Practical Applications and Recommendations for HR and OD Professionals in the Global Workplace_4 potx

56 Going Global members will ask for assistance. In addition, if team members misinterpret the cues offered within heterogeneous teams, they may provide backup when it’s not needed, neglect the cue that signals help is needed, or provide backup in a manner that is culturally inappropriate. Given this example, it becomes easy to see how heterogeneous teams may have more difficulty in backup behavior because of misinterpretations and miscommunications. Variations in power distance among members may also have an impact on the success of any supporting behavior offered. In multicultural teams with large variations in power-distance orien- tations among team members, it will become more difficult to successfully engage in supporting behaviors, because team mem- bers will vary in their acceptance of these behaviors based on the status differentials between recipients and senders. Further, given some cultural orientations, the explicit manner in which backup behavior is conducted may be seen as threatening, rude, or embarrassing. Critical Process #4: Engaging in Perspective Taking to Develop a Cultural Foundation One of the challenges to interaction within multicultural teams is that cultural differences in values and beliefs lead individual mem- bers to expect different things, ranging from how a team should function to the interpretation of members’ actions. Yet oftentimes these cognitive assumptions lie hidden. In the absence of explicit recognition of such underlying assumptions members are often likely to use stereotypes to explain behavior or will engage in faulty attributions as they assume that fellow team members are operating under the same set of rules, expectations, and prefer- ences as their own. Perspective taking may be one of the most important transition processes (see Marks et al., 2001) that occur within multicultural teams. It involves ‘‘understanding how and why another person thinks and feels about the situation and why they are behaving as they are’’ (Sessa, 1996, p. 105). Perspective taking is not empathy, but reflects a more cognitive process. Perspective taking has been shown to have a number of benefits such as: (1) reducing stereotypic responses and increas- ing the overlap ‘‘between representations of the self and representation of the outgroup’’ (Galinsky & Moskowitz, 2000, Multicultural Teams: Critical Team Processes and Guidelines 57 p. 708), (2) encouraging social coordination and helping behavior (Galinsky, Ku, & Wang, 2005), and (3) facilitating better communication. Specifically, Sessa (1996) found that perspective taking caused people to disclose more information and frame their conversations in such a way that they were easily understood. This, in turn, leads to overall greater success in multicultural communications. In essence, perspective taking is a key aspect of effective intercultural team interaction; it provides the founda- tional knowledge pertaining to a recognition of the need to adapt behavior in some manner and offers a mechanism through which likely member actions can be projected in the future. However, perspective taking is not a natural tendency. This is especially true when it involves taking the perspective of members of another culture. Though it has been argued that individuals who are high in self-monitoring (Densten & Gray, 2003) are better at perspec- tive taking than those who are low self-monitors, there may also be interventions that can be designed and implemented to facilitate this process (we will discuss this more later in the chapter). Critical Process #5: Engaging in Negotiation to Find Common Ground Negotiation is a process that is often ignored or minimized when it comes to the delineation of important team processes. However, within a multicultural setting negotiation becomes key to effective interaction. Negotiation has been defined as ‘‘the ways in which individuals manage their interdependence’’ (Walton & McKersie, 1965 as cited in Gelfand, Fulmer, & Severance, in press). In addition, whereas negotiation may differ across cultures, Gelfand et al. (in press) argue that there are several core characteristics that should apply across cultures: there is a perception of conflicting interests, communication is involved, a joint outcome exists, and although there are mixed motives, compromise is possible. Within multicultural teams negotiation is critical because members often come to the team with disparate cognitive structures that are based in their cultural orientations. These knowledge structures, in turn, serve to affect the way each individual member views the world, team interaction, and the attributions that are made. Though there are situations in which the knowledge structures are different but still compatible, it is often the case that the differences are not initially compatible. 58 Going Global It is the team leader’s job to facilitate a negotiated reality for the team such that coordinated, adaptive action is enabled. Researchers have argued that the emergence of a third culture within multicultural teams is one of the mechanisms that facilitates effective interaction (see Earley & Mosakowski, 2000). However, negotiation is a complex process even when conducted within a single culture; it becomes even more complex when conducted within the context of a multicultural team. For example, culture has been shown to affect the types of negotiation strategies, the nature of the influence used in negotiation, as well as the valued outcomes (Gelfand et al., 2002; Morris et al., 2004; Gelfand & Brett, 2004). Although viewing negotiation as the process by which differences in cultural values within a single team are resolved is not the normal way this behavior is examined in the literature, taking this approach within teams is essential in order to achieve the common ground that allows coordinated action. In engaging in this process Gelfand and Dyer (2000) report that emotional appeals are thought to be more impactful within collectivistic cultures, and rational appeals more effective within individualistic cultures. Leaders need to be cognizant of this difference when seeking to facilitate a negotiated reality. For more detailed treatment of the role of negotiation, the reader is referred to a recent review by Gelfand, Fulmer, and Severance (in press). Delineation of Emergent States Although processes explain the manner in which interaction occurs within multicultural teams, it is also essential to recognize the effect that emergent states may have on multicultural teams. Specifically, these cognitive and motivational states can arise as the result of multicultural team interaction and, in turn, serve as inputs to future interaction. As with the process variables, there are many emergent states that have been identified within the teams literature that may be argued to be important for the successful interaction of multicultural teams, but due to space constraints we limit our focus here to a few which we feel form the foundation for success: psychological safety, shared mental models, and transactive memory systems. See Figure 3.1 for a visual representation. Multicultural Teams: Critical Team Processes and Guidelines 59 Critical State #6: Creating a Sense of Psychological Safety to Facilitate Interaction Psychological safety has been defined as a shared belief regard- ing the degree to which the team is perceived to be a safe environment to engage in interpersonal risk taking (Edmond- son, 1999). As such, psychological safety reflects a team climate characterized by mutual respect and trust. Edmondson (2003) found that psychological safety was important in culturally diverse teams (such as medical teams) because it facilitated team inter- action. For example, as the degree of psychological safety within multicultural teams increases, members will be more willing to take interpersonal risks, such as speaking up and offering con- tributions during plan development or engaging in supporting behaviors. One of the potential benefits of multicultural teams is the diversity of vantage points that exist within these teams; psy- chological safety helps the team to take advantage of this diversity by promoting a climate in which members feel free to question suggestions and decisions, in essence allowing members to play a type of ‘‘devil’s advocate.’’ Furthermore, though cultures vary in the degree to which they may engage in these actions, based on power differentials and concerns about saving face, psychological safety might play a role in mitigating some of these tendencies by promoting a collective, holistic view of the team setting in which out-groups are diminished. Edmondson (2003) found that team leaders could promote psychological safety within culturally diverse teams by engaging in motivational, interpersonal activities and fostering a climate of inclusion so that power differences were minimized and the input of all members was recognized. As psychological safety reflects a climate of trust and mutual respect, activities that promote trust would be expected to facilitate a sense of safety. Within multicultural teams, research has shown that not only does trust have different relational bases, but also that cultures vary in their motivational bases. Specifically, Yuki et al. (2005) found that in more collectivist cultures (such as Japan) an important basis on which team members based their decisions to trust each other was the indirect interpersonal ties that existed between them. Conversely, within more individualistic cultures (such as the United States) decisions to trust were related to how well team 60 Going Global members identified with each other, based on a shared category of membership. Critical State #7: Forming Compatible Cognitive Structures to Aid Coordination The possession of compatible knowledge structures have been shown to facilitate performance and adaptation within teams (Mathieu, Heffner, Goodwin, Salas, & Cannon-Bowers, 2000; Entin & Serfaty, 1999). However, achieving these emergent states is often very challenging within multicultural teams, because most often members come to the team with very different knowledge structures. These knowledge structures, as partially witnessed through the metaphors used (see Gibson & Zellmer-Bruhn, 2002), guide member expectations, attributions, and interactions. Shared mental models and transactive memory systems are two categories of knowledge structures which, though difficult to construct in multicultural teams, are essential for coordinated action. Both shared mental models and transactive memory are aspects of shared understanding. Transactive memory system (TMS) is defined as the collective knowledge within a group that is coupled with the coordinated awareness of the knowl- edge distribution among group members (Wegner, 1987). When TMSs are effective, team members can easily assess who should be responsible for which task based on a mutual understanding of expertise, thereby reducing the cognitive load through more efficient social information searches. Thus, using TMS within mul- ticultural teams may affect communication patterns in that the perceptions of where expertise lies within the team will differen- tially guide interaction based on perceived expertise-based power differences. In addition, when TMSs are accurate and knowledge within them made explicit this may counter the tendency of indi- viduals within multicultural teams to rely on false stereotypes and inaccurate attributions. TMS involves three primary components: specialization, or the differentiation of information among team members; credibility, or the beliefs of members regarding the accuracy and reliabil- ity of others’ knowledge; and coordination, or the organized knowledge processing of information (Akgun, Byrne, Keskin, Multicultural Teams: Critical Team Processes and Guidelines 61 Lynn, & Imamgolu, 2005). Essentially, the root of this theory lies upon distributed complementarity and compilational emergence, where team members work as social information searchers to determine who possesses which knowledge and expertise, and then coordinate to ensure that the correct individuals are called upon to utilize such knowledge. Shared mental models (SMMs) are analogous to but unique from TMS. Though SMMs are also a type of shared cognition that works through distinct aspects of efficiency, there is not really anything in the theory that mentionsspecialization of information. This may be because SMMs were developed in teams, in which a level of specialization is understood, as team members have an inherent level of interdependency. Instead, SMM theory relies more upon implicit coordination instead of social information searchers (Edwards et al., 2006). SMMs are defined as organized knowledge structures held in common among team members in order to allow them to act in coordinated ways (Mathieu, et al., 2000). SMMs are characterized by four main types of models: technology/equipment, which hold information such as equipment functioning, operating procedures, and system limitations; job/task, which hold information such as task procedures, likely scenarios, and task strategies; team interaction, which hold infor- mation such as roles, responsibilities, and information sharing; and team, which hold information such as teammates’ knowledge, skills, and attitudes (Cannon-Bowers, Salas, & Converse, 1993). In order to be successful, it is expected that team members need to not only possess accurate and similar information regarding tasks, butalsomustbeabletoworktogetherwellasateam(Edwards, Day, Arthur, & Bell, 2006). Whereas compatible task-related mental models may be fairly straightforward within multicultural teams, it is the knowledge structures governing team interaction that are typically more divergent. It is these more complex knowl- edge structures which need to be negotiated, or at a minimum made salient, so team members are cognizant of member pref- erences and can predict and adapt to member action as needed. In all, compatible knowledge structures are especially critical to develop because of the inherent diversity of cognition within multicultural teams and the misattributions these can cause. 62 Going Global Guidelines for Improving Multicultural Teamwork Certainly, the aforementioned processes, states, and associated challenges of multicultural teamwork can be difficult to over- come. Indeed, developing methods for reducing problems and maximizing the benefits of multicultural collaboration has been a struggle for researchers (van Knippenberg & Schippers, 2007). However, drawing from what is currently known regarding how to prepare diverse teams to work together, and about general team training principles, it is possible to provide guidelines that can aid practitioners in reducing some of the challenges to success- ful performance in such collaborations. These guidelines can be divided according to the temporal frame in which their imple- mentation is most effective: pre-interaction, during interaction, and post-interaction. Guidelines targeted at the pre-interaction phase on setting a common ground for members of multicultural teams before team processes are initiated. This will facilitate shared cognition and skill-based processes that will encourage team members to utilize a sense of cultural awareness in their multicultural environment, while also reducing the negative impact of ethnocentric tenden- cies. Guidelines that can be implemented during interaction are primarily targeted at enhancing coordination across team mem- bers, as this is a particularly challenging issue for multicultural teams. Finally, guidelines can also facilitate post-interaction as a means to improve future multicultural team interactions, either within the same team or as team members move on to new teams. These guidelines are centered on facilitating feedback to team members regarding what went well during interaction, what could be improved, and how to approach future interactions success- fully. The next section provides a more in-depth look at the processes occurring within each phase and corresponding guide- lines to enhance multicultural teamwork that can be implemented to enhance multicultural teamwork. The following list provides a summary of guidelines. Guidelines for Improving Multicultural Teams 1. Utilize training that incorporates cultural self-awareness as well as mitigation of ethnocentric tendencies. Multicultural Teams: Critical Team Processes and Guidelines 63 2. Implement training that emphasizes perspective taking. 3. Incorporate advanced organizers into training. 4. Utilize textual & video vignette-based situational judgment tests to promote cross-cultural skill development. 5. Establish a set of team norms, behaviors, and beliefs to create a hybrid culture that emphasizes a combination of team member cultural characteristics. 6. Encourage teammembersto discusstheir similarities,especially at the socio-contextual level. 7. Enhance coordination through the use of regulatory commu- nication and realignment. 8. Facilitate cognitive emergent states and behavioral-based processes through the execution of AARs following team interaction. Pre-Interaction Phase Before members of multicultural teams even begin to interact, there are several phases that can be leveraged to ensure that effec- tive team processes occur. First, a primary issue in multicultural teams is the proclivity for a lower degree of shared understanding among team members due to cultural differences (Cramton & Hinds, 2005). Shared understanding among team members can be captured through shared mental models; the shared mental representations held by team members; the team’s transactive memory system; or the collective knowledge within the group (Wegner, 1987). Therefore, addressing this prior to team perfor- mance can aid in reducing some of the misunderstandings and communication failures that arise from differences in logic and information storage (Kayworth & Leidner, 2002; Baba, Gluesing, Ratner, & Wagner, 2004). In addition to forming accurate shared understanding among team members, a strong foundational set of skills that are neces- sary to interact in multicultural environments can be cultivated prior to multicultural interaction. Doing so will enhance cultural awareness and ensure that team members have the appropriate skills in their repertoire when faced with new or challenging cultural situations (Salas, Wilson, & Lyons, 2009). Encouraging team members to practice their skills in a safe environment, 64 Going Global such as through the use of situational judgment tests, should aid in facilitating the transfer of these skills during real inter- actions (Bhawuk & Brislin, 2000). The following discussion pro- vides a more detailed explanation regarding how both shared knowledge and skill-based processes can be developed during pre-interaction. Facilitating Shared Mental Models & TMS Developing at least some degree of a shared understanding among multicultural team members is a critical pre-interaction step. As previously discussed, shared mental models and transactive memory systems can enable team performance by reducing con- fusion regarding who can provide a particular expertise. Shared understanding will also streamline communication, coordina- tion, and comprehension of new knowledge (Cramton, 2001). However, it is often the case in multicultural environments that the development of shared mental models and transac- tive memory is much more complicated than in homogenous environments. Individuals in homogeneous teams tend to report stronger feelings of affinity and ease of interaction than those in multicultural environments (Ibarra, 1992). Individuals from different cultures bring their own methods for storing, retriev- ing, and exchanging information, which while at times can be advantageous (for example, in preventing groupthink and promoting creativity), can also be detrimental to the forma- tion of a shared knowledge system (Adler, 1991; Williams & O’Reilly, 1998). However, this does not mean that developing a shared understanding among multicultural team members is impossible. Indeed, multicultural teams should strive to develop a shared meaning system in order to overcome the negative impacts of cultural diversity and promote effective interactions (Gibson & Earley, 2002). Furthermore, establishing shared mental models and a transactive memory system early on in multicultural team development can aid in reducing or preventing later conflicts and setting the tone for information sharing within the team. To accomplish this, several strategies can be enacted during the early stages of team development in order to promote a lasting and beneficial shared knowledge system. Multicultural Teams: Critical Team Processes and Guidelines 65 Guideline #1: Utilize Training That Incorporates Cultural Self-Awareness as Well as Mitigation of Ethnocentric Tendencies The first strategy that can help establish a shared understand- ing in multicultural teams is the use of cultural self-awareness training to mitigate ethnocentric tendencies. Cultural awareness training is based upon the idea that individuals who have a better understanding of their own culture will be more effective and aware of the cultural norms, beliefs, and behaviors of other cul- tures (Bennett, 1986). Therefore, this type of training is designed to first educate an individual about his or her own culture so that when interacting with individuals from different cultures the trainee will appreciate differences instead of ignoring them or reacting negatively (Littrell & Salas, 2005). Furthermore, as individuals are driven by their cultural beliefs and norms, it is often the case that a tendency to view one’s own culture as supe- rior will cloud interactions with others from different cultures (Bussema & Nemec, 2006; Salas et al., 2009). Therefore, before cultural interactions begin, bringing team members ‘‘back to the basics’’ by encouraging an awareness of their own cultural beliefs, biases, feelings, and responses to culture can aid team members in developing a common understanding of cultural similarities, differences, and biases. This can in turn reduce ethnocentric behaviors and lead to greater tolerance and flexibility in cul- tural perspectives, leading team members to be more effective in creating shared knowledge structures as they begin to perceive commonalities and acknowledge beneficial differences with their team members. Guideline #2: Implement Training That Emphasizes Perspective Taking In relation to enhancing team member cultural self-awareness as a means of improving the development of shared knowledge, multicultural teams can also benefit from training in perspective taking, which is a social cognitive process of perceiving something from the viewpoint of another person (Fiske & Taylor, 1984). Perspective taking is particularly beneficial in cross-cultural envi- ronments, as it allows an individual to assume the perspective of another person during interactions, therefore enhancing under- standing and the likely success of the interaction. Perspective [...]... Dickinson, T L., Converse, S A., & Tannenbaum, S I (1992) Toward an understanding of team performance and training In R J Swezey & E Salas (Eds.), Teams: Their training and performance (pp 3–29) Norwood, NJ: Ablex Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J A (2000) The anatomy of team training In S Tobias and J D Fletcher (Eds.), Training and retraining: Multicultural Teams: Critical Team Processes and Guidelines... found that HR functions are leading their respective businesses in developing and building global HR strategies and structures (Hewitt Associates, 2009a) What Is Globalization? Hewitt’s Global HR Study (2009a) defines the four distinct stages of globalization: multinational, international, transitioning to global, and global Six percent of study participants stated they worked for a ‘‘multinational’’... cooperation during the interaction phase is to introduce a systematic means of coordinating and communicating This may tie in with the development of a hybrid culture, as it involves creating a systematic method by which team members can expect regular communications regarding their performance, and a way for teams to determine if they need to realign their efforts based on their current performance status... local and global settings This chapter will also outline a ‘‘freedom within a framework’’ approach to managing talent, including a phased approach to global program implementation Finally, we will look to the future of global human resources and the evolving field of human capital Impact of Globalization The increase in globalization over the last two decades has changed how we do business and how businesses... organization and the needs of the local country Standardization of HR programs and policies helps to keep costs down, but they must meet local needs if they are to be effective Oftentimes ‘‘standard’’ policies need to be customized locally in order for them to have any impact or meaning to employees and to the local business HR organizations are evolving to meet the needs of global business and workforces... focus is solely domestic, their work will often be affected by global issues, whether dealing with suppliers or securing visas in order to hire and retain talent HR strategies need to support and bring business strategies to life To do this, HR professionals must be fully conversant and understand the business environment, value chains, core business processes, and key talent In a global environment all... individuals’ comfort level about reporting errors, this provides a structured, acceptable method by which such feedback can be provided, maintaining a balance between individual cultural needs and the needs of the team as a performing entity Post-Interaction Phase The completion of interaction in a multicultural collaboration is not simply the end of performance; instead, lessons learned from the interaction... become a ‘‘learning organization’’ is a competitive advantage for global companies In a world driven by radical innovation and continuous change, companies need to prepare and coach their people to cope with the complexity and accelerated speed of an increasingly global economy To play and to win in such an environment also implies the need to create the right links between companies and national education... when linked to existing knowledge, providing an advanced organizer as a conceptual framework aids in the facilitation of training organization and retention of the new information gained (Mayer 1979; 1989) Advanced organizers may be as simple as a brief outline of the training modules and objectives or as complex as a complete reference guide that can be consulted throughout the training program Advanced... more complex Not only do HR professionals need to be aware of global economic, market, and labor issues, to be effective, but they must also be intimate with local economic, market, and labor issues One of the main HR challenges that companies face in trying to manage globalization is ensuring that the right people are in the right roles and that there is an effective and distinctive cross-cultural fertilization . from different cultures bring their own methods for storing, retriev- ing, and exchanging information, which while at times can be advantageous (for example, in preventing groupthink and promoting creativity),. of the inherent diversity of cognition within multicultural teams and the misattributions these can cause. 62 Going Global Guidelines for Improving Multicultural Teamwork Certainly, the aforementioned. beneficial in cross-cultural envi- ronments, as it allows an individual to assume the perspective of another person during interactions, therefore enhancing under- standing and the likely success of the