Cultural Differences in Teamwork Managers Need to Know

6 Cultural Differences Every Manager Must Understand in Global and Multicultural Teams

Managing people from different cultures can be a challenge. Different viewpoints, needs, and expectations can manifest in many ways within multicultural teams.

For managers with little awareness of the influence of cultural differences in management styles, it can be tough trying to figure out what might be causing problems within their teams.

However, with some effort and insight, it’s also possible for managers to unpick cultural differences and learn how to manage or leverage these differences effectively.

In this guide, we’re going to set out the 6 cultural differences we believe every great manager should be aware of. For newcomers to managing across cultures, we also recommend our cross cultural management course.

1. Time Orientation: How Different Cultures Approach Deadlines, Schedules, and Priorities

Not every culture in the world experiences time in the same way.

This can be explained by many factors such as environment, history, traditions, and general customs.

When it comes to time, the researcher Edward T. Hall categorised cultures as either being monochronic or polychronic.

In cultures where a monochronic approach prevails, time is experienced and used in a linear way. People tend to do one activity at a time and dislike having to move away from a schedule.

In cultures where a polychronic approach to time is preferred, people experience time in the now and tend to focus on several tasks at once. They are much less dependent on detailed structures to control time.

Examples of Cultural Differences Over Time

Below are some examples of how these different approaches to time may be realised within the team or workplace.

1. Planning

• Monochronic: The focus of activity is more on the task and making schedules
• Polychronic: The focus of activity is more on relationships and harmony

2. Organising

• Monochronic: The approach is structured, linear and highly task-focused
• Polychronic: The approach is less structured, more holistic and people-focused

3. Staffing

• Monochronic: The focus is on the short term, meeting immediate needs and requirements
• Polychronic: The focus is on the longer term, with concern for building relationships over time

2. Power and Hierarchy: Managing Expectations Around Authority and Decision Making

Cultures vary in how they understand power, social differences, and hierarchy.

The intercultural researcher Hofstede termed this ‘Power Distance’. In some management cultures, inequality is taken as being the norm, and no attempt is made to make any changes. Power difference is natural, good, and to be respected as it provides order. This can be seen in the Japanese management style.

In other management cultures, such as the Dutch approach to management, inequality is seen as undesirable, which means it has to be changed. Power difference must be corrected through legal, political, and/or economic means.

At work, this difference often comes to the fore around expectations of management styles, responsibility, and accountability.

Examples of Cultural Differences Over Hierarchy

Below are some examples of how these different approaches to hierarchy may be realised within the team or workplace.

1. Planning

• Hierarchical: Top-down, more autocratic and authoritative planning is displayed, in which managers make decisions with little or no consultation with employees
• Egalitarian: Employees are consulted and participate, and may be left to implement the plan in the way they believe is best

2. Organising

• Hierarchical: The group structure is tightly controlled, with authority and responsibility being centralised
• Egalitarian: The group structure relies on individuals. Authority is decentralised

3. Directing

• Hierarchical: Leaders are expected to display their rank. Employees like being closely supervised and feel comfortable with a directive manager
• Egalitarian: Leaders are expected to be ‘like everyone else’. Managers exhibit participative or consultative styles and avoid what is seen as micro-management

3. Collaboration vs Competition: How Cultures Define Teamwork and Success

Do you think all cultures understand cooperation and collaboration in the same way?

They don’t. In some cultures, especially those built on the idea of a ‘free market’, co-operation is much more competitive. Employees are encouraged to take personal responsibility, to be better than their colleagues, to acquire personal wealth and to push for personal success.

In other cultures, co-operation has nothing to do with the above but more about collective harmony, a pleasant working space, and future security. Competition is seen as aggressive and selfish.

It is very easy for people from different cultural backgrounds to misinterpret the intentions of colleagues.

Examples of Cultural Differences Over Co-Operation

Below are some examples of how these different approaches to co-operation may be realised within the team or workplace.

1. Planning

• Competitive: The emphasis is on speed and task performance when putting plans in place
• Collective: Emphasis is on maintaining relationships and face during the planning

2. Organising

• Competitive: Individual achievement is encouraged. Managers have more of a leadership role
• Collective: Group integration is encouraged. Managers have more of a facilitating role

3. Directing

• Competitive: The leader’s role is to reward achievement.
• Collective: The leader’s role is to protect.

4. Task vs Relationship Focus: What Drives Performance Across Cultures

Within teams, different cultures will place different emphasis on tasks.

Some cultures focus on getting things done, while others focus on how things get done. Within the cross cultural training field, this is often referred to as Task-Oriented vs Relationship-Oriented cultures.

For task-oriented cultures, they see success and progress as completing jobs, tasks, projects, and actions. They seek challenges and love achieving personal goals. Their prime motivators are recognition of achievement and promotion. This is evident in US business culture.

For the relationship-oriented cultures, such as Arab culture, it’s all about the people – building and nurturing sound relationships. The emphasis is placed on working in the moment and living the experience rather than the achievement itself. The prime motivators are the promise of future rewards while maintaining social harmony.

Examples of Cultural Differences Over Tasks

Below are some examples of how these different approaches to tasks may be realised within the team or workplace.

1. Planning

• Task-Oriented: Tends to be done by developing measurable, time-framed, actionable steps
• Relationship-Oriented: Tends to be done with a strong focus on the vision or ideal an organisation wishes to attain

2. Organising

• Task-Oriented: Involves developing action-oriented documentation for project management in which task responsibilities are clearly spelled out
• Relationship-Oriented: Based more on the assumption that implementation is not so much dependent on action steps as on common vision and personal trust

3. Directing

• Task-Oriented: Managers are considered to be effective if they have the necessary expertise and competence
• Relationship-Oriented: Managers are considered to be effective if their personal philosophy, values and style are seen as compatible

5. Personal Space and Boundaries: Navigating Privacy and Workplace Relationships

What is private and what is personal varies greatly from culture to culture.

Some cultures like to keep their personal lives private. They may expect more personal space, not only in terms of physical distance but generally. They may interpret questions about their families as prying or jumping back if a colleague tried to put their arms around them.

Other cultures expect a much more personal approach. They don’t keep their personal lives private and expect to know their colleagues personally. They tend to be more ‘touchy-feely’ at work and become much more emotionally invested.

Within teams, this can have several consequences for trust and communication.

Examples of Cultural Differences Over Personal Space

Below are some examples of how these different approaches to space may be realised within the team or workplace.

1. Planning

• Private: Tendency to use more individualistic or systematic forms of planning
• Personal: Tend to use more group-oriented or authoritative forms of planning

2. Organising

• Private: The approaches used tend to centre on tasks
• Personal: The approaches used tend to be more centred on personal needs

3. Controlling

• Private: Managers use more explicit measures of staff performance
• Personal: Managers can use more informal checks on staff performance

6. Communication Styles: Direct vs Indirect Communication in Global Teams

Communication styles change from culture to culture. 

Edward T. Hall categorised cultures as being either High or Low Context communicators.

In high-context communication cultures, such as Singapore, China, and Japan, the physical context of the message carries a great deal of importance. People tend to be more indirect and to expect the person they are communicating with to decode the implicit part of their message.

In low-context cultures, such as the United States, Germany, and the Netherlands, people tend to be explicit and direct in their communications. It’s in such cultures you’ll hear phrases such as “Say what you mean”, “Cut to the Chase,” and “Stop beating around the bush.”

For those not aware of these basic differences, it can cause all sorts of communication challenges within the workplace.

Examples of Cultural Differences in Communication

Below are some examples of how these different approaches to communication may be realised within the team or workplace.

1. Planning

• Low-context: develop plans that are explicit, detailed, quantifiable and information-based
• High-context: develop plans that are more implicit and less detailed in terms of instructions

2. Organising

• Low-context: Task-responsibility guidelines are explicit: they are detailed and understood through verbal or written instruction
• High-context: Assigning tasks and responsibilities are implicit and understood according to the context

3. Staffing

• Low-context: Detailed contracts of employment and explicit performance appraisals
• High-context: The criteria and methods for recruitment, selection, pay and firing are not explicit

Main Photo by Jud Mackrill on Unsplash