David Livermore Global Thinker and Author

“Okay. Let’s get down to business.” It’s a familiar phrase for those who live in meetings in the Western world. It’s code for, “Cut the chit chat. Time to get something done.”  Yet for many cultures around the world, a meeting is as much about building relationships and strengthening bonds.

 Why have a meeting?

U.S.: The meeting is usually meant to gather the information and input from the participants. Individuals are expected to come prepared to compare and constructively analyze the alternatives.

Japan: The meeting is meant to publicly confirm decisions made in smaller groups. The participants explore alternatives just as thoroughly as their U.S. counterparts but by doing so in private before the meeting, they save face by avoiding conflict publicly.

Mexico: The meeting is meant to build relationships and trust. Once you trust someone, decision-making is relatively easy and fast.

Netherlands: The meeting is meant to identify all the weaknesses and criticisms of a particular approach or plan. There’s little need to spend time talking about what’s good.

Of course many meetings today involve people from several cultures. And many of these meetings are held virtually.

Imagine a Japanese project manager who never leaves Tokyo for work but is assigned to work on a project with a colleague in Indianapolis… And imagine the colleague in Indianapolis never leaves the Midwest on the company’s dime…or yen. And imagine that the only time these individuals “meet”, along with others like them, is at a weekly 30-minute video conference, scheduled 14 time zones apart.

Many of you can easily imagine this scene because it’s your life. This scenario brings whole new definition to “Death by Meeting”.

Culturally-Intelligent Led Meetings
Are multicultural team meetings doomed to fail? Not if they’re facilitated by someone with cultural intelligence (CQ). Here are a few ways the four capabilities of CQ can strengthen a meeting with culturally diverse participants:

1. CQ Drive: Showing interest, confidence, and drive to adapt cross-culturally
The leader will view the cultural diversity of team members as a potential asset that can provide a better outcome if managed well. And when conflict arises from the diverse preferences in the group, the culturally intelligent leader will persevere through the hard work of moving the group forward.

2. CQ Knowledge: Understanding intercultural issues and differences
The culturally intelligent leader understands that team members from certain cultures are less likely to “speak up” in a meeting, particularly if they have a dissident perspective that could create conflict. On the other hand, the leader understands that others may believe their best contribution comes by assertively confronting different opinions.

3. CQ Strategy: Making sense of culturally diverse experiences and planning accordingly.
The culturally intelligent leader plans for what’s needed to accomplish the meeting’s objective. For example, he or she might schedule a private conversation ahead of time with the individuals who are averse to direct conflict. Or the leader might prepare participants for a brainstorming meeting by letting them know ahead of time that they should come with 3 ideas to share with the group.

At the same time, the culturally intelligent leader will be careful not to assume a cultural stereotype applies to someone just because of a person’s cultural background.  The Indian participant might have grown up in India but all her professional experience might be from working in Silicon Valley. And culturally intelligent leaders (and participants!) will be aware that some individuals ‘ behavior might not reflect their cultural background but instead, their personality or their perception of how they think others in the meeting expect them to behave.

4. CQ Action: Appropriately adapting verbal and nonverbal behavior
Finally, the culturally intelligent leader will facilitate the meeting in a way that’s authentic to him or herself while also adapting his/her leadership style to meet the dynamics of this group and meeting. High CQ Action will be evident through an effective meeting that both accomplishes the goal while also leaving members feeling respected, heard, and engaged.

I hope any meeting I facilitate accomplishes both those purposes—effective and respectful. I’m not interested in one without the other. But how one defines an “effective” and “respectful” meeting depends a whole lot upon where they’re from.

I’ve often prided myself upon how deeply I think and reflect about things….not at the expense of action. In fact, “thinking” is sometimes a way for me to bide the time when I’m bored on a plane or tuned out during a presentation. I’m constantly reflecting upon situations and considering what they mean for me and the people surrounding me.

I’ve often admonished others to engage in a similar level of thinking and reflection as a crucial way to improve their cultural intelligence and leadership. But I’m beginning to think…um…sense that I just might think too much for my own good.

The other day I was walking with my daughter Grace across the frozen lake by our house. We were having a blast together. But while we were out there I thought about how quickly she’s growing up…my desire to make the most of her adolescence… which made me wonder whether we’re saving enough for college. And then I began to think about the upcoming kite festival that happens on our lake every February which made me think about a speaking engagement I have next month that I have to begin preparing for. Lost in my thoughts, Grace “interrupted” with her question: “Dad! Did you hear what I said?”

Busted.

There’s nothing really new about this scenario, right? To be “present” when we’re with our loved ones, friends, and co-workers is en vogue language wherever I go these days.

But my friend David Rock, a thought leader in “neuroleadership” and author of the excellent book, Your Brain At Work, introduced me to the neuroscience behind my obsession with living in my head and reflecting. I’ve begun to see that all this thinking can actually erode cross-cultural effectiveness (and parenting!).

Rock refers to the 2007 study led by Norman Farb at the University of Toronto who broke new ground by neurologically examining two distinct ways we experience the world: Lost in Thought vs. In the Moment. The technical terms are “Narrative Focus” vs. “Experiential Focus”. Learning about these two different ways of experiencing any situation has been a real breakthrough for me.

Narrative Focus (Lost in Thought) is the default mode by which we experience the world. We observe something, judge what’s going on, and interpret what it means. It’s a natural part of how we’re wired.  We’re using the medial prefrontal cortex of the brain and memory regions, such as the hippocampus. It’s called “narrative” because this is the part of the brain that holds together the story by which we view the world. Some might refer to it as our worldview.

When operating from the narrative focus, I notice something and I immediately focus upon how this connects with me and my view of the world. This is what I was doing with Grace on the lake. Or this is what I often do if a friend tells me about his child who is making some bad choices. I listen with one ear but I think in my head about why his kid is doing this and whether I can ensure mine won’t. I listen to the news and fit the reporting and events into my mental categories. And when I encounter a new culture, I’m tempted to make snap judgments about cleanliness, manners, and efficiency.

It’s certainly not a new idea to me that I need to slow down from rushing to judgment if I’m going to behave with emotional or cultural intelligence. But I’ve often thought that living in my head, journaling compulsively, and reflecting on situations was a real asset to cultural intelligence. It is a valuable component. But if we’re not careful, it can actually be a roadblock—whether it’s a fun walk across the frozen lake or working with someone a world away.

Experiential Focus (In the Moment) is a way of experiencing the world that doesn’t think intently about the past, the future, or what something means. Instead, this is the practice of simply taking in stimuli as they come to our senses in real time. During experiential focus, neuroscientists find that several brain regions become more active, including the insula—a region that relates to perceiving bodily sensations; and the anterior cingulated cortex is also activated—a region central to switching your attention.

This might mean sliding across the ice with Grace, feeling the contrast of the warmth of the sun above us and the cold air from below. And simply enjoying the moment of a spontaneous activity with my daughter, taking in her laughter and her questions about how the swans survive all winter…and holding at bay the thoughts chafing for attention.

Ironically, this sounds like the absence of thinking but instead, it’s a very conscious choice to not move into the internal world of our own narratives and instead, to focus on the moment at hand. That’s why it’s so hard. The brain is naturally inclined to default into a narrative focus. But as I learn to activate the experiential focus of my brain, I can consciously choose to stop myself from thinking about the upcoming work I need to do to prepare for February.

Switch Back and Forth
The goal is to consciously choose which brain circuitry is best suited to a situation. Farb found that the more people noticed the two different paths of thinking, the more easily they could switch between the two.

A narrative focus is well suited for organizing, planning, and developing goals. It’s the focus that helps us to question our assumptions and to examine our cultural perspectives against others, hence the many years I’ve spent emphasizing this type of thinking.

But the experiential focus will help us get closer to the reality of any event. It allows us to pick up on cues we might otherwise miss by perceiving more information about the events occurring around us. And it makes us less imprisoned to our own expectations and assumptions and allows us to be able to more actively respond to events as they unfold.

I expect to do a great deal more thinking…err…experimenting with this personally and with others. So expect to hear much more from me on this as it relates to CQ and global leadership. For now, I’m off for a run around the lake. Let’s see whether I can leave the narrative focus for the next 30 minutes.

Learning and Talent Development (L&TD) professionals are crucial allies for assessing and developing cultural intelligence (CQ). The findings of a recent survey of L&TD practices in India, the U.K., and U.S. offer several strategic insights for those of us committed to improving the CQ of working professionals:[1]

1. In-House Programs Ranked Highest by Practitioners
Practitioners from all three countries view in-house customized programs as the most effective way to teach new skills. Canned, generic presentations on CQ, diversity, or cultural differences do little to help practitioners apply intercultural effectiveness to their day-to-day work. And numerous studies indicate that the closer learning occurs to the environment in which it will be used, the more likely people are to retain that learning.

A little effort to conduct a needs assessment beforehand will allow for relevant examples and case studies about CQ. And the more the material can be applied to the specific organizational culture and niche, the better. There’s nothing too surprising about this. But the longer you train CQ, the greater the temptation to rely upon facilitation skills and familiar content, only to end up offering generic sessions that may be “okay” but not so “great”.

2. External Events and Coaching are Best for Leaders
In contrast, the survey suggests that leadership capabilities are better developed through external events. By removing leaders from the constant interruptions at the office and allowing them to learn and interact with peers from different organizations and industries, they expand their understanding of how to effectively lead in a global context. As noted in a previous article, effective, global leadership requires an ability to adapt one’s leadership style to a variety of situations, cultures, and personalities.

In addition, the L&TD leaders strongly affirmed the value of individualized coaching sessions to develop leadership skills. Many organizations have found that coaching is the best way to help leaders develop a personal development plan for improving CQ. Using CQ to lead effectively is best done with the benefit of a coach who offers personalized input and support.

3. Big Potential Seen in High Potential Programs
The top priority in talent management programs across all three contexts (India, U.K., and U.S.) is investing in the up and coming leaders of an organization. There’s no group of individuals with whom it makes more sense to prioritize CQ assessment and development than future executives. It’s often assumed that the younger generation, by default, is better at working across cultures. The research simply doesn’t support this. Emerging leaders may not need as much convincing that CQ is an essential capability for but they still need help to develop it. The high potential programs that most effectively incorporate CQ assessment and development do so by integrating it throughout the program rather than isolating it to one session.

4. Different Takes on e-Learning
It’s no surprise to find that e-learning is prominent across all the L&TD contexts surveyed but there were differences among the approaches used. The U.S. directors plan to place more energy on e-learning programs this next year than their peers in India and the U.K.; but the British organizations report the most extensive offerings currently. And India L&TD leaders are more interested in smart-phone approaches to e-learning than computer-based ones.

All three contexts see a much lower level of completion among employees who participate in e-learning programs compared to live training—not surprising given the self-directed discipline required. This raises some interesting challenges about if and how to use this mode of learning for cultural intelligence. Delivering CQ training to thousands of employees across the globe often requires e-learning approaches but fresh, interactive approaches are needed that truly engage individuals rather than giving them one more, boring, module to plod through on their own.

We should glean all we can from the L&TD field to assist us in how we help working professionals improve and apply CQ. And I’m always a fan of sharing ideas with each other. What’s one of your favorite ways to get people thinking about or applying CQ?