so, there was much frustration going on throughout the entire company.

In the system, there is a program that sales would use called “configurators”. This would configure a product based on a menu-based selection therefore pulling all the materials needed helping keep track of inventor. I was put in charge of creating these “configurators” which involved C# coding, something of which I had no background in. I bravely took on the challenge and began figuring out the system. Working in the system, I had managers breathing down my neck to do what seemed like the impossible. So not only was it frustrating for the users but also for the people working on the system itself. There were several meetings with ERP support where we would have to fly them in and pay for their lodging just for them to be there to aid us.

After months of creating these configurators, it was time to present them to the sales team. This would be the unfreezing part of Schein’s planned theory, “Creating the motivation to change” (Pennsylvania State University). I was to show the team how useful it would be and how much easier it was to do their job with my configurators. To have everyone together and show them the new way of doing their job was quite daunting and of course had much confusion which leads to the second part of Schein’s theory which is changing. “The actual changes in behaviors and attitudes to the new desired behaviors and attitudes” (Pennsylvania State University). After giving them this new tool, I had to ensure they were not only using it but using it correctly. I would routinely check up on people and ask for their feedback if they’d like anything changed. This helped them adjust to the new system and furthermore feel that they had a support system if they needed help. This leads to Schein’s last step of refreezing, “stabilizing the changes by freezing the new behaviors into the standard behavior” (Pennsylvania State University). After making the changes they ask for, it started coming to a point where I just had to make minor tweaks. I made sure that they knew I was there to support them if they were confused how to use the system all the way to what would make their job easier.

When they’re satisfied, they’re more likely to see the benefits of the system. One of the newsletters of the company had a section where they asked some people what they liked about it. This helped boost morale as well as brought light to ideas others may not have seen. The change from one system to another was not a smooth one but I’m glad I was able to be a part of making the change.

 

References:

Penn State University World Campus. (2016a). Lesson 5: Learning and Changing in a Global Context

Retrieved From https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1802572/modules/items/21179081

 

Penn State University World Campus. (2016b). Lesson 5: Learning and Changing in a Global Context

Retrieved From https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1802572/modules/items/21179082

These days, I’ve been feeling in need of a support group. I’ve been dealing with my current condition for about 18 months, but it stretches back well over two years. Public awareness is coalescing around this condition poorly, and it’s driving me crazy. Writing this is one part academic, one part therapeutic. I need to do this. So without further ado (and at risk of being doxxed),

Hi. I’m Joey, and I work for Wells Fargo.

Nearly everyone has seen the proverbial mud that the name of the well-known consumer lending bank has been dragged through in recent weeks. The allegations of widespread fraud, intermingled with a toxic environment of high-pressure sales and cheating (to the detriment of the clients who put their trust in the bank officers who subsequently took advantage of them) has been front page news for weeks. Many depositors have withdrawn their accounts, Congress is on a mission to lop the heads off of careers (rightly so), and my stock options have devalued to the point where I don’t want to even look at the login screen to my 401(k).

And it all could have been avoided. It very nearly was, and if senior leaders within the company had been more effective at communicating within the ranks of management, they likely would have achieved significant organizational change.

The current controversy, while just now becoming publicly known, has been old news for years in Wells Fargo circles. The main story ties back to a lawsuit filed by the city of Los Angeles in May of 2015, alleging “‘unfair, unlawful and fraudulent conduct” through a pervasive culture of high-pressure sales” (Reckard, 2015). Comparatively, media outlets have used each of those terms like confetti since the scandal broke in September.

Even before that, the company was trying to change.

Leading up to the end of 2014, it began to become apparent that there was a cultural problem at Wells. Even as early as 2011, there were allegations of “employees [opening] duplicate accounts, sometimes without customers’ knowledge” (Reckard, 2016). At the time, I was a newly minted employee, still a rookie banker, when it was announced that there would be ‘major changes’ to the way we did business. At the time, everything that could be measured was measured daily. If possible, hourly ad hoc reports were requested. Daily reports were comprehensive, and the principal tool used by managers to gauge effectiveness of personnel. Everything was in a stack-ranking format; the highest performers were always on the top of the list, fostering competition between retail bankers to ‘out-sell’ each other. When the ‘major changes’ came down at the start of 2015, the first thing to go was the stack-ranking, followed shortly thereafter by some of the more insidious reporting like the hourly ad hoc reports. Language was changed in the sales incentive programs to promote a less cutthroat, “sell sell sell” mentality.

Nothing really changed. In fact, change was rather heavily resisted in my area. When reports were disabled and removed from the system, lower-level executives and area managers simply began demanding that their direct reports create and send them the reports manually, via email, much to the chagrin of branch managers and senior executives alike. When minimum goals were redacted, those same lower-level executives and area managers simply implemented their own minimum goals. When manual reporting was banned by senior leadership (yes, it actually got that bad), emails were replaced by thrice-a-day phone calls. Finally, in what felt internally like desperation, the company did the unthinkable: all daily reporting was blocked, and the model shifted to a weekly basis instead, with managers limited to no more than two conference calls with subordinates per week.

It’s necessary to explain the progression in order to demonstrate one very important fact: change was being attempted by senior executives; whether out of fear or altruism, the intent was very much there. According to Schein’s planned change theory, top executives were trying (and failing) to kick off the process of unfreezing, “creating the motivation to change” (Penn State University, 2016). This failed for a myriad of reasons, from the level of entrenchment in the culture to the lack of transparent communication regarding the need to modify behaviors. Following the Schein model, unfreezing was a failure because the three mechanisms it is comprised of never fully came together, and portions were omitted. Disconfirmation, “the process of showing organizational members that their current behaviors or attitudes are incorrect” (Penn State University, 2016), was half-heartedly approached with programs like the seminal “Ethically Speaking” newsletter that was sent out on Mondays, outlining examples of unfair, abusive, or deceptive sales practices. The second mechanism of unfreezing, “creating anxiety or guilt in organizational members” (Penn State University, 2016), never materialized at all, with a few outlier exceptions. The third mechanism, creating psychological safety, or “showing organizational members that there is an alternative to their current behaviors that will reduce the guilt and anxiety they are experiencing” (Penn State University, 2016) was undercut by the fact that the second mechanism was never triggered, and by the fact that while one thing was being said by high-level executives, the awards, bonuses, recognition, promotions, and accolades employees sought after were bestowed upon one demographic: the highest sellers.

That being the case, with the first step of the 3-step model to organizational change dead on arrival, the second step of actually implementing changes could never be effective; naturally, this makes refreezing, the third and final step, a moot point, trapped in a proverbial purgatory of non-existence without the effective use of the first two. The fact that daily reporting was replaced by managers demanding manual daily reporting is a testament to the ineffectual nature of change without unfreezing. It also speaks to another issue and the one that, in my own opinion, is the lynchpin of the unfreezing’s failure; a lack of buy-in. The half-heartedness with which the company approached their attempt at organizational change was underscored by the fact that no one bought in to the change. With rewards still limited to high sellers, what motivation did the (relatively) few employees cheating in the trenches have to change? What motivation did managers, whose upward mobility pivoted on the sales figures of their subordinate managers and producing staff, have to try and change?

Instead of addressing the problem directly, a soft approach of weekly memos, quarterly conference calls, and slow removal of incentive reporting was taken. No one wanted to address the elephant in the room; that certain area managers and presidents in certain locations were being unethical was widely known. Many of our leaders disregarded talk of it, not because they were guilty of taking part in the abusive practices, but because they themselves weren’t supporting such behaviors, and didn’t think it was their concern. In more rural states like Wyoming, we had it relatively easy; our own district’s internal culture was very sales-cheating averse. The districts and areas that were doing such things were scoffed at. They were an abstract concept; a bunch of idiots that were going to be standing in the unemployment line, barred from working in the financial sector ever again if they got caught.  The fact that Wells Fargo has fired over 5,300 employees over ethical concerns in the last five years (Egan, 2016) suggests that the scoffing wasn’t that far off the mark in many cases. But still, the problem wasn’t really addressed, because the three mechanisms of unfreezing were never fully deployed.

Since the nationwide version of the story that company employees have been dealing with for years broke, I’ve been on no less than six conference calls with different business lines, discussing how to increase sales volume. It’s as if the leadership between my level and the top of the crop simply cannot comprehend the paradigm shift that must happen, despite the fact that Wells Fargo announced publicly that all of its sales incentive bonus goals will be discontinued. Many area managers and lower-level executives still haven’t changed their tune, and it is beginning to look like they will either be forced to change, or will be removed. Already, I’ve had two superiors unceremoniously fired in the last three months (to the point of the company trying to instill change, these firings happened well before news broke on the topic of sales practices). I fear that many more will follow if the message of change that has been trying to get through doesn’t come.

The good news is that, in the wake of the media blitz, change finally appears to be coming. There is nothing quite like being asked fifteen times a day by clients if they have any accounts in their name that they are unaware of to help along the process of disconfirmation of the behavior. For bankers who have cheated and not been caught, anxiety is now very likely a constant companion; the removal of sales goals, with a different incentive plan focused more thoroughly on customer satisfaction surveys, is generating psychological safety. Sales accolades are gone, with new, “client-centric” accolades being levied in their place. The unfreezing step is now happening, and is visible. As for change, and refreezing… well, we’ll have to wait and see what that looks like.

NOTE: This is not a confessional; I can honestly say that not I, my team, nor any of my colleagues currently employed by the company have ever engaged in the kind of behavior displayed in the news. The truth is that we didn’t need to cheat to meet our goals. A blind eye was turned to it in some cases, and the results have been rough. The people who did it received a couple hundred bucks’ short term benefit, usually followed by a spate of unemployment as the long term consequence. I have high hopes for the company’s future.

**Image of WFC stock prices last 12 months. Note in particular the sharp drop in September (SlideShare.com, n.d.).

**An example of Wells Fargo’s ratings from a high-level overview investment meeting just months earlier (SlideShare.com, n.d.).

 

Egan, M. (2016). 5,300 Wells Fargo employees fired over 2 million phony accounts. CNN. Retrieved from http://money.cnn.com/2016/09/08/investing/wells-fargo-created-phony-accounts-bank-fees/

Penn State University. (2016). OLEAD 410, Lesson 5: Learning and Change In A Global Setting. Retrieved from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1802572/modules/items/21179082

Reckard, E. (2015). LA Sues Wells Fargo, Alleging ‘Unlawful and Fraudulent Conduct.’ The Los Angeles Times, May 4, 2015. Retrieved from http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-wells-fargo-suit-20150505-story.html

Reckard, E. (2013). Wells Fargo’s Pressure-Cooker Sales Culture Comes At A Cost. The Los Angeles Times, December 21, 2013. Retrieved from http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-wells-fargo-sale-pressure-20131222-story.html

 

Learning and change are very important to the dynamic global environment we live in. If we look internationally, we can see that companies set in their old ways, refusing to change and learn failed.

“In 1989, Encyclopedia Britannica sold over one hundred thousand copies of its multi-volume encyclopedia and set a sales record of $627 million. Only five years later, sales had plummeted 53 percent.”(Russo & Schoemaker, 2002) Unfortunately the leadership of Britannica was blind to the global technological revolution. That resulted in it’s unwillingness to change and learn new ways bringing them to a point of fall Britannica was not able to recover from.

“In global organizations learning can occur in many ways, but social learning is one way that occurs in all cultures across the globe, as it is a basic part of being human” (Redmond, 2016). This makes social learning a bridge that connects all societies. Bandura(1986) developed a social learning model that is especially noticed in young children. Children tend to take a behavior they see and adapt it to their own. Bandura outlines four main steps: Attention, retention, reproduction and motivation. Social learning is imperative for growth and development of all ages. This makes the old adage leading by example ever more imperative as our peers and subordinates unwittingly emulate us for better or worse.

On a bigger scale we have organizational change. Shein(1980) created a planned change theory that describes steps involved in the process of change in organizations. While many models exist, this one has a lot of supporting research that shows it’s effectiveness. Shein states that unfreezing, changing, and refreezing steps are imperative to effective and permanent change, but behind any change there is a motivation stemming from belief that the change in behavior is necessary and will lead to beneficial outcome.

In Britannica’s example the leadership failed to perceive the need to change. They saw themselves as book publishers first, which limited their view. If they were willing to change their organization from book publisher to a firm that specializes in global knowledge distribution they would be more willing to see the importance of restructuring the company in favor of new technological advancement and would develop planned change, they would learn from their global peers that perceived the importance of technology and thus managed to corner new market insuring their success.

Times are changing and demanding new ways. By applying principles of Bandura’s social learning and Schein’s planned change today we can be better prepared for tomorrow.

References:

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought & action: A social cognitive theory. Upper Saddle River, : Prentice Hall.

Image retrieved on 21 September, 2016 from http://www.managers.org.uk/~/media/Images/Insights/ChangeManagement.jpg

Redmond, B. (2016).The Pennsylvania State University World Campus, (2016). Lesson 4: Introduction to Culture. Retrieved from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1802572/modules/items/21179083

Russo, J. & Schoemaker, P. (2002). Winning decisions. New York: Currency.

Schein, E. H. (1980). Organizational psychology. Englewood Cliffs, : Prentice Hall.

 

After this lessons readings, and the commentary of some of my peers, I am choosing to write about both the effectiveness of communication and egocentrism. Egocentrism, as the text suggests, is having little or no regard for interests, beliefs, or attitudes other than one’s own; self-centered. I believe that as students to the concepts we are learning in the course, we still fail to see ourselves as people who tend to be egocentric or insensitive to the actual plight of people who are different than us.

I read a blog post today that made me refer to the readings and analyze, because I wanted to take that as a learning opportunity and properly address what I had read and understand where the disconnect or “error in communication” occurred. Long story short, I think it is very important for us to consider our biases and if we’re selective listeners when things are being communicated. Maybe someone has a legitimate reason to complain, but we’re choosing not see their reason. Maybe certain groups of people are crying for help and fairness, but we only choose to hear that they are speaking out against something.

An applicable example of this would be Syrian refugees trying to illegal enter other countries because they are escaping persecution where they are from. It is possible that they want better lives for their children instead of having their children be slaughtered in their homeland; but we only choose to hear that they are trying to come to American illegally and not that they are escaping death, Or maybe because people are saying that black lives matter, we choose to insert the word “only” in front of that, even though the statement means to shed light on the race of people who are being killed by police officers at an alarming rate, not negating the importance of the lives of other races. Lastly, how about people from Mexico smuggling themselves to the US with only positive intentions? Many of them come here and take the jobs that no one wants, yet entitled Americans who don’t care to open up the lines of communication and understand the circumstances of others, say that they’re coming in and “taking our jobs.”

Communication is a two way street and I think that us, as Americans need to understand that as well. We always blame, instead of trying to understand others perspectives. I truly believe that the moment we start to do that, the less of a divide we will see here across race, religion, and culture. I could elaborate further, but I think this should suffice. We need to let go of the egocentrism that is embedded in our American culture.

Moran, R. T., Moran, S. V., & Abramson, N. R. (2001). Managing Cultural Differences.

https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1802572/modules/items/21179073

I’m about to do something dangerous.

I want to address something that, while unable to do so in another class, has been bothering me since I read about it, and that deserves more attention than it likely gets. I doubt most students are pleased to approach this subject, but  approached it shall be, nonetheless. I want to discuss the disparate scores that follow racial lines in tests of intelligence, and how communication, not intelligence, is a potential explanation for the issue.

Communication is defined as “the exchange of information between individuals” (Penn State University, 2016, 1) in very basic terms. Communication, however, takes many forms. One form of communication that is often discounted is the administration and subsequent scoring of written tests. Consider that for a moment; the test writer has devised a series of questions whereby they attempt to glean understanding of the test-taker’s knowledge of a subject. By contrast, the test taker is attempting to communicate their proficiency by means of answering the questions as accurately as possible. It falls into the category of an exchange of information between individuals, and has a defined purpose, which most communication of a serious nature will.

So here’s the thing: decades of research has gone into the application of tests that people take for a variety of reasons; everything from the teller survey at the bank to the GMAT exam has been thoroughly researched and studied for effectiveness, creating a linkage of communication whereby answers might be gleaned about a particular paradigm. Intelligence tests are one such item; a carefully designed examination asking questions to which the answers can show a particular amount of cognitive ability; perhaps the most well known is the Wonderlic Personnel Test, a 50 question exam administered over the course of 12 minutes, made famous for its use as an intelligence measurement tool by the National Football League. There are probably as many intelligence tests out there as there are blades of grass, but the Wonderlic, like other accepted tests, is able to boast high quality results thanks to construct validity; most intelligence tests in common use agree with one another to a high statistical level.

So why is it that there are clearly delineated scores along racial boundary lines?

The question is posed in part by a study from the mid ’90’s that was published as a book called “The Bell Curve.” In it, authors Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein  discuss, among other things, what we refer to today as “adverse impact” as it relates to the ratio of scores between two particular races (Penn State University, 2016, 2). This concept, like many others in posts I tend to write, was difficult to research, as no one seemed willing to approach the subject directly. When one simply types, “the bell curve book” into Google’s search bar, the results of the entire first several pages are all refutations and arguments against the research and the positions taken by Herrnstein and Murray, a snap-to-attention cattle call of the anger that is so near the surface of anything related to the racial relations in America today. Actual research is harder to find.

But finding research, when there is research to be found, is never impossible, and what I found sobered me. A study carried out in 2005 found that the two races in question had a consistent disparity of 1.o-1.1 standard deviations of difference in terms of IQ test results (Ruston & Jensen, 2005).  In a personnel selection class taught at Penn State, the class text discussed the concept of “adverse impact” subsequently needed to be controlled for, as disparate scores due to racial precedent could cause an Equal Opportunity issue (Gatewood, Field, Barrick, 2016). It would seem that the research is out there, but is difficult to find, much of it having been explicitly to refute “The Bell Curve” and the various studies that have found similar results. I find that troublesome, as the scientific method requires objectivity; if you set out to refute something in an experiment, you will. Unfortunately, that invalidates much of the research on the issue. As the Penn State lesson states, “In response to The Bell Curve, many of the highest profile psychologists studying intelligence endorsed the previously mentioned one-page summary of scientific findings on intelligence testing, titled “Mainstream Science on Intelligence”, in The Wall Street Journal” ( Penn State University, 2016, 2). Anytime one sees someone endorsing something (or someone) because ‘the alternative can’t be correct/right/good,’ you have a serious problem.

I’m going to be as clear as possible; I do not believe the issue to be one of racial superiority/inferiority. Rather, I’m looking at this from the vantage point of communication: if the results are skewed to one side, rather than run around in the testing room like a chicken with its head cut off, crying out “diversity, diversity!” we need to look at the problem objectively, as there is a miscommunication of some sort happening between certain test takers and the test, which is driving the results difference. If we can find where the communication goes wrong, we can probably find a way to close the gap between the races and improve everyone’s scores, imbuing confidence and pride in intelligence into an entire generation of Americans, race immaterial. Yes, the research may first yield values that people could lose their careers over; right now does not feel like a good time in America to start running experiments on racial differences on intelligence tests. But being willing to address the problem is the only way to fix it; endorsing previously unendorsed articles because they don’t agree with a controversial study isn’t going to get us anywhere.

 

Gatewood, R., Feild, H., Barrick., M. (2016). Human Resource Selection. 8th Ed. Boston, Cengage.

Penn State University. (2016). OLEAD 410, Lesson 4: Global Communication. Retrieved from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1802572/modules/items/21179072

Penn State University. (2016). PSYCH 490, Lesson 4: Intelligence. Retrieved from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1803843/modules/items/21158266

Rushton, J. Philippe; Jensen, Arthur R (2005). “Thirty Years of Research on Race Differences in Cognitive Ability” (PDF). Psychology, Public Policy and Law.

 

Communication is one of the first things we learn as babies. As soon as we leave the womb, our internal instincts kick in and help us communicate with the world. In the first two years of our lives, we learn how to communicate. In fact, young mothers are encouraged to talk and read to their babies while still in utero. As babies, we would often cry when we were hungry, tired, sick, wet, or scared, and we would giggle or smile when we were happy, relaxed, or satisfied. By 6 months old, we begin to catch on to words we hear our parents, siblings, and others around us say, and by 18 months, we can even begin to formulate sentences. (Baby Center, 2015).

Communication is the “exchange of information between individuals” (Penn State, 2016). As we grow older, communication becomes so natural; we do so without even realizing it. In fact, according to Edward Hall, founder of the intercultural communications field, 80-90 percent of all communication is actually non-verbal cues, or communication involving no exchange of words (Moran, Abramson, & Moran, 2014, p. 35, 43). Some examples of non-verbal cues include body language and facial expressions. As for verbal communication, the average person will speak approximately 1,200 sentences a day, and our brains can actually listen to up to 400 words per minute (Moran, Abramson, & Moran, 2014). Now that’s a lot of communicating!

In global leadership, communication is even more important, as to ensure every employee receives the message as it was intended (Solomon, 1999). With more and more companies expanding internationally and advanced technology, most businesses rely heavily on written communication such as emails, instant messaging, and text messages. In fact, as of 2015, approximately 205 billion emails were sent on a daily basis world-wide. The average number of emails an office worker received on a daily basis was close to 120 emails (Smith, 2016). With that being said, it is extremely important we limit the amount of errors in communication, also known as noise or biases (Penn State, 2016). Bad internet connection, faulty phone service, a limitation of characters allowed for a text message or email, or a misunderstanding of the message received, are all examples of errors in communication. In today’s society, email messages play a huge role in miscommunication. Because non-verbal cues are missing in written correspondence, too often the receiver of the message may not fully understand it. What was meant to be sarcastic could potentially offend the reader because the email has no tone, and the reader cannot easily distinguish the sender’s intent (Penn State, 2016).

Effective communication is what makes or breaks an organization, especially one that spans across the world. The process of intercultural communication is becoming a more standard procedure for companies. To first step to doing this effectively, is to understand cultural diversity. Accepting that what may not offend you, could potentially offend someone from another culture is the key to effective communication. In addition, egocentrism should be avoided at all costs. If we cannot see another person’s perspective, it can nearly be impossible to send a message the receiver will understand (Penn State, 2016).

As a business owner, I communicate with clients, wholesalers, and workers on a daily basis. Ninety percent of my communication is via email. The level of education of each person I communicate with varies from person to person. Most of my workers are young guys who chose not to continue their education, or could possibly have dropped out of high school. Some of my workers are even immigrants trying their hardest to support their family and live the American Dream. I have to ensure my workers understand what is being asked by my client, and I also have to ensure my clients understand the jargon my team and I use when installing their fence. My clients pay a decent amount of money for the work my company does for them, so communicating effectively is something I must do on a daily basis.

References:

Baby Center. (2015). “Baby Milestone: Talking.” Retrieved from: http://www.babycenter.com/0_baby-milestone-talking_6573.bc.

Moran, R. T., Abramson, N. R., & Moran, S. V. (2014). Managing Cultural Differences (9th ed.). New York, New York: Routledge.

Penn State University. (2016). Lesson 4: Global Communication. Retrieved from: https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1802572/modules/items/21179073.

Smith, Craig. (2016). “By the Numbers: 73 Incredible Email Statistics.” DMR. Retrieved from: http://expandedramblings.com/index.php/email-statistics/.

Solomon, Charlene. (1999). “Communicating in a Global Environment,” Workforce. Retrieved from: http://www.workforce.com/1999/11/01/communicating-in-a-global-environment/.

In paraphrasing Managing Cultural Differences (2014), communication across countries, languages, religious beliefs, genders and time zones is difficult and requires a special set of behaviors to be done so effectively. Over the last three years, a white, Anglo-Saxon, Christian, Female has built a solid business relationship with a Muslim, Male who lives in Malaysia. So, how is it possible that two people from such divergent backgrounds are able to go from “Hello” to a trusted business partnership?

It began by checking out each others pedigree.  Did they really have what they said they had? Could they do what they said they could do?  Are they who they say they are and do they really know the people with power or are they just another also-ran?

As all of our negotiations and conversations have been held over FaceTime at 9 AM EST and 9PM EST as Malaysia is 12 hours ahead of the US East Coast. The key to growing our understanding and respect for each other has been utilizing active listening, Managing Cultural Differences (2014).  At first, I was unsure of his English as I certainly did not speak Malaysian.  After he spoke, I would repeat what I thought I heard and then add the meaning behind what I thought I heard him say and vice a versa.  Once we had a common understanding of language, we were able to take our positive attitude toward one another and begin to trust each another.

Over the next year and a half, the process of closing our transaction slowed and there were times of testing as to whether I was telling the truth or speaking like any other broker as opposed to a principal in a transaction.  This caused me to have some hard conversations with him about the status of the market and what was a realistic time-frame for the conclusion of one of our ventures. It was however, through this testing that he knew he could trust me to always tell him the truth and not fill his ears with “broker talk.”  This cemented our business friendship.

Now, I am his first choice to do business with and unless I cannot meat the criteria or the deadline, he will choose to work exclusively with me and my team. I look forward to the day that I am able to meet him face to face and walk through Malaysia with my head uncovered and under his protection as a businesswoman and treated with the respect of my profession and not my gender.

It is with respect, humility, honesty and hard work that one can successfully communicate with an individual or group from a divergent culture.  It is the foundation that has been laid down properly, that gives you permission to negotiate. This allows you to look forward to a long and prosperous business relationship.

 

Moran, R. T., Phd., Abramson, N. R., Phd., & Moran, S. V., MA. (2014). Managing Cultural Differences (9th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

 

 

 

 

I have had a very difficult time getting into these blog posts, however it seems I have (finally) figured them out! My name is Jacqui Neff. I’m an Organizational Leadership major graduating this December! I late added this class after a mix-up with my required courses. I had accidentally scheduled a class I passed back in the spring semester (oops!). I am currently located in State College, PA. My son and I just moved back right before the school year began.

I am working as a Universal Banker for Citizens Bank on College Ave. Banking is something i have grown to love in the last two years. I started out at PNC Bank’s call center in Pittsburgh last spring and have decided to follow the career path and move up the ladder in the banking industry. My long term goals are to become a branch manager and move up to regional and divisional management within the bank. As a single mother, it is sometimes difficult to see too far ahead with everything that is going on in the now, however, I have faith that I will be able to achieve any goals I set for myself, regardless of how difficult it may seem right now.

My past leadership comes mostly from sports and various clubs I was a part of in high school and college. I started out at University Park and moved to World Campus after having my son in order to make school fit with my full time work schedule.

As I mentioned before, I have a son. He is two years old and smart as they come. Everything I am doing is for him. He is my motivation when I start to feel overwhelmed. I can’t wait to walk across the stage in December and show him that mommy did it! For this reason, my favorite leadership quote is, “If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader”- John Quincy Adams.

http://istockphoto.com

When dinning out with a diverse group to my surprise some of them paid their bill without tip. In United States it is looked upon favorably to give a large tip, as in Germany you are expected to tip very little, while in some nations tip is not expected. Every nation has it’s etiquette when it comes to tipping and it’s social norms. I had to explain to the group it is customary to tip and is the way to thank the waiter for the job well-done. They get paid for it was their response to which I had to clarify that most waiters in US are paid less than a minimal wage. They were shocked.

If cross-cultural communication at this level has already presented differences, it gets even more involved in the business world. According to CIA World Factbook report in 2013 United States is involved in 13.9% value of world trade (Moran, Abramson, 2014). How would people from different countries learn about inner workings of another countries and social norms? How can we anticipate what is a socially acceptable behavior when dealing with people all over the world? How can we expect to make fair deals and negotiations when we do not know what is the expected level of it in the country?

Global communication may require challenging what you know and what you consider acceptable and proper. Furthermore, it will require changing the way you interact if you want to get the message across and have a working global relationship. Taking a class on Leadership in a Global Context has helped me to reexamine cross-cultural communication, dimensions involved and to recognize ways of managing those. It is important to focus not only on differences, but similarities as well. For example, understanding that we both share and altruistic point of view can make a communication much easier.

Understanding needs, values, expectations, goals, cultural and social norms, roles, attitudes, stereotypes, social organization and social dimensions, personality, influences, customs, beliefs, thought patterns, history, politics, language are all vital ingredients in the process. Egocentrism is a factor that will decrease effectiveness of the communication, however it should be accounted for during interactions. Active listening will increase the effectiveness of communication and a lot of times will help to negate challenges presented by intercultural differences. Nonverbal clues equate to 80-90% of communication and send an important message. (Moran, Abramson, 2014). Realization that countries vary on low-high context, preference of slow or fast messages, preferences of space and time may enable one to elude potential misunderstandings and frustrations. For example, understanding that Germany is interested in shutting down it’s nuclear plans and has a goal to completely depend on renewable energy can assist in preparation of presentation to discuss energy needs of countries. Business investors will realize that it is faulty to offer Germany plans to build new nuclear reactors, but instead is beneficial to present plans with renewable energy sources.

Understanding global communications presents us with a multidimensional model, but understanding every additional aspect of it brings us closer to the goal of improved communication.

References:

Image retrieved 15 September, 2016 from http://media.istockphoto.com/vectors/abstract-global-traffic-design-communication-transport-networking-vector-id511473492?k=6&m=511473492&s=170667a&w=0&h=tbq3-AbxYwFZr4ks84TpXV-IVE-B2Vaup7gnoDARHrg=
http://media.istockphoto.com/vectors/abstract-global-traffic-design-communication-transport-networking-vector-id511473492?k=6&m=511473492&s=170667a&w=0&h=tbq3-AbxYwFZr4ks84TpXV-IVE-B2Vaup7gnoDARHrg=

Moran, R. T., Abramson, N. R., & Moran, S. V. (2014). Managing Cultural Differences (9th ed.). Oxford: Routledge.