Breaking Down Babel: Why Speaking the Same Language Is Not Enough to Get the Job Done

While English may be the lingua franca of the international business community, anyone who has ever worked outside their native country knows that speaking the same language is rarely enough to get the job done. Cultural differences that appear subtle at first can easily grow into a Tower of Babel.

As someone who was born and raised in the Netherlands, emigrated as an adult, and worked across continents, I can attest that life abroad is a journey filled with pitfalls that often remain hidden until it’s too late. The Dutch are known for their directness, for instance, while our neighbours, the British, often express themselves more subtly. Listening between the lines is not our greatest strength. Despite being among the world’s top non-native English speakers, some of us may struggle to comprehend what our Anglophone conversation partner is really trying to convey when the discussion moves to a higher level. However, this type of confusion is not unique to the Dutch. Every nationality has its own peculiarities that can often be difficult to gauge. Among the myriad potential causes of cultural confusion, four stand out, according to researchers: direct versus indirect communication, regional accents, differing attitudes toward hierarchy and authority, and conflicting norms for decision-making.

Who’s Right and Who’s Wrong?

Imagine a Dutchman named Johan and two Americans named Alison and Emily come together to work on an important and urgent project. While their expertise shines, cultural differences cast a shadow over their chances of success. Johan does not mince his words and values open discussion. Alison and Emily are straightforward but somewhat pushy for Johan’s liking. Johan seeks consensus, while Alison and Emily just want to get started. Soon, tensions are running high. Johan’s need for deliberation and the Americans’ desire to produce results have clashed to a point where Johan asks his boss to assign him to a different project. Who is right and who is wrong? The answer may depend on where you grew up. Lesson 1 for all of us: avoid ethnocentrism at all costs.

Cultural differences and their impact in the workplace have been the subject of intense academic scrutiny, resulting in scientific models with real-world applicability. Dutch social psychologist Geert Hofstede (1928-2020), widely regarded as the father of cross-cultural communication research, analysed the results of more than 116,000 surveys from 72 countries in twenty different languages, which he conducted among employees of computer giant IBM in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Subsequently, he developed his Cultural Dimensions Theory, which culminated in the publication of his seminal book “Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind” in 1991. Several others, including Fons Trompenaars, Charles Hampden-Turner, and Shalom Schwartz, have conducted similar studies in the decades after Hofstede. His theory has nevertheless stood the test of time and continues to be widely used.

Hofstede distinguishes six key dimensions that help managers understand how team members think and act: Power Distance (acceptance of unequal power distribution), Uncertainty Avoidance (tolerance for ambiguity and risk-taking), Individualism vs Collectivism (prioritisation of the self over group interests), Masculinity vs Femininity (motivation towards achievement and success), Long-Term Orientation (focus on future planning vs immediate results), and Indulgence versus Restraint (gratification of desires vs adherence to social norms).

These key dimensions can manifest themselves in a variety of forms. Hofstede found that professionals from countries with a high degree of power distance generally have a greater acceptance of hierarchy than their colleagues from countries with a low degree of power distance. In such cultures, found in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, people are more comfortable with unequal power distribution and respect for authority figures. Professionals from countries with a low degree of power distance, including the Netherlands and other parts of Northern Europe, exhibit a preference for egalitarian relationships and are more inclined to question authority. This can cause conflict in brainstorm sessions. Team members from countries with a low degree of power distance may feel that their colleagues from countries with a high degree of power distance aren’t contributing their opinions, while those from the opposite cultures may see their colleagues as undermining hierarchy and showing a lack of respect.

Creating a Level Playing Field

Models like Hofstede’s are a useful starting point to understand differences, foster empathy, and promote open-mindedness among colleagues. Remember Johan, Alison, and Emily. The United States and the Netherlands have a low degree of power distance in comparison to most other parts of the world. However, according to Hofstede, Americans are strongly motivated by the prospect of reward, and have a “winner takes all” mentality, as Hofstede describes it, while the Dutch value modesty and cooperation. Americans like Alison and Emily need ambitious goals. They will strive not only to reach but also to surpass these goals. Johan will happily accept ambitious goals in the beginning, but as time goes on and circumstances change, he will argue that the goals need to be reconsidered and possibly adjusted if no longer attainable. For Johan, it’s less about competition and more about having a say and being heard.

How should we deal with this? Firstly, it’s important to recognise that one is not better or worse than the other. Both the American drive for ambitious goals and the Dutch emphasis on adaptability have their benefits and can contribute to collective success. Secondly, to bridge this cultural gap and effectively motivate American and Dutch team members, a hybrid method could be considered. Set challenging goals to inspire and engage Alison and Emily while maintaining an open dialogue with Johan to ensure his ideas are taken seriously. Regularly review and adjust goals to accommodate changing conditions and ensure everyone’s input is considered. Thirdly, promote a culture of curiosity and avoid jumping to conclusions. Share perspectives and keep learning from one another.

Perhaps the greatest difficulty lies in creating a level playing field. When one group dominates numerically, it can inadvertently set the tone for how things are done. This can cause problems if team members assert their perceived superiority and limit consideration of alternatives. These dynamics should be vigilantly watched and acted upon immediately if the situation is getting out of balance.

No One-Size-Fits-All Solutions

The biblical myth of the Tower of Babel could very well be the oldest example of a communication breakdown that, in today’s reality, would almost certainly be blamed on a lack of leadership and cross-cultural skills. Taken from the Book of Genesis in the Old Testament, it recounts a time when people from all over the world came together to build a structure that was supposed to reach the heavens. Arrogance, confusion, and division caused the project to collapse. We can draw parallels between this ancient parable and contemporary organisations.

Successful leaders promote humility, clarity, and unity. They openly acknowledge cultural differences, set clear expectations, encourage active participation, and avoid getting personal. Early intervention is key. Under no circumstances should problems be allowed to simmer because that will do more harm than good. However, there are no one-size-fits-all solutions. Any approach should be tailored to the circumstances and assessed on its merits. In the absence of universally applicable methods, stepping outside your comfort zone remains one of the most effective ways to get ahead personally, and professionally.