The Cross-Cultural Coaching Kaleidoscope

A Systems Approach to Coaching Amongst Different Cultural Influences

Jennifer Plaister-Ten

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• eBook ISBN: 9780429920431
• Topic: Psychology
• Subtopic: History & Theory in Psychology
• Index: Psychology

Coaching has emerged from a Western, largely Anglo-American, perspective that may not be appropriate across cultures, given the multi-cultural nature of societies and workplaces today and the working practice of virtual teams. This has repercussions for the coaching profession. There is little knowledge about the constituent factors of cross-cultural coaching; or the attitudes, skills and knowledge required to practice in a global market. Therefore, there is little sharing of best practice that in turn has an impact upon coaching competency. This book shows a unique approach to describing the impact of culture in the coaching relationship. It demonstrates how culture can affect our perceptions, thoughts and emotions, influence our choices and impact our behaviour. It identifies the need for the coach to become adept at raising awareness of cultural influences and to reframe psychological constructs often thought to have universal meaning; such as responsibility.

Part I
The Cross-Cultural Kaleidoscope Model: Context, Applicability, and Use

CHAPTER ONE
The impact of culture in coaching

This chapter focuses on:

• coaching in a globalised context: changing the way we live and work and the impact on our cultural values and beliefs
• the need for a paradigm shift in approaches to global leadership that embeds intercultural awareness and builds global mindsets
• coaching within a complex adaptive system (CAS).

What is culture?

Globalisation affects cultures and cultures shape globalisation.¹ But culture is a complex concept with varying definitions. Consequently, it has been difficult for the coaching profession to define, with terms such as cross-cultural coaching, intercultural coaching, or global executive coaching often used interchangeably. The word “culture” originates from the Latin verb colere: to cultivate the soil. However, the German word Kultur means education, according to Kroeber and Kluckhohn (1952, p. 21). This potentially indicates the origins of the concept of culture as learned, the cultivation of learning. Hall, on the other hand, suggests that “culture is acquired”, not taught (1959, p. 37). Such is the diverse and often conflicting nature of the culture debate. Yet these binary distinctions, on a par with the nature/nurture debate, may appear to be over-simplistic when we look at the factors that can influence those of us who live and work in multicultural societies today.

Figure 1.1: Some layers of culture.

All too often, culture is viewed solely as national culture. Yet the culture concept is far more complex, with many layers of “subculture” that people have or belong to, each with its own unique identity. The Figure 1.1 above shows some of them.

A multicultural world

I met my husband in Singapore; my son was born there. My husband is from Suriname with African, Chinese, and Dutch heritage. Before the age of seven my son had lived in three different countries and had exposure to a multitude of cultures. This continued as we educated him multilingually and multiculturally. My son is perhaps representative of a new generation of children of expatriates or migrants who will later take their place in the workforce, bringing with them a rich tapestry of cultural influences. These influences will no doubt affect the way he views the world and will impact his interactions with people.

More people now live outside their home countries than ever before. According to the United Nations Population Fund website, in 2015, 244 million people, or 3.3 per cent of the world’s population, lived outside their country of origin. This was an increase from 232 million people in 2013, amounting to 3.2 per cent of the world’s population. Furthermore, many more move around inside their home countries, particularly in China and India where rural workers are relocating to the major indus-trialised cities such as Shanghai and Mumbai.

In 2009, one in six people of the population of England and Wales (9.1 million) was estimated to be of Non-White British origin, according to a statistical bulletin from the Office of National Statistics (ONS, 2011). This represented an increase from 6.6 million in 2001. Also in 2009, the mixed-race population rose to almost a million (986,600)—from 672,000 in 2001, representing an increase of nearly 50%. According to a Guardian news report (2011), an ONS statistician said this was due to the fact that “the population is mixing up more”. Furthermore, a BBC (2012b) news report suggested that London is the first region where “White British” people are a minority. It further reported that the number of foreign-born residents in England and Wales had risen by nearly three million over the period 2001 to 2011. This meant that around one in eight, or 13% of the population were born outside the UK. Oxford University Migration Observatory (2015) has further suggested that the migrant population of England alone has increased by 565,000 since 2011; this is based on labour force data and is an update to the 2011 census. These trends contribute to an increase in multicultural societies characterised by mixed marriages, to bi-cultural offspring, and to multicultural workplaces.

According to a report in the New York Times (2012), the 2012 United States Census Bureau reported that for the first time in the history of the USA, white babies were outnumbered by non-white. “Minorities”— including Hispanic, Black, Asian, and multiracial people—reached over fifty per cent of the population. This demographic shift means that the USA, in true capitalist style, is treating “diversity as an industry”, as reported by The Week (2012a). Changes in political policies and marketing campaigns are two repercussions of such demographic shifts, leaving the debate wide open to the possibility of attitude changes and shifts in perspective. To add to these demographic shifts, borders that have historically restricted both population movements and international trade are breaking down. Not only are there increases in the flow of labour, but the large-scale interactions of capital and goods across global supply chains. Companies have learned to work across a multitude of markets with differing regulatory controls, government influence, and consumer behaviours. According to Friedman, more people are interconnected, “able to collaborate and compete in real-time with other people on different kinds of work from different corners of the planet and on a more equal footing than at any previous time in the history of the world” (2005, p. 8).

One of the impacts of the interconnectedness of today’s world is that we are prone to feeling the effects of actions taken by others in other parts of the world. The “butterfly effect” was felt in full force during the 2008 financial crisis when the high-risk structure of financial systems and, in particular, sub-prime mortgages in the USA created problems for financial markets and economies worldwide. Companies, governments, and citizens exist in complex interconnected systems creating the potential for both global collaboration and competition. Yet, despite all this, cultural norms, reactions, and expectations persist.

Countries such as India and China, who have traditionally supplied cheap goods to developed economies, are and will continue to be a major force. McKinsey and Company (Bisson et al., 2010) suggest that Western economies will have a lower share of global GDP (gross domestic product) in 2050 than they had in 1700, representing a tipping point in economic power from the West to the East. This would mark a return to Asia’s pre-1700 “glory” days when it comprised two-thirds of the global economy (Kohli et al., 2012). McKinsey also points out that the number of BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China) companies on the Fortune 500 has more than doubled in the past four years.

These shifts will have a major impact on the world as more and more people enjoy a spending capacity that they have not previously had. It also represents a huge opportunity to capture new customers from the world’s most populous countries. Moreover, these countries are moving beyond being “copycat” suppliers of low-cost goods and out-sourced manufacturing. They are innovating. Innovations such as China’s high-speed trains and the Tata group’s $2,200 car will sooner or later have an impact on the world market. At the moment, sceptics consider that the quality of goods does not and will not meet the stringent quality standards of more advanced markets. However, this is changing.

Global business landscape

Some countries in the West are experiencing flat growth, national debts of gargantuan proportions (at the time of writing the UK’s national debt has risen to one trillion pounds sterling for the first time), civil unrest, and austerity measures. Leaders face the most difficult of times, not least of which is the need to balance the short-term pressures of delivering revenue and profit targets with the need for long-term growth and sustainability.

Traditionally, one of the most expedient ways of driving business growth has been by means of a merger or an acquisition. Expedient, yet risky. A report commissioned by KPMG (2009) found that the issues it had identified in its 1999 survey still prevailed. Namely, that companies were failing to address the “softer” issues that impacted cross-border deals: specifically in the management of cultural issues. The KPMG 1999 survey found that eighty-three per cent of mergers were found to be unsuccessful, producing little business benefit in terms of shareholder value. The resolution of cultural issues was found to be a key success factor. Deals were found to be twenty-six per cent more likely to succeed if cultural issues were addressed early on in the process. The KLM/Air France merger has been hailed as one of the more successful of our times, despite the analyst projections citing cultural differences as a pitfall. According to Renaud (2009) one of the key success factors was in addressing the intercultural issues early on, through the appointment of intercultural consultants and coaches to guide the process.

* * *

The Office for National Statistics (2013) reported that foreign investors owned more than half of UK quoted companies, an increase from just over thirty per cent in 1998 and just over forty per cent in 2010. Today, four of the largest six energy companies in the UK have received foreign investment. For example, the China Investment Corporation (CIC) acquired an almost nine per cent stake in Thames Water in 2012, according to The Week (2012b). The CIC is just one of several sovereign wealth funds (SWFs) investing in business and infrastructure in Britain, causing general speculation and debate about the prudence of selling national assets. The news report goes on to say that, besides China, other SWFs include funds estimated at five trillion US dollars from Saudi Arabia, Norway, and the United Arab Emirates. According to research from The Grocer (2012) and the research firm Nielsen, just forty-four of the largest grocery brands in the UK are British-owned. For example, the BBC (2012a) reported that Shanghai-based Bright Foods Company bought sixty per cent of Northamptonshire-based Weetabix for £1.2 billion, giving both entities increased global reach. This is bad news for people who believe in home grown enterprise, but good news for the generation of new jobs. The BBC (2014b) reported that according to figures from UK Trade & Investment, in one year, 66,000 jobs had been created in the UK by foreign businesses—from Europe, the Americas and Asia. Furthermore, the Centre for Economic Performance and the London School of Economics (2015) suggest that UK productivity (GDP per hour) is around seventeen per cent below the G7 average. British productivity has fallen since the Great Recession of 2008. Moreover, McKinsey (2015) research findings suggest that ethnically diverse companies are thirty-five per cent more likely to outperform, compared against their industry average ratings. These findings should all represent good news for multicultural organisations, communities, and societies. Yet it seems that diversity is often reduced to a tick box competency, to a “nice to have”, or to positive discrimination. In the workplace, relatively little appears to be known about the benefits of increased productivity amongst diverse teams.

* * *

In the context of international mergers and acquisitions, culture is often referred to as organisational culture.

My own experience of surviving several mergers and acquisitions, including one “backwards integration” with Nokia/Erikson in Finland/Sweden, is that whichever entity is perceived by senior management to have the quickest route to value, is the culture that prevails. So when ICL bought the personal computer division of Nokia, Nokia was thought to have the brightest products, people, and potential; it quickly became the dominant culture at the expense of ICL’s own culture. Smart companies think about how to integrate both cultures and leverage the strengths of the combined organisations.

The impact upon global leadership

Technological advances, thanks to the internet and mobile solutions, make it easier to both collaborate and compete across borders in virtual teams. However, operating globally, not to mention virtually, demands an understanding that there are culturally bound approaches to time, authority, communication styles, autonomy, respect for processes, adherence to rules, the importance of relationship building, allegiance to individual or collective goals, to name but a few. There are huge risks to business if they fail to understand and respect these differences.

This is evident at the boundary of compliance, ethics, and culture. For example, The BBC (2015) reported that Goodyear was fined sixteen million US dollars by the Securities’ and Exchange Commission (SEC) for failing to stop bribery at its Kenya and Angola operations. Companies who fail to comply with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) can find themselves with hefty fines and law suits, jail sentences, and mass dismissals, all pointing to the need for increased due diligence in accounting practices. However, they also point to the need to understand “how things are done around here”. Bribery is systemic in some countries. Furthermore, cultural relativism suggests that what is right or wrong is culture-specific. What is wrong to someone from “the West” may be acceptable to someone from “the East” and vice-versa. Take the issue of human rights in China, for example. Therefore, effective global leaders not only need to increase compliancy procedures, but to take an ethical stance in ensuring that a zero tolerance to corrupt business dealings is communicated to all employees and members of the supply chain, and acted upon. We may take a lead from Delphi Automotive. It has been voted one of the world’s most ethical companies by the Ethisphere Institute (2015). It has built a corporate culture of both ethics and compliance.

The Government of Sweden has also provided us with an example of an ethical business decision. It has stopped an arms deal with Saudi Arabia on the basis of...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• LIST OF FIGURES
• ABOUT THE AUTHOR
• SERIES EDITOR'S FOREWORD
• INTRODUCTION
• PART I THE CROSS-CULTURAL KALEIDOSCOPE MODEL: CONTEXT, APPLICABILITY, AND USE
• PART II BUILDING COMPETENCIES
• REFERENCES
• INDEX