The Culture Map

Ready to Publish

URL

https://www.martynbromley.com/

Excerpt

OG Image

Meta Description

Analytics

https://plausible.io/martynbromley.com?page=/

Hide Cover

Fallback Cover

Meta Title

Do Not Index

Hide CTA

Erin Meyer's "The Culture Map" explores eight cultural dimensions or categories that help individuals and organizations understand and navigate cultural differences effectively.

These dimensions provide a framework for comparing and contrasting the cultural tendencies of different countries or regions. Here are the eight cultural categories along with examples:

Communicating:

Explicit vs. Implicit: In explicit cultures (e.g., the United States, Germany), people tend to communicate directly and explicitly. They say what they mean. In implicit cultures (e.g., Japan, China), communication is more subtle and relies on context and non-verbal cues. For example, in Japan, it's common to use silence as a form of communication, which might be misinterpreted in an explicit culture.

Evaluating:

Frank Feedback vs. Positive-Negative Feedback: In cultures that value frank feedback (e.g., the Netherlands, Australia), criticism is given directly and honestly. In cultures that prefer positive-negative feedback (e.g., South Korea, Japan), criticism is often cushioned with positive comments to soften the impact. For instance, in the United States, feedback may be direct, while in Japan, it's typically more indirect and considerate of the recipient's feelings.

Persuading:

Principles/Data vs. Intuition/Relationships: In cultures that prioritize principles and data (e.g., Germany, Switzerland), decisions are made based on objective information and analysis. In cultures valuing intuition and relationships (e.g., India, Brazil), personal connections and trust play a significant role in decision-making. For instance, a negotiation in a relationship-driven culture might require building trust before discussing business matters.

Leading:

Egalitarian vs. Hierarchical: In egalitarian cultures (e.g., Sweden, Denmark), leaders are expected to be approachable and are seen as equals among team members. In hierarchical cultures (e.g., Japan, South Korea), leaders hold clear authority, and hierarchy is respected. An example is how a team meeting is conducted – in an egalitarian culture, everyone may speak freely, while in a hierarchical culture, the leader's input is paramount.

Deciding:

Consensual vs. Top-Down: In consensual decision-making cultures (e.g., the Netherlands, Sweden), decisions involve input from various team members, and consensus is sought. In top-down cultures (e.g., China, Saudi Arabia), decisions are made by senior leaders or authorities. For instance, a project decision in a top-down culture might not involve extensive consultation with team members.

Trusting:

High-Trust vs. Low-Trust: High-trust cultures (e.g., Denmark, Finland) readily extend trust to others, even in initial interactions. Low-trust cultures (e.g., Brazil, Russia) require trust to be earned over time through repeated interactions. For example, in a high-trust culture, business negotiations may progress more quickly due to trust established early on.

Disagreeing:

Confrontational vs. Harmonious: Confrontational cultures (e.g., the United States, Israel) openly express disagreements and debate ideas. Harmonious cultures (e.g., Japan, Thailand) avoid confrontations to maintain group harmony. In a harmonious culture, disagreements may be addressed more indirectly to preserve relationships.

Scheduling:

Linear-Active vs. Multi-Active: Linear-active cultures (e.g., Germany, Switzerland) view time as a limited resource and prioritize punctuality and a strict schedule. Multi-active cultures (e.g., India, Middle East) have a more fluid approach to time and value flexibility. For instance, a meeting scheduled in a linear-active culture is expected to start and end on time, whereas in a multi-active culture, it might start later and extend beyond the planned duration.

These examples demonstrate the cultural variations in each dimension and highlight the importance of understanding and adapting to these differences when engaging in cross-cultural interactions and collaborations.