CHAPTER EIGHT

I GET BY WITH A LITTLE HELP FROM MY FRIENDS

The Roles of Multiculturals in Teams and Organizations

Much of the work of organizations is now done in work groups or teams. As knowledge-based competition becomes the norm, the contribution of teams to innovation is even more important to understand. Not only are individuals with multicultural minds a source of creative ideas, they have important and unique roles to play in organizations and teams seeking innovation. Individuals in culturally diverse organizations can be a source of innovation. However, as the line from the Beatles’ song in the chapter title suggests, in order to be effective contributors, they may need a little help from their (multicultural) friends.

Culturally diverse teams have the opportunity for superior performance, but that same diversity can be a source of problems, which must be managed.

For example, in a famous case of drunk flying, Japan Airlines cargo flight 8054 carrying the pilot (a 53-year-old US national), two copilots (both Japanese, aged 31 and 35), two cargo handlers, and 65 beef cattle crashed shortly after takeoff in Anchorage, Alaska, killing all on board. Post-mortem analysis indicated that the captain had a blood alcohol level of .29 percent (a driver in the United States with .08 percent is considered legally intoxicated). The captain’s preflight behavior included staggering and slurring his words and was noticed by the driver who took the crew to the airport. The National Transportation Safety Board determined that the probable cause of the accident was “a stall that resulted from the pilot’s control inputs aggravated by airframe icing while the pilot was under the influence of alcohol. Contributing to the cause of this accident was the failure of the other flight crew members to prevent the captain from attempting the flight.” The cockpit voice recorder showed that neither the first nor the second officer remarked about the captain’s intoxication, nor did they try to deter him from controlling the aircraft. Subsequent investigation attributed the reluctance of the junior flight crew members to confront the captain to the fact that suggesting to the captain, their superior, that he delegate the takeoff to a junior crew member would have caused him to lose face.¹

The failure of the Japanese junior officers to intervene in the case of Japan Airlines flight 8054 may be an extreme example of the influence of culture in a team. However, the expectation that individuals have about their roles is a powerful influence on their behavior in organizations. In this case the Japanese pilots saw themselves as subordinate to the captain, and Japanese norms for behavior with a superior resulted in their reluctance to act. Individuals develop the expectations that they have about their role in the organization from several sources. One of these sources is the messages that the organization sends to prospective employees about the expectations that the organization has of them. Another is how individuals see themselves fitting into the organization or group based on their sense of who they are—their self-identity. Because of having more than one cultural influence on their self-identity, multiculturals are particularly well suited to certain roles in organizations and teams. The organization, because of its powerful influence on the situation, can either foster these roles to take advantage of the multicultural mind or suppress them by creating incompatible imposed roles for these employees. The power of roles to influence individual behavior is dramatically demonstrated in the following example.

It was 1971, and the basement of the Stanford University Psychology Department had been converted into a mock but realistic prison. Twenty-four male university students were selected for psychological normality and paid $15 a day to participate. Participants were assigned by the flip of a coin to the role of either prisoner or guard in a simulated prison environment. The simulation was kept as realistic as possible. Prisoners were arrested at their own homes, without warning, and taken to the local police station. They were then transported to the mock prison where they were stripped naked, deloused, their possessions were removed, and they were issued prison clothing (a smock and nylon cap and a chain around one ankle), which identified them only by number. They were then locked up. Guards had been issued military-like khaki uniforms, whistles, and handcuffs, and they wore reflecting sunglasses.

The prisoners and guards immediately began settling into their roles even though they had been given no formal instructions about how to behave. Within hours some guards began to harass prisoners, behaving in a brutal and sadistic manner. Other guards followed this lead, and prisoners were tormented, taunted, made to do push-ups, and given pointless tasks. Prisoners adopted prisoner-like behavior. Over time, they became submissive and obedient. After 36 hours one prisoner began showing signs of serious emotional disturbance and was removed from the experiment. Three other participants also became so distressed that they had to be removed. As the days went on, the relationship between prisoners and guards deteriorated; the guards became more aggressive and assertive, demanding even greater obedience from prisoners. The situation became so powerful that even the experimenter, who was only supposed to be an observer, began to think of himself as a prison warden as opposed to a researcher. Although the simulation had been scheduled to last two weeks, because of fear that it would result in permanent mental or physical harm, it was terminated after six days.²

The preceding is a description of one of the most famous experiments in psychology in which normal university students behaved in ways consistent with their randomly assigned roles as opposed to their internalized values and beliefs.³ It shows how powerful the roles to which people are assigned can be in shaping their behavior. It also shows how easily organizations can create role expectations for their employees, either intentionally or unintentionally. Organizations seeking innovation need to be cautious about creating role expectations, either formally or informally, that do not allow multiculturals to play out their innate roles.

Multicultural Roles in Teams

Individuals who have developed a multicultural mind have a broader worldview, higher levels of sensitivity and perceptual acuity, greater empathy, and more complex ways of thinking. These skills allow them to function well in a number of organizational and team roles. The higher level of cognitive complexity that has resulted from effectively managing their multiple identities allows multiculturals to be more creative.

However, multiculturals fit naturally into a number of roles important to innovation beyond being the engine for the generation of creative ideas. The roles they play in multicultural teams can have a dramatic effect on team effectiveness.

When you have a very diverse team—people of different backgrounds, different culture, different gender, different age, you are going to get a more creative team—probably getting better solutions, and enforcing them in a very innovative way and with a very limited number of preconceived ideas. (Carlos Ghosn, CEO of Renault-Nissan)⁴

Harnessing the creativity of multicultural teams is a key pathway to organizational innovation. We have long known that culturally diverse teams generate more ideas and that they have the potential to reach better solutions to problems than single culture teams.⁵ However, the same cultural diversity that leads to more and different ideas also results in culturally different perceptions, expectations, and communication patterns that can have damaging effects on team performance (as we saw in the case of drunk flying). These negative effects (called process losses) include the formation of faultlines between culturally different groups, increased performance time, higher levels of conflict, and lower levels of team member participation. The presence of multiculturals in teams can help to reduce these process losses and improve creative performance.⁶ Multiculturals improve team creativity by performing the three key roles of bridges, integrators, and mediators.⁷

Bridges. Individuals bring their culturally based norms for how work groups should function to culturally diverse teams. When the workgroup is composed of a few different cultures (as opposed to many cultures) individuals form subgroups based on culture. Information flow across subgroup boundaries is reduced because the larger group is divided along these so-called fault lines.⁸ Multiculturals can bridge this cultural divide because of their cultural knowledge, their ability to relate to members of both cultures, and often their language skills. They can explain the perspectives of the different group members, improve knowledge sharing in the group, reduce the tendency to use redundant information or make premature decisions. Bridging across these intragroup boundaries reduces the time that culturally diverse teams take to reach a conclusion.

Integrators. Culturally different workgroup members are aware that they are different. Based on this awareness, they compare themselves to the other members of the group and evaluate their status in the team and whether their participation will be valued or evaluated negatively. As John Cleese said, “Nothing will stop you from being creative so effectively as the fear of making a mistake.” If individuals perceive their status in the group as high, they are likely to participate more fully and to feel more positive about the group. When other group members are perceived as being different, individuals are often reluctant to invest high amounts of effort in interacting because they feel this will cost more in time and effort than the potential benefit. The Japanese flight officers, in the story that opened this chapter, were reluctant to act, in part because of their perceived low status and the feeling that taking over from the captain would be viewed negatively.

High status also conveys to the individual a sense of power to influence others by increasing confidence in his or her thoughts and perspectives. Recent research shows that individuals who feel empowered generate creative ideas that are less influenced by the situation.⁹ Creative performance in teams depends on the full exchange of ideas by group members. Multicultural individuals, with their high levels of sensitivity and empathy, encourage the full exchange and integration of ideas by helping all group members feel comfortable with their status in the group and are able to share their ideas and fully participate. The variety of perspectives held by multiculturals helps reduce the tendency for teams to conform to solutions proposed by a dominant group (called groupthink).¹⁰ By encouraging the expression of alternative views, they help the team focus on how the team is functioning as opposed to a somewhat mindless rush toward solutions.

Mediators. Working together in teams, often under time pressure, produces conflict, but conflict comes in several forms.¹¹ There is conflict that comes from interpersonal differences, conflict that results from different views regarding the team task, and controversies about how to accomplish the task (process-related conflict). The opportunity for all three types of conflict is greater in culturally diverse teams than in single culture teams. However, not all conflict is bad. High-performing teams tend to have low levels of relationship and process-related conflict, but higher levels of task conflict. Surfacing differences of opinion about the task may result in conflict, but it also produces better solutions. Not only do culturally diverse teams have more conflict, but their members can also have different approaches to solving conflicts.¹² For example, Japanese might like to refer conflicts to a higher authority, Germans might prefer referring to rules and procedures, and Americans may seek to discover the underlying cause of the conflict.¹³ When conflicts arise, multiculturals can use their skills to minimize the destructive interpersonal and process-related conflict and bring about an agreement or reconciliation. Their ability to see issues from multiple perspectives allows them to understand the often culturally based sources of conflict and to take appropriate action. Their multiple identities allow them to be perceived as neutral and not aligned with any one group, as the following story illustrates.

Joanne Qiu, born in Hong Kong but raised and educated in Canada (MBA from Simon Fraser University), had recently joined the product development team at Vancouver-based Startech Industries. The team’s job was to come up with ways to market Startech’s satellite-based technology products to Asia. The team seemed to be stalled, and Joanne’s job was to see if she could get them moving. The four other team members have very different cultural backgrounds. Steve, an American is the official team leader. He has strong ideas about what the product offering should look like; he talks about it a lot, and tries to persuade his colleagues. Ulrike, a recent immigrant from Germany, has ideas about products that are not only different from Steve’s but diametrically opposed. And, she has 20 years of experience in the industry in Germany. She is not about to back down from her ideas and thinks that she has forgotten more about satellite technology than Steve has ever known. She too speaks loudly and forcefully about the offering. Steve doesn’t agree with her and argues back just as loudly.

The other members of the team keep a low profile. Juan, a technical expert from Mexico, can’t stand Ulrike. How does she dare talk to the team leader like that? She has no respect for authority! It’s not so much that Juan doesn’t agree with Ulrike’s ideas—in fact he secretly thinks they are good—it’s just the rude and aggressive way she presents them that he objects to. She acts as if she were Steve’s equal if not above him. Juan would not support Ulrike’s ideas if his life depended on it. Yuan from Taiwan is the final member of the group. Her knowledge of the Asian market is an important element in the decision. However, she doesn’t feel that Steve really wants her opinions and ideas. He says he wants to hear from everyone, but she doesn’t think he means it. If he does, why does he argue so aggressively with Ulrike? Yuan thinks if you really want to hear what other people think you should show them respect. Listening to Steve and Ulrike makes Yuan sad. These people are talented but completely egocentric. She puts forth her views when the opportunity arises, but so timidly that Steve wonders if Yuan herself believes what she is saying.

It didn’t take Joanne long to understand what was happening in the team she had just joined. Everyone had good ideas, but the conflict between individuals was preventing them from being understood and discussed effectively. Even though she wasn’t the team leader, she used her newness to the group as an opportunity to make a suggestion. She said, “You all seem to know each other’s views well. But, so I can get a better understanding of where we are I wonder if I can make a suggestion. Can each of us write down our ideas on a card? Then we will shuffle the cards, deal them out, and each read an idea in turn. That way we separate the idea itself from the person presenting it.” By this time the group was so frustrated that they agreed. And it didn’t take long before agreement on a marketing strategy was reached.¹⁴

In the preceding story, multicultural Joanne did not have deep knowledge of the cultures of any of the other team members. The role she took in helping the team to achieve its goal was to facilitate the interactions of the parties. If she had deep knowledge of the other cultures, research shows that she would have been more likely to intervene more directly to resolve the issues.¹⁵

Virtual Teams. Not all teams interact face to face. One way in which organizations are dealing with the challenges of globalization is by forming work groups with geographically dispersed structures. These virtual teams interact primarily by electronic networks. The advantage of virtual teams is the ability to choose group members regardless of geographic boundaries. However, virtual teams have special challenges in communicating, relationship building and conflict management, and task management.¹⁶ The skills that multiculturals bring to these teams can help resolve these issues. Communication in virtual teams relies on electronic media and most often the written word, such as e-mail. Because the language used is usually English, this may help second language speakers who are conversationally weak. However e-mail is not a very rich communication medium, and it can mask cultural differences. A straight-to-the-point e-mail from a person from a direct-communication culture can easily be misinterpreted by a colleague from an indirect-communication culture who needs information about the context to understand. The multicultural mind is able to catch these subtle differences and improve communication in virtual teams.

Virtual teams often have less conflict because they interact though electronic media. However, this means they lose the physical contact that helps develop trust, respect, cooperation, and commitment that a cohesive team needs to function effectively. Because the multicultural mind understands the context of the various cultures involved, multiculturals can be the glue that holds these far-flung work groups together.

Different tasks require different team processes and strategies. The exchange of the tacit knowledge (in-the-bones knowledge as opposed to more explicit easy-to-record ideas) required to generate creative solutions proposes an additional challenge for virtual teams. In face-to-face teams, individual roles and clear task strategies and norms for interaction can be resolved on a continuous basis. Virtual teams have little opportunity to manage the task process in this way. Multiculturals can use their skills to act as a coordinating mechanism in which they encourage participation that allows the knowledge of group members to be leveraged, helps to foster a strong group identity, and creates an environment of trust. While virtual teams face additional barriers to creative performance, the advantage of being able to select team members without geographic restrictions can result in teams than are even more creative than face-to-face teams—if the challenges are appropriately managed.

Multiculturals as Boundary Spanners in Organizations

Of course, teams do not exist in a vacuum. They operate inside the organization in which they are embedded, and the characteristics of the organization can influence the creative performance of teams. The strategy of the organization, the authority structures, and the regulations employed to implement that strategy determine which groups in organizations get resources and which behaviors get rewarded. Large, profitable organizations can provide more resources for any type of group. However, just throwing resources at multicultural teams may not be the best solution. In some cases, teams generate greater innovation by making do with what is at hand.¹⁷ What is more important is making sure that teams have the skills and attitudes to perform well. It’s also important to remember that team members must first be organization members, so the selection process of the organization will determine the individuals available to form teams. As Steve Jobs said, “Innovation has nothing to do with how many R&D dollars you have. When Apple came up with the Mac, IBM was spending 100 times more on R&D. It’s not about money. It’s about the people you have, how you’re led, and how much you get it.”

Multiculturals can draw on their skills to engage in activities across the organization that can have a positive influence on innovation. These activities can include mediating, brokering, or negotiating between different organizational groups (sometimes in different countries), acting as language nodes to improve organizational communication, facilitating the integration of newcomers, helping to develop monoculturals, and leading organizations in the management of diversity. A key element in all of these activities is that they involve spanning a boundary of some sort. Boundary spanning involves four general tasks that multiculturals can perform in the organization.¹⁸ These are exchanging, linking, facilitating, and intervening.

Exchanging of information happens when multiculturals transmit information and knowledge across organizational boundaries. This can take place in formal meetings, horizontal arrangements such as task forces, or informal networks.

Linking is the use of personal networks to enable previously disconnected organization members to link up across boundaries. Multiculturals often have personal networks that cross cultural and organizational boundaries.

Facilitating is assisting in the cross-boundary interactions of others, for example by acting as the channel through which messages are delivered.

Intervening is the active participation in resolving misunderstandings and building intergroup trust.

By engaging in these activities across cultural contexts, multiculturals develop a loose and varied social network that improves the free exchange of information that is critical to organizational innovation. All multiculturals are not the same. Because multiculturals manage or experience their multiple identities in different ways, they may be more effective in some of these roles than in others. It may be tempting to try to identify multicultural types and match them logically to appropriate roles. However, in reality, it’s very difficult to understand how multiculturals are dealing with their identities except by observing their behavior. Organizations should therefore try to attract a wide range of multiculturals and create an environment that allows their skills to emerge and allows them to migrate to roles in which they feel comfortable. Once more is known about them as individuals, they can then be placed strategically. Providing an appropriate organizational context in which multiculturals can take on the roles that allow their multicultural minds and skills to emerge is the subject of the next chapter.

Summary

As organizations increasingly face knowledge-based competition, they often turn to teams of people to generate the innovative solutions they need. Culturally diverse teams are capable of generating more creative ideas than single culture teams. Organizations can be a powerful influence on the situation by creating imposed roles or by allowing innate roles to emerge. Multiculturals, because of their broader worldview, higher levels of sensitivity and perceptual acuity, greater empathy, and more complex ways of thinking can function well in a number of organizational and team roles that are important for innovation. In teams they can act as bridges across cultural fault lines, as integrators of the views of culturally different team members, and as mediators by intervening to reduce destructive forms of team conflict. Multiculturals may not excel at all these roles, depending on how they manage their multicultural identities.

Not all teams interact face to face. So-called virtual teams work across geographies primarily through electronic networks. Virtual teams have special challenges in communicating, relationship building, and conflict management, all of which can be handled more easily by multiculturals. Teams exist within the context of the larger organization and can be influenced by organizational strategy, authority structures, and regulations. Multiculturals can engage in important boundary-spanning activities that can have a positive influence on innovation. These activities include exchanging information across boundaries, linking disconnected organizational units, facilitating cross-boundary interactions, and intervening to resolve misunderstandings. To leverage these important boundary-spanning skills, organizations must produce a context that allows multiculturals to play out their innate roles.