Think of culture as a filter inside a pair of glasses you’ve been wearing your entire life. Since you have been wearing them since birth, you likely do not even notice they are there. These varying interpretations are shaped by cultural differences that subtly influence how people think, what they value, and how they behave.
1. Evaluating: Direct vs. Indirect Feedback
Australia has a direct communication culture, and people express feedback clearly and openly. A team member might say, “We can’t approve this request,” and mean exactly that. On the contrary, in an indirect communication culture such as Japan, instead of rejecting an idea openly, someone might say, “We’ll need to look into whether this is possible,” which often means absolutely not.
This is where teams get stuck. Before ending a meeting with indirect communicators, confirm the decision clearly. Consider asking, “We’ve decided not to move forward with this, right?”
2. Deciding: Top-Down vs. Consensual
In top-down cultures like China, decisions are expected to come from senior management. Once a direction is determined, teams proceed with implementation. In more consensual cultures like Malaysia, the process tends to be more collaborative. Instead of decisions being made in isolation at the top, different stakeholders are brought into the discussions before anything is finalized.
When teams misunderstand how decisions are made, confusion and frustration can easily arise. To prevent confusion, clearly communicate the purpose of each meeting from the start.
3. Trust-Building: Task vs. Relationship
Trust works differently depending on where you are. In the United States, trust is often built through reliability and results. Deliver consistently, and credibility grows. In India, trust is personal before it's professional. Start with informal conversations before moving to business discussions, as it helps establish rapport.
4. Disagreeing: Confrontational vs. Avoiding
A French team leader might view open debate as a sign that people are involved and interested. However, team members from the Philippines might remain quiet in public meetings because they fear appearing disrespectful or losing face if they speak up. Silence doesn’t usually indicate agreement or indifference.
This creates a predictable mismatch, leaving important issues unresolved. If leaders want those risks to surface, the solution is less about asking louder and more about changing the conditions for speaking. Pre-meeting anonymous feedback or small-group discussions tend to surface issues that large-group debates suppress.
English is commonly used for international communication, but even when two people leave the same meeting believing they’ve reached an agreement, they may still walk away with different understandings of the outcome. When leaders miss this, they can mistake cultural differences for disengagement or underperformance. What may seem passive or unclear could result from someone adhering to a different cultural norm.
A simple way to avoid confusion is to recap the decisions at the end of the meeting. This not only reinforces understanding but also leaves everyone on the same page as you wrap things up.
