Case Study – Managing Multicultural Teams

The case study is taken from your reading in the Harvard Business Review (HBR), 2006. Please access
the reading from the topic section for this week or from the reading list.

Please answer the following:

1. HBR Research identifies four categories that create barriers for multicultural teams. In what
ways do you think the team of the major international software developer from India and
the United States would have struggled in these four areas? (Their situation is described in
the first paragraph of the article) Please give specific examples relevant to the team.

2. The Project Manager of the Indian/US team applied a managerial intervention strategy to try
and resolve the cultural challenges. Please describe how the three other strategies could be
applied to the team. The four strategies are described on page 89. Please give your
recommended strategy.

Answers:

Question 1: The barriers India and the U.S. made were described in four challenges.

1. Direct versus indirect communication: Cultural differences in communication styles can

cause understanding and practical collaboration difficulties. In the case of the Indian and
American team, the Indian culture often values indirect communication, which means
conveying messages subtly, relying on nonverbal cues, and avoiding direct confrontation. On
the other hand, American culture emphasizes direct and explicit communication, in which
messages are conveyed explicitly, and confrontations are addressed head-on.
Because of their cultural preference for indirect communication, Indian team members may
have difficulty openly expressing their concerns or disagreements during team discussions.
They may choose to remain silent or express their opinions indirectly, which their American
counterparts may misinterpret as a lack of engagement or agreement. In contrast, American
team members who are used to direct communication may find the Indian team members'
indirect communication style confusing or misinterpret their intentions.
For example, an American team member may expect direct input and explicit suggestions
from all team members during a team meeting to discuss a critical project issue. However,
the Indian team member may express their concerns indirectly or avoid contradicting
superiors' opinions if they follow their cultural communication style. This could lead to
misunderstandings and interrupt the team's ability to address and resolve the issue
effectively.
2. Trouble with accents and fluency: Language fluency and accents can be obstacles to effective
communication in multicultural teams. The Indian team members may have accents,
making understanding their speech difficult for their American coworkers.
Miscommunication or difficulties with complex ideas may result from pronunciation,
intonation, and vocabulary differences.
As a result, American team members may need to make an extra effort to listen carefully,
ask for clarifications when necessary, and ensure they comprehend the intended meaning
 behind the Indian team members' words. Similarly, the Indian team members may need to
speak more clearly and adjust their speech patterns to improve comprehension.
For example, during a conference call, an Indian team member may propose a solution to a
technical challenge. Still, an American team member may struggle to understand the details
because of their accent and pronunciation. If critical information needs to be conveyed
effectively, this can lead to misunderstandings, decision-making delays, or even
implementation errors.
3. Conflicting norms for decision-making: Individuals' decision-making processes and
preferences are frequently influenced by their diverse cultural backgrounds.
Indian culture values hierarchy and deference to authority, while American culture
commonly emphasizes equality and participatory decision-making. Therefore, Indian team
members may be more likely to respect and postpone decisions made by team authority
figures such as team leaders or senior managers. They may hesitate to express their opinions
openly or challenge their superiors' decisions. American team members, on the other hand,
may expect active participation and contribution from all members during decision-making
processes, despite their hierarchical position.
This cultural difference can make reaching an agreement or making informed decisions
difficult. The Indian team members may refrain from providing input unless explicitly
requested, which their American members may interpret as a lack of engagement or
commitment. The American team members, compared to the Indians, may interpret the
Indian team members' deference to authority as a lack of initiative or critical thinking.
For example, during a team meeting to discuss project milestones and resource allocation,
an Indian team member may have concerns about the feasibility of a proposed timeline but
may be reluctant to share their concerns openly due to their cultural tendency to respect
hierarchical positions. Hence, the team leader may require more critical input, posing risks
and challenges in meeting project deadlines.
4. Varying attitudes toward hierarchy and authority: Within multicultural teams, attitudes
toward hierarchy and authority can significantly impact team dynamics.
In this case, Indian culture has traditionally emphasized authority and preserving hierarchical
structures. American culture, in contrast, promotes a more egalitarian and informal
approach. These differences in attitudes can make it more challenging to develop team
roles, manage authority, or address power dynamics within the team. Indian team members
may prefer to stick to their assigned roles and seek guidance from superiors, and American
team members may choose a more collaborative and open approach.
This cultural gap can cause misunderstandings, frustration, and even conflict within the
team. American team members may believe that decision-making processes could be more
hierarchical and require more opportunities for input or creativity. In comparison, Indian
team members may find their American members' informal and egalitarian approach
unsettling or disrespectful.
When the team is working on a complex software development project, for example, an
American team member may suggest a different approach to a technical challenge.
However, suppose the Indian team members are accustomed to strictly following their
superiors' instructions and decisions. In that case, they may hesitate to explore the
suggested alternative or feel uncomfortable deviating from the established plan.
 Question 2:
1. Structural interventions: Structural interventions involve changing the team's structure or
processes to accommodate cultural differences and promote collaboration. In the case of
the Indian/US team, the Project Manager could make the following changes:
 Establishing clear communication channels: Creating structured communication
channels, such as regular team meetings, virtual collaboration platforms, or project
management tools, will help establish clear communication channels. This ensures
that team members have opportunities to express themselves, share information,
and effectively address concerns.
 Cross-functional team assignments: Encourage cross-functional team assignments in
which members from different cultural backgrounds cooperate on specific tasks or
projects. This allows team members to learn from one another, understand other
points of view, and form stronger bonds.
 Encouraging collaboration and knowledge sharing: Foster a culture of cooperation
by promoting knowledge-sharing sessions, peer mentoring, or cross-cultural training
workshops. These initiatives assist team members in understanding the cultural
values, communication styles, and decision-making processes of their team
members.
2. Adaptation: The adaptation strategy focuses on team members adjusting their behaviors
and approaches to accommodate cultural differences. To apply this strategy, the manager
could:
 Arranging cultural sensitivity training or workshops: they learn about each other's
cultural values, norms, and communication styles from the workshops. This training
can help team members develop cultural intelligence and foster empathy toward
one another.
 Establishing communication and collaboration guidelines that consider and respect
different cultural perspectives can be beneficial. Active listening, seeking clarification
when necessary, and avoiding assumptions based on cultural stereotypes are all
essential practices within an adapted team. Team members can adjust their
behaviors and develop effective strategies if awareness and mutual respect are
encouraged.
3. Exit: When all other options have been exhausted, and the cultural challenges impede the
team's performance and collaboration, the exit strategy should be considered a last resort.
Disbanding the team or reassigning team members to different projects or teams may be
necessary. However, it is critical to carefully consider the impact of such a decision on both
individual morale and the broader organizational culture. Exiting the team too soon may
jeopardize the long-term benefits of managing and leveraging cultural diversity. Therefore,
before resorting to an exit strategy, exhausting all available strategies and interventions is
critical.

Recommended strategy: Given that the project manager has already used a managerial
intervention strategy, it is appropriate to continue emphasizing and reinforcing this
approach. The project manager should actively promote cross-cultural understanding,
facilitate communication, and resolve cultural differences-related conflicts. The manager can
provide ongoing cultural dynamics coaching and guidance to team members, encourage
open dialogue and knowledge sharing, and create a safe environment for addressing
concerns and misunderstandings. Furthermore, the project manager should encourage team
members to change their behaviors and, if necessary, engage in structural interventions.
This could entail implementing rotational leadership, establishing clear communication
channels, and organizing team-building activities celebrating diversity while encouraging
collaboration. The team can work toward building a cohesive and high-performing
multicultural team that leverages the strengths of its diverse members by combining the
managerial intervention approach with elements of adaptation and structural intervention.
Regular feedback mechanisms and periodic assessments can also aid in tracking progress
and ensuring that the chosen strategy remains effective.