Cultural Values through the Lens of the Cultural Navigator

Greetings to everyone around the world! May this be a year of health, safety, and contentment!  May this also be a year of inner reflection on how to be a more culturally competent global citizen.

In my last post I talked about the landmark event of Saudi women both running for office and being able to vote, and analyzed this through the lens of Geert Hofstede’s Cultural Dimension theory, specifically regarding the power and masculinity dimensions.  Today I will continue my discussion about differences and similarities regarding cultural values by using my favorite tools, the Cultural Navigator and Cultural Orientations Indicator.

The Cultural Navigator (CN7) is an online platform that provides a wealth of information geared towards the business person who wants to increase her or his competitive advantage in communicating in a global business environment (1).  This tool consists of country specific information about business practices (management, negotiation, team, etc.) as well as issues related to diversity.  The Cultural Orientations Indicator (COI) is the signature non-judgmental assessment tool that helps users understand their own preferences towards interacting with people who have different preferences for communicating.  Cultural challenges often arise because of these differences (also called GAPS) and the tool suggests strategies for dealing with such challenges.  The COI is a scientifically validated and reliable tool that assesses a person’s communication preferences and how these impact one’s work. It is based on the Cultural Orientation Model which is one of the first of its kind developed by international business leader, Danielle Walker (along with a team of psychologists from NYU), who founded the company, TMC (Training Management Corporation), in 1984.

This is the tool that I use in all of my intercultural management courses at Notre Dame and which provides the foundation for my online executive course in Advanced Intercultural Management (2) (3). [For a recent White Paper on how we are using the COI at the University of Notre Dame at all levels of instruction, please go to: https://www.tmcorp.com/Our-Solutions/White-Paper/The-Cultural-Navigator-A-Powerful-Tool-for-Undergraduate-and-Graduate-Students/138/.] In this online course I have professionals from all industries (business consultants, entrepreneurs, CFOs, law enforcement and fire fighters, aerospace workers, medical administrators and registered nurses, diversity officers, HR directors, project managers, pastors, army lieutenants, and correctional facilities employees) and from large companies and organizations such as Verizon, Boeing, Samsung, IRS, U.S. Army, to pharmaceutical, I.T., higher education, auto industry, and banking.  We meet weekly with Live Chats and discuss issues in the workplace.

For example, right now I have quite an international group and we’re using the COI to analyze our communication and interaction preferences amongst ourselves and in comparison to other cultures – some of the participants include a pharmaceutical executive who has lived in Japan for over 35 years (originally from the US), an IT developer who lives in Qatar (originally from Jordan and who lived in the US for many years), and a woman from Norway who is living and working in Japan at the moment.  We’re having quite an interesting discussion during our weekly virtual chats as we talk about our cultural experiences and analyze them according to the Cultural Orientations Model.

Here is what this model is all about.  The Cultural Navigator platform and the Cultural Orientations Indicator tool both help professionals:

• Understand individual cultural preferences that affect communication at work.
• Identify the potential cultural gaps that occur when interacting with those who are different AND strategies for dealing with them.
• Have guidance for how to participate more effectively in teams and within the organization.

The COI is a non-judgmental assessment tool that measures a person’s communication preferences based upon three dimensions:

• Interaction Style: Orientations that impact how we communicate and engage with others in work situations.
• Thinking Style: Orientations that impact how we conceptualize and process information in work situations.
• Sense of Self: Orientations that define how we view ourselves and are motivated in the workplace.

These three dimensions have been scientifically developed over the 30 years based upon the theories developed by the ‘greats’ such as Hofstede; Hall, Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner; Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck; and Rhinesmith, to name a few. The Cultural Orientations Indicator has been tested across 13 languages and there are over 100 countries available for comparison.  Within the three overarching dimensions (Interaction Style, Thinking Style, Sense of Self), we will find a number of orientations to which we all prefer – these are plotted along continua that compare opposite sides of the spectrum.  For example – some of us may prefer to be more direct with our communication while others indirect.  Some of us prefer to focus on the task at hand and others on developing the relationship first.  Neither is better than the other – they are simply preferred ways of communicating based upon the norms (accepted and expected ways of behaving) of a given group of people (most often referred to as countries or nations).

Here is how I would analyze the previous post (26 December 2015) according to the COI.  There are two ways that I can do this – I can use the COI assessment tool and compare my country (USA) with Saudi Arabia in order to get comparisons (both similarities and differences).  I can even compare my personal preferences with those of both the USA and Saudi Arabia.  I chose the former and we can see that there are distinct differences between both cultures– in general – see the image above. (4)  Remember, cultural dimensions are measured on central tendencies – not on individual tendencies – so we are able to get a “baseline” of any given culture ? or Society Clusters as the GLOBE Study calls them (5).  We also need to remember that within a given country/nation, there are often multiple cultures.

These differences are called GAPS and we can see that the U.S.A. is different than Saudi Arabia across every dimension!  This is neither good nor bad – it means that both nations (in general) have very different norms for behaving = communicating, thinking, and being.  By comparing differences (as well as similarities) it’s possible to get a better idea of how you might better approach communicating and interacting with someone else. Let’s explore a few of these orientations that will relate to what I discussed previously about Power Distance and Masculinity. 

I find that the Sense of Self dimension (how people view themselves and are motivated in the workplace, e.g., identity) holds the most insights for issues of power and masculinity.

• According to the COI, Saudis have a constraint orientation, which is a deep rooted belief that those in authority are in charge of the environment (both physical and spiritual). This is in direct contrast to the U.S.A. where people believe that they can manage their environment (control orientation).  Of course, in the U.S.A. there is much variance based upon the millennial generation as well as immigrants hanging on to constraint tendencies – but overall, we can compare and contrast these GAPS – which helps us to look at things from a different perspective.  Having a strong constraint orientation means that people have less tolerance for ambiguity and tend to follow rules.  The opposite is control?an orientation emphasizing that people can and should be influencers of change to suit their needs.

• Saudis have a strong hierarchy orientation and the U.S.A. more of an Equality hierarchy. This is similar to what we discussed in the Hofstede model.  The importance placed on power structure and how individuals recognize and accept the power/status differences.  For example, the Saudi government is an absolute monarchy?people are conditioned to accept this centralized authority (they may not agree with it but they accept it as a way of life). Recognition of power and its status differentials among individuals is expected, rewarded and reinforced.  The expectation is that a society (and organization) will function properly only when it is socially stratified – everyone has a place with different rights and responsibilities to be fulfilled for the good of the society.  The U.S.A. has an orientation toward equality where people expect to minimize power structures in favor of emphasizing the equality and status among individuals.
•  Another orientation that has much to do with the views about women and their own decision-making is the collectivistic Collectivism means that doing what is right for one’s group is more important than doing what is right for one’s self. Therefore, group membership is extremely important – more so than one’s own individuation.  This means that people will (usually) do what is good for their family versus self.  Last week we talked about the woman needing permission from a male relative – the head of the house whether father, husband, brother, or uncle.  In a collective society, the social environment expects, rewards, and reinforces the subordination of individual interests in favor of those of the group.
•  Finally, another interesting orientation is the public versus private orientations (this relates to physical and emotional space). While the U.S.A. tends to be more private, Saudis are more public.  But then why are women required to cover themselves?  Again, this seems paradoxical, but the complexity of how these orientations are perceived is important to the discussion.  In the U.S.A. regarding physical space, people would more likely prefer a private office, sit next to an open spot on a bench, or give a handshake versus a hug.  Regarding emotional space, people will self-disclose, but often it is not about personal issues.  On the other hand, Saudis are said to embrace a more public perspective regarding space – such close greetings among the same gender or sharing personal information and details about their families.  However, we recognize the paradox of public orientation by the covering of women, which is based upon social customs, past history, and a strong religious connection to appropriate modesty.

In sum, because of the scientific research regarding culture, we are able to compare cultures – in general – along similarities and differences in order to try and make sense of practices, beliefs, attitudes, and values that differ from ours.  Organizations and individuals can benefit from such tools as they lead to insights that move us away from our own way of thinking.  We all see things from our own perspective, so I’d be interested in knowing what are your insights based upon your background and life experiences.  Using intercultural assessment tools is merely a starting point for understanding the overarching norms of any given group of people - -  examining  and considering them through dialog and further exploration is essential.  Let’s get a dialog started as we explore cultural differences and similarities in 2016 as we all seek to become more culturally competent global leaders.

 ####

 GlobalBizLeader specializes in helping business professionals and educators understand how to develop cultural competence (also known as CQ – Cultural Intelligence) by gaining knowledge, practicing reflection, and developing communication skills.  My specialization is in developing programs for Executive Education and Executive MBA Programs.  https://globalbizleader.com

1. 1. https://www.culturalnavigator.com/CN7/login.aspx
   2. https://www.notredameonline.com/programs/certificates/executive-education-programs/advanced-specialized-certificate-in-intercultural-management/
   3. https://www.notredameonline.com/resources/intercultural-management/intercultural-management-in-the-global-economy-interview-1/#.VofvdPkrLIX
   4. Used with permission from TMC ?2016 https://explore.culturalnavigator.com      Twitter: @CNavigator  
   5. Robert House et al., Culture, Leadership, and Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies, 2004, Sage. A follow-up book was published in 2013: Strategic Leadership Across Cultures: GLOBE Study of CEO Leadership Behavior and Effectiveness in 24 Countries.