striking a balance - lup.lub.lu.selup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/1736392/file/1736422.pdf ·...
TRANSCRIPT
Striking a Balance A Cultural Analytical Study of a Cross-Cultural
Consultancy Anna-Mari Fagerström
Elias Mellander
Master of Applied Cultural Analysis Supervisors
Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences Jessica Enevold
TKAM01 - Spring 2010 Orvar Löfgren
I
Abstract
Striking a Balance: A Cultural Analytical Study of a Cross-Cultural Consultancy
Anna-Mari Fagerström
Elias Mellander
ThisthesisaimstoaidtheconsultancyLivingInstituteinevaluatingtheperceivedeffects
ofthecross‐culturaltrainingcoursesitprovidestoawidevarietyofclients.Todothiswe
studythecompanyinrelationshiptoitsclients,mappingoutitstheoreticalfoundationas
wellasitsstrategiesforteachingculture.Inordertogainadeeperunderstandingofwhat
thecompanyteachesandhowtheclientsputlessonstouse,wefocusonhowtheconcept
ofcultureispackaged,soldandtaughtandwhathappenstoitintheprocess.By using an
ethnographic approach, performing observations and in-depth interviews, we create empirical
material with depth as well a breadth; describing both the perspective of the company and the
experiences of its clients. By doing this we also want to reach beyond taking the informants’
accounts at face value to identify patterns of logics and assumptions.To perform this analysis we
employ a number of theoretical concepts from intercultural communication and cultural analysis
as well as discourse and narrative analysis. The company combines perspectives from the
traditions of intercultural communication and anthropology in order to deliver an accessible but
complex understanding of culture. We show Living Institute has to handle a number of balancing
acts like this one in order to make it relevant in the business world while simultaneously
retaining theoretical depth. These balancing acts are not specific to Living Institute, but apply to
anyone wanting to employ culture analytical concepts outside academia. This commodification
process reduces and simplifies the meanings of culture. Living Institute, however, manages to
put culture on the agenda, demonstrating to its clients how, why and in what ways culture
matters to them.
Keywords: cultural awareness; intercultural communication; diversity management; cross-
cultural communication; cultural economy; discourse analysis; cultural analysis; expatriates;
narrative; anthropology.
II
Acknowledgments
A big thanks to Living Institute for the opportunity to work with them and all the support they
have given us. We would also like to thank all the informants, who took time from their busy
schedules to share their experiences. Special thanks to our academic supervisors and everyone
else who have contributed by guiding us along the crooked path that has been the writing of this
thesis. Of course, we also direct many thanks to all the teachers and our fellow students at
MACA for making these two years inspiring, challenging and most importantly, fun. Last but
not least we would like to thank each other for a rewarding collaboration and great company.
Thank you!
Lund, 2010-05-27
Anna-Mari Fagerström
Elias Mellander
III
TableofContents
Abstract ....................................................................................................................................................................I
Acknowledgments .............................................................................................................................................. II
TableofContents ...............................................................................................................................................III
Introduction...........................................................................................................................................................1
Background,aimandresearchquestion .....................................................................................................2
PresentationofLivingInstitute ......................................................................................................................4
Theoreticalframework......................................................................................................................................7 Previousresearch .................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Frominterculturalismtodiversitymanagement....................................................................................................................... 9 Culturalanalyticalperspectives ......................................................................................................................................................11
Methodologicalapproaches .......................................................................................................................... 13
Informantportraits.......................................................................................................................................... 16
Culturalgoods .................................................................................................................................................... 21 AdayattheCrashCourse...................................................................................................................................................................21 Thewholepackage ................................................................................................................................................................................25 Raisingculturalconsciousness ........................................................................................................................................................29 TheEdutainer ..........................................................................................................................................................................................32 Danes–Thewaytheyare...................................................................................................................................................................34
Culturalexperiences........................................................................................................................................ 38 Overcomingculture...............................................................................................................................................................................38 Cosmopolitanculture ...........................................................................................................................................................................44 Whenyou’restrange.............................................................................................................................................................................46
CriticalperspectivesonCulture .................................................................................................................. 50 Enactingabalance .................................................................................................................................................................................50 Thedifferencesthatmakeadifference ........................................................................................................................................52 Culturalcurrencies ................................................................................................................................................................................55 Workinprocess ......................................................................................................................................................................................57 Learningalesson....................................................................................................................................................................................59
Conclusions ......................................................................................................................................................... 63 Strikingabalance...................................................................................................................................................................................63 Insights .......................................................................................................................................................................................................70 Applyingoneself .....................................................................................................................................................................................72
References........................................................................................................................................................... 74
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 1
Introduction
Inanincreasinglyglobalizedworkmarket,wheretransnationalconnectionsare
commonplace,culturalconflictsareboundtoarise.Morethanlanguageissuesmaycloud
communicationbetweenpeople,andinabusinesscontextthebreakdownofcommunication
spellsfinancialtrouble.Theseissuesmaymanifestthemselvesinanumberofways,ranging
fromthefeelingofisolationandfrustrationthatanexpatriate1mayexperienceworkingata
locationfarfromhome,toteamsthatmustcooperateacrossnationalandculturalborders.
Thishasinturngivenbirthtoa“cultureshockpreventionindustry”,wheretrainingin
culturalsensitivityandknow‐howisemployedtolimittheeffectsoftransnationalcultural
frictions(Hannerz,1996,p.108).Researchininterculturalcommunicationincreasedsince
theturnofthemillennium,butthereisstilluncertaintywithinthescientificcommunityon
whattheoreticalfoundationthiskindoftrainingshouldbebuilt(Larsson,2010).
TheDanishconsultancyLivingInstitutehasfoundtheirownanswertothis,combining
theoreticalperspectivesfromanthropologyaswellasfromtraditionalintercultural
communication,aimingtocreateagenuinecuriosityandawarenessofculturalissues.Living
Instituteprovidescross‐culturalworkshopsandtrainingtocompanies:Deliveringboth
tailoredcoursesforincomingandoutgoingexpatriates,alongwithCulturalAwareness
WorkshopsforentireteamsinDenmarkandabroad.Byemployingaculturalanalytical
perspective,LivingInstitutestrivestoprovideeveryclientwithacustomizedsolution.This
makesthecompanyinterestingfromtheperspectiveofanappliedculturalanalystontwo
levels:Firstly,becausetheorganizationusescultureasacommodity,creatingtheconceptina
shapesuitabletoandforbusiness,andsecondly,withitstheoreticalbackgroundin
anthropology,LivingInstituteisaprimeexampleofapplyingculturalanalysisintheworldof
business.InthisthesiswewillexploreLivingInstitute,thecompany’srelationshiptoits
clients,someofthechallengesitfacesandwhatit“does”withtheconceptofculture.
1InthisstudyweusethedefinitionofexpatriatefromHannerz(1996),referringtoapersonwhohaschosentoliveabroadtoworkforaperiodoftimeandwhocanchoosetoreturnbackhomewheneversheorhelikes.
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 2
Background,aimandresearchquestion
AclientrequestingFinnishculturaltrainingforanoutgoingDanishexpatriatecontactedthe
cross‐culturalconsultancyLivingInstitute.Asaresult,thecompanylookedtorecruita
freelanceconsultantwithgoodknowledgeofFinlandandFinnishcultureandthuscontacted
oneofthisthesis’authors,Anna‐MariFagerström,tosetupameetingbetweenherandthe
company’smanagingdirector.Inordertogettoknowthecompanybetter,shewasalso
invitedtoattendoneofthecompany’sCulturalAwarenessSeminars,entitled,“WhyareDanes
soweird?”.ThetrainingsessionfortheDanishexpatriategoingtoFinlandnevercametopass,
butinsteadtheauthorswereinvitedtoassistLivingInstitutewithanotherchallenge.
Thecompanyconsistentlyperformsevaluationsurveysonthespotaftereachworkshop,
trainingsessionandseminar,askingiftheparticipantsfoundtheinformationusefulandthe
presentationgood,generallyreceivinggoodfeedback.Becauseofthefastpacedbusiness
contextinwhichLivingInstituteoperates,therewashoweverlittletimeforboththecompany
anditsclientstoreturntoevaluatetheresultsofthetrainingtogether.Thus,therewaslittle
knowledgewithinthecompanyastohowthetraining,theoreticalconceptsandcultural
actionplanswereimplementedbyitsclientandiftherewasadiscernibledifferenceforthe
clientbeforeandafterthetrainingsession.Sinceasurveywouldnotbeabletocatchthe
emotiveandpracticalaspectsofthekindoftraining,LivingInstitutedecidedaculture
analyticalperspectivewasneededtodigdeeperandexploretheeffectsofthecompany’s
culturalcoursesovertime.AsMoeran(2005)pointsout,byusinganethnographicapproach
onecanapplya“strategicexchangeperspective”,examiningtheinterconnectednessofpeople
andknowledgeinalargercontext,notlimitingittotheoreticalconcepts(p.2).Inshort,he
authorswereaskedtoinvestigatethelong‐termeffectsofthetrainingprovidedbyLiving
Institutetofindoutwhetherornotthetraininghadledtoanykindofchangefortheclients.
Therefore,thisthesiscanbeunderstoodasaformofevaluationwiththegoalofcreatingnew
insightsforLivingInstitute’sproductswiththeaidofclients’perspectives.
TogainadeeperunderstandingforthewaysinwhichLivingInstitutetransfers
knowledgetoitsclientsandhowthatknowledgeisputtouse,wewillfocusontheconceptof
culture.OuraimistoshedlightonwhatmeaningLivingInstituteinfusesintocultureandhow
theconceptisputtouseoncetaughttothecompany’sclients.Tocreateananalytical
foundationfromwhichtodothis,wewillemploythefollowingresearchquestions:
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 3
WhatarethecentralassumptionsandtheoreticalknowledgeonwhichLivingInstituteis
based?
InwhatshapedoesLivingInstituteprovideculturalknowledgetoitsclients?
Wastheknowledgeprovidedperceivedasusefultotheclientsandhowwasitputtouse?
Byemployingthesequestionswehopetocreatea“thickdescription”,notonlyfocusingonthe
goalsofLivingInstitutebutonthesceneinitsentirety,incorporatingthecontextinwhich
actionsareperformed(Geertz,1973,p.16).Inthiswaywehopetodiscoversomeofthe
unreflectedandunexpectedconsequencesofthetrainingthatthecompanyprovides.
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 4
PresentationofLivingInstitute
Inthischapterwewillintroducethisthesis’leadingcharacter,namelythecrosscultural
consultancyLivingInstitute,givinganoutlineofthecompany’shistory,thepeoplebehinditand
howitoperates.
LivingInstituteisasmallcompanywithonlyitsmanagingdirectorworkingonafull‐time
basis.Sheisresponsibleforalloperationsincludingselling,marketing,designingworkshops
andensuringthequalityofthetraining.Thesecondmostprominentpersoninthecompanyis
theseniorconsultant,ananthropologist,whoisresponsibleforprovidingatheoreticaland
scientificallysoundfoundation,aswellasdesigninganddeliveringmostofthecompany’s
trainingsessions.BesidesworkingwithLivingInstitute,healsoworksasanexternallecturer
attheuniversity,anactor,commentator,writerandbookreviewer.Inaddition,Living
Institutehasarosterofaboutfifteenexternalconsultants,whofreelanceonacase‐to‐case
basis.
LivingInstituteisthebrainchildofthemanagingdirector,whoisthecompany’s
founderandtoagreatextentdictatesthecompany’sphilosophyandpractices.Shebelieves
onecantraceculturelikeaconnectingthreadthroughoutherlife,fromherchildhoodtothe
present‐day.GrowingupwithaGermanfatherandDanishmother,atanearlyageshewas
abletostudythedifferencesofambianceandatmosphereindifferentcultures.Shealwaysfelt
shewasdifferentfromotherchildrenbecauseofherGermanheritage.Afterhighschoolshe
unintentionallyendedupteachingDanishtoexpatriatesinadistinguishedlanguageschoolin
Copenhagen.Despitehavingnopriorteachingexperience,attheageofnineteenshetaught
herfirststudent,theCEOofagiganticmultinationalcompany.Thiswasherfirstexperienceof
workingwithcultureanditfunctionedasaneye‐openerofsorts.Afterafewyearsofwork
shewentbacktoschoolinordertobecomealanguageteacher.Consequently,shechanged
jobsandbeganteachingDanishtoimmigrantsandrefugees.Giventhequitedifferentclientele
fromtheinternationallanguageschool,thisexperiencemadeherevenmoreawareof
culture’simportance.Duringthistimesheandherhusbandalsoestablishedaverysuccessful
restaurantinCopenhagen,withfoodandmusicfromallovertheworld—anenterprisethey
ranformorethantenyears,untilherhusbandwasaskedtomanageanotherestablishment.
Afterafewyears,herhusbandwasofferedajobwithinahigh‐endtechnologicalcompanyin
anotherpartofDenmark.Thewholefamilyrelocatedtoasmalltown,whereshecameto
experiencethebiggestculturalclashesshecouldeverhaveimagined.Shehadagreatjobin
thesamecompanyasherhusband,butshecontinuouslystruggledwiththefactthatshewasa
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 5
citygirlhavingtodealwithsmalltownattitudes.Duringthistime,anexpatriatecameto
workforthecompanyandshesawwhathappenedtohimintheunfamiliarculturalcontext—
howtheDanesactedaroundhimandwhattheydidwhenthey,forthefirsttime,hada
foreignerontheirteam.Theculturalmeetingdidn’tturnoutthatwellandthisgaveherthe
ideatogobacktoCopenhagenandestablishacompanythatdealtwithcultureshocksandthe
issuesofretainingforeignexpatriatesinDenmark.
LivingInstituteopenedforthefirsttimeinAugust2001,notlongbefore9/11andits
followingcrises.Peopleweren’ttravelingandcompaniesweren’thiringnewpeople.Thus
therewaslittlebusinessforLivingInstitute.Afterafewyearssheopenedthecompanyagain,
followingrevitalizedgrowthintheglobalmarket.Businesswasslowtobeginwith,butwhen
the“cartooncrisis”struckin2006,itstartedtopickupthepace.Suddenlyshedidnothaveto
propagateforthesignificanceofculturesincethecrisishadbeenarudeawakeningtomany
companieslackinginculturalawareness.AtthetimeLivingInstitutewasonlydealingwith
foreignexpatriatesinDenmark,butthedemandforcoursesdirectedtooutgoingDanish
expatriates,shorttimebusinesstravelersandtoemployeesworkinginmulticulturalteams
increasedquickly.
Today,LivingInstitute’sslogan“Culturematters”sumsupboththecompany’s
philosophyandeverydaybusinesspractice.Thecompanysellscross‐culturaltrainingand
educationtocompaniesoperatingintheglobalmarket,deliveringtailoredcoursesforsingle
incomingandoutgoingexpatriates,aswellasworkshopsforentireteamsinDenmarkor
othercountries.TheproductLivingInstitutesellsisdevelopedfromanthropologicaltheory,
aimingtocreateagenuinecuriosityandawarenessofculturalissues,steeringawayfrom
simpleexplanationsofhowpeople“are”indifferentpartsoftheworld.However,asinmost
caseswhereacademictheoryisappliedinthefastandglobalworldofbusiness,themessage
mustbegivenashapesuitableforabusinesscontextwheretheclientsarenotnecessarily
“talkinganthropology”.
Thecompanyappliesaculturalanalyticalperspectivetohelpittailorsolutionstobest
suittheneedsoftheclient.LivingInstitutesellsanumberoftemplateproductsthatcanbe
customizedtofulfillspecificdemands,suchastheDanishLivingCrashCourseandCultural
AwarenessWorkshops.TheDanishLivingCrashCourseisaone‐daycourseforexpatriates
livingandworkinginDenmark.ItfocusesonDanishhistory,workingculture,mentality,“do’s
anddon’ts”andunwrittenrulesatworkaswellasinprivatelife.TheDanishLivingCrash
Courseisheldonceamonth,ifenoughparticipantsareenrolled.CulturalAwareness
Workshopsarearrangedforclientsworkinginternationally.Thiscoursecanbecustomized
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 6
forteamsorforsingleindividualsinneedofpersonalcoachinginadditiontocountry‐
specificinformationormoregeneralculturalawareness.
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 7
Theoreticalframework
Inthischapterwewilltouchuponthreetheoreticalthemesrelevanttoourstudy.Thefirst,
“PreviousResearch”,focusesonstudiessimilartoours,dealingwithresearchonthefieldof
interculturalcommunicationaswellasperspectivesontheapplicationofcultureintheworldof
business.Thesecond,“Frominterculturalismtodiversitymanagement”,dealswithsomeofthe
mostprominentcurrentswithinthefieldofintercultursalcommunicationandmanagement
strategies.Inthethirdandfinal,“Cultureanalyticalperspectives”,wewillpresentthetheoretical
traditioninwhichthisthesisplacesitselfalongwithanumberoftheoreticalperspectivesusedto
digdeeperintotheempiricalmaterial.
Previousresearch
Whiletherehasbeenmuchliteraturewrittenaboutinterculturalcommunicationitself,
surprisinglylittlehasbeenwrittenabouttheconsultanciesworkingwiththeseissues.Tommy
Dahlén’s(1997)doctoraldissertation,AmongtheInterculturalists,isananthropologicalstudy
ofpracticingconsultantsinthefieldofinterculturalcommunication,agroupthathecalls“the
interculturalists”.Dahlén(1997)focusesonthevariedrangeofconsultantcompaniesand
organizationsinthefield,emphasizingtheprofessionalismoftheinterculturalists,“andthe
waycultureandculturaldifferencesareconceptualizedandrepresentedamongthem”(p.9).
Dahlénexaminesthecomplexfieldwhereinterculturalistsworkandexertinfluence.In
relationtoourstudy,Dahlén’sresearchrepresentsamoregeneralmacrolevelviewofthe
fieldofinterculturalcommunication,whilezoominginontheonespecificconsultancy.
Dahlén(1997)looksatthefieldfromtwoperspectives.Firstly,hestrivestounderstand
theinterculturalists’cultureinitsowncontext.Secondly,hecomparestherelationshipofthe
interculturalists’understandingofculturetoananthropologicalone.Thisisemphasizedin
theconclusionsofthedoctoralthesis,whereDahléndiscussesthewayinwhich
interculturalistsarerecyclingolderanthropologicalconceptionsofcultureandthattheyseem
tohaveneglectedtoexaminethenewdiscussionsanddevelopmentswithinanthropology.
MediaandcommunicationsscientistIngerLarsson’sdissertation,AttByggaÖver
Kulturgränser2(2010),focusesonSwedesworkinginaninternationalcontext,butalso
discussesthefieldofinterculturalcommunicationfromacriticalperspective.Shequestions
thetraditionalfunctionalistapproachtocultureoftenusedwithinintercultural
communication,insteadadvocatingasocialconstructionistperspective.Thefunctionalist
2Roughlytranslatesto“Buildingbridgesacrossculturalborders”.
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 8
approachtoculturetreatitasfixedsetsofcategoriesandcharacteristics,turningculture
intologicalsystemsofideasandvalues,anapproachthathasalongstandingpopularity
withinthefieldofinterculturalcommunication.AccordingtoLarsson,socialconstructionism
insteadprovidesapointofviewfromwhereisitpossibletofollowthedevelopment,changes
andfasttransformationofculture,somethingwhichisclosertowhatactuallyhappensinthe
interactionbetweenpeople.Socialconstructionismshouldberegardedasakeyconceptwhen
talkingaboutnationalidentity,insteadofresortingtotheoftenmisusedconceptofnational
culture.Larssonwritesaboutculturalandnationalidentity,regardingidentitiesassocially
constructedthroughinteractionswithotherhumanbeings.Larssonalsonotesthelackof
relevantliteratureandresearchonthefieldofinterculturalcommunication,especiallywithin
thefieldofanthropology.
WhenexaminingacompanylikeLivingInstituteitalsobecomesrelevanttotouch
uponresearchdealingwiththeinterbreedingofculturalscienceandbusiness.BillyEhnand
OrvarLöfgren(2009)discusstheproblemsfacedbycultureanalyticalacademicsworkingas
consultantsinthepublicandprivatesector.Accordingtothemthereisaneedforreciprocity
intherelationshipbetweenacademiaandpracticingconsultantsandthatthereisgreat
potentialforgainingnewskillsandunderstandingsindialoguewitheachother.Ehnand
Löfgrenpointoutthatasacademicstheyhavecrossedthethinborderbetweenthetwo
worldsmanytimeswithoutevennoticing,forexample,whenorganizingworkshopsorbeing
consultedbyorganizationsoutsideofacademia.Theyconclude,“researchthatdoesnot
involvethewayspotentialusersoftheresultsactandthinkalwaysmissessomething
important”(p.47).
TheamalgamationofcultureandeconomyisfurthertoucheduponbyLöfgrenand
Willim(2005)inthebook,Magic,CultureandtheNewEconomy,whoclaimamoreintimate
connectionbetweenthetwocanbetracedtothegrowthofwhathasbeencalled“thenew
economy”,whereculturebegantoplayamoreprominentroleinbusinessascompanies
startedtoborrowconceptsfromacademiaandculturalanalysis.Theypointoutthemost
importantwayinwhicheconomyandculturemixedwasintheattempttopackageandsell
intangibleculturalconceptsandexperiences.Culturaltechnologiessuchasritualizationand
narrationareputtoworktogivecredibleformtotheculture‐as‐product,turningtheminto
tangiblegoods.AccordingtoLöfgrenandWillim,theseamalgamationsarefruitfulobjectsfor
culturalanalysis,partlybecausetheyusemanyofthesamesignsandideas,albeitinanew
context,butalsobecausetheyoftenmakegreatclaims,highlightingsomethingswhile
keepingothersoutofthelight.
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 9
TheverysamethemeisdiscussedbyduGuyandPryke(2002)whoclaimcultureand
economycannotbeunderstoodasseparateentitiessincetheyaretoagreatextentdependent
onandpartofeach.Theypointoutthe“turntoculture”canmeanmanydifferentthingsand
takevariousforms,butthatitisanoutcomeofthere‐emergedfocusoncultureasacritical
notionforunderstandingtheeconomicandorganizationallife.Oneofthecentralfeaturesof
theculturalturnaccordingtoduGayandPryke(2002)“isarenewedinterestinthe
productionofmeaningatwork”(p.1),meaningthatitisregardedconstitutingforhowpeople
areacting,thinkingandfeelinginanorganizations.RayandSayer(1999)alsoclaimthatthe
borderbetweencultureandeconomyhasbecomeblurred,buttheyalsostressthatitisstill
there,sincetheconceptsotherwisewouldhavebeensynonymous,whichtheyareclearlynot.
Inmostcases,thevalueofeconomyisinstrumentalwhilethevalueofcultureisnot.However,
economymustalwaysbeenunderstoodasapartofculturesinceitisthroughcultural
processesthatitgainsitsvalues.
Frominterculturalismtodiversitymanagement
Asmentionedabove,thissub‐chapterdealswithsomeofthemostprominentcurrentswithin
thefieldofinterculturalcommunicationandmanagementstrategies.Thetheoriespresented
inthefollowingserveathreefoldpurpose:tofunctionasacursoryoutlineofthefield,tobea
sourceforanalyticalconceptsandtoformempiricalmaterialinthecaseswhenbeingan
internalizedpartofLivingInstitute’scurriculum.
Thefieldofinterculturalcommunicationwasfoundedinthe1950sbyanthropologist
EdwardT.Hall,whodevelopedtheoreticalandmethodologicalframeworksfordealingwith
communicationacrossnationalborders(Hall,1973).Claimingthat“Thereisnowaytoteach
cultureinthesamewaythatlanguageistaught”,(p.25)hetouchesupononeofthecore
elementsofourstudy—theprocessesofteachingandlearningculture.Hedescribeshisown
experienceofteachingculturalsciencetopeopleoutsideacademiawhoweregoingoverseas
towork,oftenlackingthekeeninterestinculturehewasusedtofromhisanthropology
students.TogetherwithGeorgeL.Trager,thisledhimtostartdevelopinganewmethodfor
analyzingculture,whichisbymanyconsideredthefoundationfortheintercultural
communicationfield.
FollowinginthefootstepsofHall,GeertHofstedeandFonsTrompenaarsaretwoofthe
mostwidelyrecognizedtheoristswithinthefieldofinterculturalcommunicationtoday,being
primerepresentativesofthefunctionalistapproachpropagatedagainstbyLarsson(2010)
andhavinglittletodowiththefieldanthropologicalroots.Thisbecomesevidentincategories
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 10
employedbyHofstede(2001)forrepresentingdifferencesinnationalculturesforalarge
numberofcountries3.AccordingtoHofstede(2001)thereare“fiveindependentdimensions
ofnationalculturedifferences,eachrootedinabasicproblemwithwhichallsocietieshaveto
cope,butonwhichtheiranswervary”(p.29).Thedimensionshehasidentifiedare:power
distance,uncertaintyavoidance,individualismversuscollectivism,masculinityversus
femininityandlong‐termorientationversusshort‐termorientation.Hofstede(2001)argues
“thattheremustbemechanismsinsocietiesthatpermitthemaintenanceofstabilityin
culturepatternsacrossmanygenerations”(p.11).Herefersto“mentalprograms”,atypeof
conditioningthatstaysstableovertime,learnedinveryearlychildhoodandcontainingbasic
values(p.2).
FonsTrompenaars4,alongwithCharlesHampden‐Turner(1998)hasfocusedon
culturaldifferencesandwhatkindofimpactthesedifferenceshaveon“processesofdoing
businessandmanaging”(p.1).TrompenaarsandHampden‐Turner(1998)definecultureas
“thewayinwhichagroupofpeoplesolvesproblemsandreconcilesdilemmas”(p.6).Their
bookpresentsthesolutionsthatdifferentcultureshaveonuniversalproblemsandfromthese
solutionstheyhaveidentifiedsevenfundamentaldimensionsofculture,whicharedivided
intocategories,muchinthesamewayasHofstedeuseshisdimensions—i.e.todescribe
differencesinnationalcultures,placingdifferentculturesonaculturalscaleaccordingto
scorestheyhavegainedthroughsurveys.
Whiletheoriesininterculturalcommunicationseeminglyfocusonthecultural
differencesacrossthebordersofnationstates,emphasizingthemeaningofnationalityin
socialinteraction,thestrategycalleddiversitymanagementinsteadspreadsitsfocusto
encompassotherfactorsofculturaldifference.AccordingtoWrench(2007)diversity
managementisarelativelynewmanagementstrategythatgainedprominenceinthe
Europeanmarketduringtheearly1990sandhascontinuedtoplayavitalrole.Itpartly
sharesthesameconcernswithinterculturalcommunication,strivingtominimizecultural
frictionsindiverseworkplaces.Thetheoreticalframeworkis,however,verydifferent.While
interculturalcommunicationfocusesoncross‐culturalism,nationalorigin,misunderstandings
andproblemsthatmightarisebetweenindividualsinbusiness,diversitymanagementisa
strategythatnotonlytakestheindividuals’needsintoaccount,butaimtocreatepoliciesand
strategiesonanorganizationallevel(Wrench,2007;Kandola&Fullerton,1998).
3ForamorecomprehensivesummaryofHofstede’stheory,seeDahlén(1997).4ForamorecomprehensivesummaryofTrompenaarsandHampden‐Turner’s’theory,seeDahlén(1997).
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 11
Culturalanalyticalperspectives
Havinggivenatheoreticaloutlineofthefieldinwhichweoperate,wearenowgoingto
introducethetoolswebringinorderto“makesense”ofitall.Thisthesisplacesitselfwithin
theculturalanalyticaltradition.Inpracticethismeansthatnotonlyisculturetheobjectof
study,butalsothelensthroughwhichthefieldisviewed,meaningthatdifferenttypesof
knowledgecanbecreatedbyshiftingbetweendifferentperspectives.Weapproachculturein
thesamemannerasEhnandLöfgren(2001),treatingit,fellowshipandidentityas
multifacetedandfragmentedconceptsthatarecreatedandnegotiatedthroughdifferent
categoriesdependentonspecificcontexts,ratherthanasessentialproperties.Cultureisnota
rational,systematicandwellthoughtoutstructure,butsomethingwhichisrenegotiatedand
fluctuating,oftenmadevisiblethroughfriction,conflicts,inconsistenciesandparadoxes.
AlongthelinesoftheanthropologistsPatriciaSunderlandandRitaDenny(2007),wedonot
regardcultureassomethingdeterminatelytiedtoagrouporaplace,neitherasaproperty
“active”insomeinstanceswhiledormantinothers.
Tocreateaclearerdistinctionbetweentheetic,anthropologicaluseofcultureandthe
emic“layman’s”definitionwewilllooktotheethnologistMagnusÖhlander(2005)who
discussestheconceptofcultureandhowitisusedoutsideoftheculturalsciences.According
tohim,therearethreecommoncategoriesforhowtheconceptisputtouse,allofwhichare
interlinkedandinmanywaysdependentoneachother.Thefirstisasaqualitythatonecan
possess,e.g.“beingcultured”or“beingrefined”.Thesecondisassomethingthatone“does”,
likeliterature,music,theatreandthusculturebecomesmoreorlesssynonymouswithart.
Thethirddefinitionofcultureisasvaluesandidealsthatpeoplegatherround,i.e.thatitisa
qualitysharedbyacertaingroup.Öhlanderclaimsthatallofthesedefinitionsareproblematic
sincetheytreatcultureastheresultofaprocess,asanobject.Inessencethismeansthat
culturecouldexistwithoutpeople,anotionthatdoesnotfitwiththecultureanalytical
perspective.
Sincetheempiricalmaterialonwhichthisstudywillbebasedprimarilyconsistsof
interviews,wehavealsochosentoemployanalyticalconceptsfromtwotheoreticaltraditions
aptatcatchingthewaysinwhichmeaningsaretransferredthroughlanguage:narrativeand
discourseanalysis.Theseanalyticalmethodsfocusindifferentwaysonhowlanguageisused
toconveymeaning.Thedistinctionthatweareprimarilygoingtoemployhereisthatof
BarbaraCzarniawska(1998),makingadistinctionbetweenthediscourseandthe
conversation.Thenarrativeisisolatedintheformerwhileitoriginatesfromactorsor
“speakers”inthelatter.Thefirsttreatstextsasentitiesuntothemselves,whilethesecond
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 12
treattextsascommunicativeaction.Discoursesarespreadoutandreoccurringwhile
conversationsarelocatedinaspecificplaceinspaceandtime.Thetwoperspectivesare
complementarywiththediscoursefunctioningasarepertoirefortheconversationandthe
conversationasadevelopingmediumforthediscourse.Theperspectivescarrywiththema
furtherimplication;notviewinglanguageasamererepresentationoftheworldbutas
constitutingforsociallife.Therefore,thepositionsfromwhereonecandefinetheflowof
discoursearepositionsofpower(WintherJørgensen&Phillips,2000).
WhenevaluatingapedagogicactivitylikethetrainingthatLivingInstituteprovides,
bothanarrativeapproachanddiscourseanalysisareusefulsincetheycanfunctionasmeans
touncoverhowmeaningsaretransferredbetweendifferentcontexts,keepinginmindthat
therelationshipbetweenexperienceandnarrativeisn’tstatic;thenarrativeisshapedbythe
experiencebutatthesametimeitgivesshapetoit(Palmenfelt,2000).However,sincewedo
notwishtolimitourselvestostudyingtheuseoflanguage,wewillalsoemployamore
experientialperspective.ThisbecomesparticularlyimportantwhenturningthegazetoLiving
Institute’strainingsession.ThestudyofeventslikethesearetoucheduponbybothO’Dell
(2005)andRistilammi(2000),dealingwithhowdifferentatmospheresandexperiencesare
invokedinordertoachievecertainresults.
Tocreatefurtherunderstandingofhowculturecanbepackaged,taughtandsold,we
havealsochosentousePierreBourdieu’scapitalmetaphor,originallyusedtoillustratethat
economiccapitalmerelyisoneofseveralfactorsaffectingsocialclassandthemicro
managementofpower.Besidesmonetaryassets,individualsalsopossesscultural,socialand
symboliccapital,thepossessionofwhichcanbeusedasmeanstodisplaypower,giventhe
rightcontext.Culturalcapitalcanbeembodieddispositions,objectifiedinshapeof“cultural”
possessionsorinstitutionalizedintheshapeofeducationandthelike(Skeggs,1997).Social
capitalismanifestedthroughsocialconnectionandbelonging,whilesymboliccapitalisthe
shapetheothertypesofcapitaltakeoncerecognizedandacknowledged;thepointbeingthat
thedifferentcapitalsnotbeing“worth”anythinguntiltheyarelegitimizedfromapositionof
power(Bourdieu,1999).
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 13
Methodologicalapproaches
Inthischapterwewilldiscusstheresearchmethodsusedforcreatingourempiricalmaterial
alongwiththepossibilitiesandlimitationstheypresent.Wehaveperformedakindof“double
ethnography”,puttingfocusonLivingInstituteanditsclientsinordertocreateabroad
foundationfortheforthcominganalysis.
Oneofthemainadvantagesofethnographyisthatonecanchoosearesearchmethodbest
suitedforexaminingtheproblemathand.Thisis,however,anidealsituationandwhen
performingfieldworkonehastobeabletoadapttotherulesofthespecificcontextinwhich
oneoperates.IdeallywewouldhaveperformedparticipantobservationofLivingInstitute’s
clientsinordertogainabetterunderstandingofwhatchallengestheyfaceintheirday‐to‐day
workandofhowLivingInstitutecanbetteraddresstheseissues.Alas,evenwiththehelpof
LivingInstitutewewerenotabletoestablishcontactwithanyinformantswhowerewillingto
grantaccesstothemforanylongerperiodoftime.Asaresultofthiswearepreventedfrom
sayinganythingwithcertaintyabouthowtheinformantsputtheirnewlygainedknowledgeto
use,beinglimitedtotheirnarratedaccountofevents.
LivingInstitutewarnedusfromthestartthattheirclientsmainlyworkatthe
manageriallevelininternationalcompanies,makingtheirschedulesoftenextremelyhectic
andtimescarce.WiththehelpofLivingInstitute,wewereabletoestablishcontactwithsix
formerclientswhogladlyparticipatedinourstudy,adiversegroupcontainingbothDanes
andforeignexpatriateswhohadallreceiveddifferentkindsoftraining.Theamountoftime
theywereablespendwithusvaried,resultinginsomeoftheinformant’svoicesappearing
“louder”thanothersthroughoutthisthesis.
Thescopeofthestudyislimitedbytwofactors:Timeandaccess.Thefirstisself
evident.Thesecondisaconsequenceofthefieldinwhichweoperate:Wewerecompletely
dependentonLivingInstitutewhenrecruitinginformants.Althoughwedidhaveasayinwho
wethoughtwouldberewardinginformants,wewererestrictedbythesamplethatwas
presentedtousbyLivingInstitute.Naturally,thislimitstheempiricalmaterialandthe
differentperspectivesonLivingInstituteandtheireducationtoafewvoicesthatthecompany
itselfhasjudgedtobeinterestingand/oraccessible,somethingwhichmustbetakeninto
considerationwhenviewingtheresultsofthisstudy.Itstandstoreasonthatformerclients
willingtospendtheirtimebysharingexperiencesandopinionsonLivingInstitutewillnotbe
entirelynegativetowardthecompanyandthetraining.Hopefully,theevaluationgenrein
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 14
whichwewriteledtheclientstogiveclearandsincereanswers.Itisalsohardtoimagine
themwantingtowastetheirtimebynotsharingtheirhonestopinions.
Theinterviewsperformedcanbedescribedas“semi‐structured”—usingaspecificsetof
questionsasbaseforanopen‐endedconversation,allowingustocontroltheconversation
whilenotcontrollingtheinformant.Themainadvantageofthesemi‐structuredinterviewis
thatitallowsforflexibilitywhileitatthesametimeletsyoukeepyour“eyesontheprize”.
Thiskindofinterviewisbestsuitedforsituationswhenyouarelookingforempirical
testimonyfromanindividualperspective(Fägerborg,1999,p.55).Westrovetoaskthekind
ofquestionsthatencouragetheinformantto“narrate”ratherthan“answer”,allowingthe
informanttoputfocusonwhattheyfoundtobeimportant,notreducingthemtobeingmere
objectsforustostudy.Anotherbenefitofthisinterviewtechniqueisthatleadingquestions
arelessofaconcernsinceitisharderfortheresearchertohavethe“correctanswer”inmind
beforehand(Arnstberg,1997,p.90).Becausenearlyallinterviewsituationshadarather
stricttimelimit,theinterviewswererelativelyfocusedontheinformant’sstory,withus
askingquestions,strivingtomakethemrecallspecificmemoriesinrelationtoLivingInstitute
andtheproblemsthatledthemtocontactthecompany.Whilebeingopenwiththepurposeof
theresearchproject,weweredeliberatelyvaguewhendescribingourresearchquestionsas
suggestedbyDavies(2008),sincewedidnotwanttheinformantstofocustoomuchonthe
cultureconceptitself,butrathertothewaysitwasputtouseintheireverydaylives.Tobe
abletolistenmoreactivelyandaskrelevantfollow‐upquestions,weusedadigitalrecorder.
Whileanethnographeralwaysmustbewaryofthepowerrelationsthatareactive
duringaninterview,beingcarefulnottoexploittheinformant,thisdidnotseemtobean
issueofgreatimportanceforthisstudy.Inthemeetingwiththeinformantsbothourroles
wereclearlydefined.Thoughweweremetwithnothingbutsmiles,itwasclearwewerethe
oneswhohadbeengrantedanaudienceandnottheotherwayaround.We;ratheryoung
ethnographerswritingourmaster’sthesis.They;aged30to50withlongprofessionalcareers
behindthemandhighpositionsintheirrespectivecompanies.Thefactthatweworkedasa
pairfornearlyalloftheinterviewsprovedtobeagoodstrategyfordealingwithwhat
potentiallycouldhavebeenaratherintimidatingsituation.Wedid,however,manageto
establishmeaningfulconversationswithallinformantsandseveralofthemclaimedtheyfelt
ithadbeenagoodopportunityforthemtoreflectontheirownsituationandonthetraining
theyhadreceivedfromLivingInstitute.OneexampleofthiswasValeriewhoseemedtobe
quitedisappointedwhenshe,aftermorethantwohours,hadtobreakofftheinterviewin
ordermakeanimportantbusinesscall.
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 15
Tobeabletocreatearichempiricalmaterialandtocontextualizetheinformation
gatheredthroughtheinterviewswithLivingInstitute’sclients,wealsochosetoperforma
seriesofinterviewswiththepeopleworkinginthecompany.Allinallweperformedfive
interviews;onewithLivingInstitute’sfounderandmanagingdirector,onewiththesenior
consultant,theanthropologistresponsibleformostofthetraining,andthreewithconsultants
whohaveworkedwiththecompanyondifferentoccasions.Theseinterviewsweremore
“informative”innature,focusingonthehistory,practiceandidealsofthecompany,butthey
alsogaveusanopportunitytodelvedeeperintothecultureofLivingInstitute,helpingus
understandhowtobestdirectourmessagetothecompany.Tofurthergainanunderstanding
ofthecompany’smethodwealsoattendedanumberoftrainingsessionsasparticipant
observers,withthegoaltogaincomplementaryknowledgeofthepracticesthatmakeup
LivingInstitute,notlimitingourselvestostudyingidealizednarratives.Aspointedoutby
Öhlander(1999),thiskindofdirectobservationcanfunctionasagreatcomplementto
interviewssincetheypresenttheopportunitytocatchun‐reflectedactionsanddiscrepancies
betweenthatwhichwasnarratedandwhatwasactuallyperformed,aswellasdatathatnot
easilycanbeputintowords.Thisalsogaveusabetterunderstandingforthestoriesofthe
clientsandhelpedusaskmorecompetentandbetter‐informedquestionsinthefollowing
interviews.Theseobservationswerekeptrelativelyopen,tryingnotonlytocatchwhatwas
toldbyLivingInstitute,butalsohowthetrainingwasperformedandwhatkindof
atmosphereandemotionswereinvokedduringthesessions.
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 16
Informantportraits
Wewillnowintroduceourprimaryinformants,consistingofformerclientsofLivingInstitute.
Wedothissothatthereadermaygainbetterunderstandingoftheirexperiences,perceptions
andlives.ThegroupcontainsbothDanishandforeignknowledgeworkers,livinginDenmark
permanentlyoronashorttermbasis.AsmostoftheLivingInstitute’sclients,theyworkatthe
manageriallevelinawidevarietyofdifferentbranches.Intheireverydayworktheymay
encountermanysituationswithpotentialforculturalfriction,suchashavingemployeesand
colleaguesindifferentcountries,travelingfrequentlyaspartofthejob,operatingina
multiculturalworkingenvironmentorasanexpatriateinDenmark.
Manfred:Expatveteran
Manfredisinhisearlyfortiesandhehasbeenworkingintheinternational“hamster‐roll”,as
hecallsit,sincehewasnineteen.Afterfinishinghighschool,Manfredstartedworkingfora
healthcarecompanyinhisnativehomeland,Germany.Hewaspartofathree‐yearinternal
educationprogramwherehegotpaidwhilestudyingandasapartofthiseducationhesoon
receivedhisfirstexpatriateassignment.ManfredremainedwiththeGermancompanyforten
yearsandthenwentontoworkforaSwisscompanyfornineyears.Duringthistimehehas
livedandworkedintheUK,theUS,Germany,Austria,Chile,ColombiaandMexico.Hehas
livedinsomeofthecountriesmorethanonceandisn’treallysureifhehasmadetenor
elevenmovesbetweendifferentcountriesandjobs.
In1995hemethiscurrentwifeinColombiaandshehassincestayedwithhim
throughouthismanyrelocations,untilthemostcurrentone.Manfredhadjustfinishedan
assignmentandthecouplehaddecidedtosettledownforawhile,movingtoColombiawith
theirtwochildren.However,itdidnottakelongbeforeManfredwasheadhuntedbyaglobal
searchcompanyforanexecutivepositioninglobalmarketingintheDanishlife‐science
companyHumanCare.Hedecidedtotakethejob,butheandhiswifedecidedthatshewould
stayinColombiawiththechildren.HemovedtoDenmarkinAugust2009andexplainsithas
beenhardtobeseparatedfromhisfamily.However,hewaspleasantlysurprisedbythelevel
ofunderstandingforhissituationthathereceivedfromhisnewemployerandhehasbeen
abletomakefrequenttripstoColombia.Soonhowever,Manfred’sfamilywillbemoving
“here”,thatis,toBarcelona.HeexplainsthathewillbeinCopenhagenduringtheweeksand
inBarcelonaduringtheweekends.Goingfromdoortodoorwillonlytakehimfourhoursand
takingaflightisliketakingabustohim,heexplainswithalaugh.WhenManfredfirstcameto
DenmarktheHRdepartmentinHumanCarerecommendedheattendLivingInstitute’sDanish
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 17
LivingCrashCourse.Heplannedtotakethecourseonseveraloccasions,butbecauseofa
busyschedulehekeptpostponingit.WhenhefinallytookthecoursehehadbeeninDenmark
formorethansixmonthsandhehadalreadyrunintoseveralproblemsandchallenges,both
professionallyandinhispersonallife.
Thomas:Goalorientedbusinessculturalist
ThomasworksatthemanageriallevelinMicrocator,adivisionofalargerinternational
company,exclusivelyworkingwiththeoutsourcingofIT‐services.CustomersinDenmark
delegatesomeoftheirfunctionstoMicrocator,whichthenapplydifferentoutsourcingmodels
dependingontheclient’sneeds.InmanycasesoutsourcinglikethismeansthatMicrocator
takesovertheexistingresourcesfromtheclientandreplacessomeofthemwithoffshore
resources.MicrocatorhasemployeesinbothDenmarkandAsiathatworktogetherinthe
samedevelopmentteams.Thecompanyisimplementingarotationplanwhereasmallgroup
ofAsianemployeesworkonsiteinDenmarkinordertostrengthenthecollaborationwiththe
overseasteams.ThomashasworkedforMicrocatorforfourmonthsandseemsverydevoted
andenthusiasticwhenitcomestodevelopingtheoperations,especiallytherotationplan
describedabove,andhasplayedanessentialroleindevelopingit.Thomasisself‐taughtinthe
fieldofinformationtechnologyandhehasworkedindifferentsettingswithinthebusinessfor
morethan20years.Hehasworkedinternationallyforroughlytenyearsandhas,among
othersplaces,beenstationedintheUSandItaly,somethinghefindstohaveimprovedhis
culturalcompetence:
Thomas:“IwastheonlyDanishguyworkinginthisItalianIT‐companysoIreallyfeltinmyownbodyhowit
feelstobetheonlyone.WorkingintheUSgavemeatleastverygoodsenseofworkingwithdifferentcultures
anddifferentpeopleandIreallylikedthatandthediversityofpeopleingeneralsoIthinkthatissomeofthe
thingsthatIcanmakeuseoftodayworkingwithoffshorepeople.”
Thomasisanexperiencedbusinesstravelerwhohastraveledalot.Hehastiredofthe
ordinarypatternofbusinesstrips,whichforhimonlymeansspendingtimeinanother
airport,sleepinginanotherhotelandcatchinganothertaxi,albeitinanothercountry.Forhim
ithaslostallsenseofadventure.Hethinksthathehasmadeallthecommonmistakes
businesstravelercan,whichforhimincludestheneedtoknoweverythingaboutthe
destination,somethingwhichhesimplydoesnothavetimeforanymore.Bytakingthecourse
hehopedtogainknowledgeabouthowtoavoidthemostbasicproblemswheninteracting
withhisAsianbusinesspartners,bothoffshoreandinDenmark.
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 18
Anne:Borntobeinterculturalist
Annehasanidealbackgroundforworkinginternationally.Sheismultilingual,bornin
EnglandandraisedinDenmark.DuringherstudiesshespentoneyearinAustraliaandlater
shehasworkedintheUSaswellasinSwitzerland.Shenowworksforaninternational
companyinthefieldofhealthcarecalledNordhealth.Thecompanyisrepresentedworldwide
inmorethan70countries,buthasitsmaindivisionsinDenmarkandtheUS.Sincethe
companyhasworkedtoachieveamoreglobalpresenceinthelasttwoyears,itsresearchand
developmentoperationshavebeenrevised.DuringthisprocesstheDanishofficebecamethe
headquartersandsomeofthefunctionsearlierlocatedintheUShavebeentransferredto
Denmark,whichledtotrustissuesandcommunicationproblemsbetweenthetwodivisions.
Annemanagesaglobalteamofexpertssituatedinanumberofdifferentcountries,such
astheUS,Japan,ChinaandDenmark.ShemeetsherDanishcolleaguesandemployeesinher
dailyworkandtherestshemeetsinglobalmeetingstwiceayear,aswellasonherfrequent
businesstripstoboththeEastandWest.Herdailyroutinereflectsthis,sincewhenshewakes
upinthemorningshestartsherdaywiththee‐mailsfromtheEastandendsherworkdayat
homeintheeveningwithe‐mailsfromtheWest—thereisanine‐hourtimedifferenceinboth
directions.
Valerie:Culturaldenier
Valerieworksformultinationalcompanyasheadofaninternationalgroupoffinanceexperts,
beingresponsibleforemployeesinDenmark,aswellasintheUS,ChinaandItaly.Valerieis
fromAustriaandhasworkedandlivedthereformostofherlife.Whenshemovedto
Denmark,shehadinternationalworkenvironmentexperiencesinceshehadworkedashead
ofaninternationalbusinessunitinherhomecountry.Herfirstexpatriateassignmentwasa
half‐yearperiodthatshespentinChina.Shedescribesthisasherfirst“real”international
experience,spendingalongerperiodinanothercultureanditwasalsothefirsttimeshe
reallyfeltlikeastrangeramongotherpeople:
Valerie:“IwasneverthinkingthatIcouldexperiencesomethinglikethis.Itwasreallystrangefeelinglikea
stranger,likeanaliensomewhere.”
ValerierelocatedtoDenmarkoneandhalfyearsago.Earlyonshefacedproblemsinbothher
privateandprofessionallifeforvariousreasons.Asaresultofherexperiencesinthe
internationalworkfieldandparticipationtotheDanishLivingCrashCourse,shehas
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 19
developedadenyingattitudetowardscultureasaninfluentialfactorinhumaninteraction.
ForValeriedifferencesinhumanbehaviorarecausedbydifferencesinpeople’spersonalities,
havingrecentlydecidedthatculturedoesnotmatter.
Diane:Culturalagent
DianeworksasahumanresourcemanagerforQualityHelp,afirmdeliveringservicestoother
companies.Whilethefirmdoesnotoperateinthetransnationalmarket,nearlyfiftypercent
ofitstotalnumberofemployeeshasimmigrantbackground,ranginguptoninetypercentin
somelocations.Dianeisresponsibleforrecruitmentaswellascoursesandtrainingofferedto
thestaff.Sheisveryinterestedinissuesofculturalawareness,diversityandequalityandhas
takenonaleadingroleinpromotingtheseissueswithinthecompany.Herreasonfor
contactingLivingInstitutewasthatoneofthedepartmentswithahighnumberof“new
Danish”employees,thetermshepreferstouse,hadproblemswithmanagersnotknowing
howtomanagetheirmulticulturalteams.
DianefoundoutaboutLivingInstitutefromhersupervisor,whohaddecided
QualityHelpshouldbuyaworkshopfromthecompany.Dianeorderedaone‐hourworkshop
onculturalawareness,whichwastobeheldatseveralofthedepartmentmeetingsin
QualityHelp.Intotalthreeworkshopswereheldfordifferentaudiences,includingthe
managersandsomeofthecompany’sdirectors.
Doris:Minianthropologist
Dorisworksasamanagerforaninternationalgroupofexpertsinaninternationalhealthcare
companyHealthAid,whichproducesmedicalandpharmaceuticalproductsforaworldwide
market.Shespeaksveryhighlyofhercompany’svaluesandculture,whichshefindsveryeasy
torelateto.DorisstartedhercareerwithinthecompanyinSouthAmericaandrelocatedto
Denmarktwoyearsago.ShewasborninAfrica,butgrewupinSouthAmerica,soherfamily
hasahistoryofmovingalot.ShehighlyappreciatestheDanishmanagementstyleat
HealthAidandshepickedDenmarkoutofanumberofpossiblerelocationdestinations,such
asFrance,China,theUSandBrazil.HerdecisionwasinfluencedbyherfirstvisittoDenmark
someyearsago,avisitthatlastedthreemonths.Shedescribesitasanimportantlearning
process,wheresheexperiencedfirsthandthedifficultiesofmovingtoanothercountryto
work.
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 20
Doris:“IsaidIdonotwanttocomehere.Iwanttogohome.Iwasjustlookingforwardthosethreemonthsto
gohome,butatthesametimeIthinkaftermysecondmonthandwhenIwasonmythirdmonthIstartedto
understandalittlebitmoreandtryingtounderstandwhythingswerethewaytheyweresoIalwayshadin
mindtoaskthequestions‘Why?’,insteadofcriticizingandsaying‘Thisisstupid,Idon’tlikethis’or
blahblahblah,soIjusttryalwayssay‘Butwhyisitlikethat?’andthenItrytounderstandtheircultureandwhy
theyworkastheywork.Itmakesiteasiertoacceptornot,atleasttounderstand.”
Thisshowsagreatdealofreflexivityandanawarenessofherownculturalawareness.Ina
way,Dorisislikeamini‐anthropologistobserving,interpretingandtryingtounderstandthe
behaviorandenvironmentthatsurroundher.HermainmotivationwhenchoosingDenmark
wastobecomeabetterprofessionalbylearningfromtheDanishworkstyleandbusiness
practice.DorisattendedtheDanishLivingCrashCourseafterbeinginDenmarkformorethan
sixmonths.Shefoundoutaboutthecompanyfromafriend,whomsheattendedthecourse
with.BeforeshetookthecourseshehadbeentoDenmarkontwoseparateoccasionsandhad
experiencedanumberofsituationsthatreallyannoyedherandthatshewouldliketoknow
moreabout.
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 21
Culturalgoods
Havingintroducedouraim,ourmethodologicalapproaches,thetheoreticaltraditionsonwhich
webuildalongthemaincharactersofourstudy,LivingInstituteanditsclients,wewillnow
commenceouranalysis,plungingheadfirstinto“AdayattheCrashCourse”,asubchapter
aimingtogivethereaderafeelingfortheshapeandforminwhichthecompanydelivers
culturalknowledge.Thisisfollowedbyanotherfoursubchapters,alldelvingdeeperinto
differentaspectsofLivingInstituteanditsproducts.In“Thewholepackage”wewillexaminethe
ideals,theoreticalfoundationsandpracticesthatthecompanyisbuiltaround,lookingtohow
theyaffecttherelationshiptotheclients.In“Raisingculturalconsciousness”wewilldealwith
thestrategiesemployedbythecompanytocreateculturalawarenessinitsclients.In“The
Edutainer”weexplorehowthecompany’sproductsbalancebetweentheoreticaldepthand
entertainingadventure.Finally,in“Danes–thewaytheyare”,wewillmapoutthewayinwhich
thecompanyusesaspecificculturalnarrative,thatoftheDanes,inordertoconveyamessage.
AdayattheCrashCourse
WewereabletoattendtrainingsessionsgivenbyLivingInstituteonthreeseparateoccasions.
Ourgoalwhenattendingthecourseswastogainafeelingforthepracticeofthecompany,the
handiworksotospeak.TogivethereaderabettergraspofwhatitisthatLivingInstitute
actuallydoes,wewillhererecountadayspentataDanishLivingCrashCourse.Wehave
chosentodothisinordertomovebeyondthatwhichisnarratedbythecompany’s
representativesandclients,touchingupontheunreflectedandephemeralaspectsofthe
trainingsession.IfallLivingInstitutedidwastodeliver“culturalknowledge”abookcould
havesufficed.Sincethisisnotthecaseitbecomesessentialtoexaminetheshapeinwhich
knowledgeispresented,lookingattheproductinitsentiretyandnotonlyatitsdiscursive
content.
ThecoursewasheldinaConferenceCentreclosetoChristianshavnincentral
Copenhagen,alocationfrequentlyusedbyLivingInstituteforthispurpose.TheCentreis
quiteflashy,beinghousedinanoldharbourbuilding,rightnexttothewater,combiningthe
historicalarchitecturewithmoderndesign,mergingoldwoodenbeamsandcolumnswith
clean,whitesurfaces.Theconferenceroominwhichthecoursewasheldwasdominatedbya
large,blacktablewithaprojectionscreenattheoneshortside;thedomainofthesenior
consultant,wholedthetrainingsession.Ateachchairaroundthetableabinderwasplaced,
containingtheprogramfortheday,contactinformationforalltheparticipants,the
Powerpointslidesdisplayedduringthesessionaswellasanumberofexercisesandafuture
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 22
actionplan.Thebinderanditscontentswereelegantlydesigned,justlikethesurrounding
environment.Duringthisparticularsessiontherewerefourparticipants,allfromdifferent
companiesandcountries.AccordingtotherepresentativefromLivingInstitute,thiswasan
unusuallylownumberofattendants,whichmadeitpossibleforeachtoaskmorequestions
thanwhatisordinarilypossible.Otherthanthis,itwasaquiteatypicalCrashCourse,
includingalltheordinaryelements,accordingtotheseniorconsultant.
Startingat9a.m.thecoursewentonuntil5p.m.,withaonehourlunchbreakwherethe
participantsandtheconsultantatetogether.Itstartedoffwiththeseniorconsultant
presentinghimselfand“thepackage”thathewastodelivertotheparticipantsduringtheday
andhowitrelatedtowhatLivingInstituteusuallydoes.Hewascarefulinpointingoutthat
thecompany’sclaimsarebasedonresearchedknowledgeandscientifictradition,notonmere
individualexperiences.Hefurthercementedhisscientificauthoritybytellingtheparticipants
thathecouldgivethemreferencesiftheywantedtoreadmoreandduringthedurationofthe
dayhefrequentlyusedtermslike“thisisasociologicalfact”,whichhelpedmaintaina
scientificair.Theseniorconsultantwasverycharismaticandconvincingandheseemingly
hadanswerstoalloftheparticipants’questions,eventhoughheoftenstrivedtohelpthem
comeupwiththeanswersthemselves,ratherthandeliveringsimplesolutionstocomplex
culturalissues.Heconstantlystruggledwithkeepingtherightorderonthemattersthatwere
tobediscussed,guaranteeingtheinquisitiveparticipantsthatalltheirquestionsaboutwhat
theyshoulddoincertainsituationsorwhyDanesdoastheydowouldbecomeapparentlater.
Oncetheprogramofthedayhadbeenpresented,theparticipantswereaskedto
introducethemselvestoeachother,everyonegettingplentyoftimetotelltheirownstoryand
whytheywereattendingthecourse.Theywerethenaskedaboutwhattheirexpectationsfor
thedaywereandtheiranswersconcernedbothprivateandprofessionalmatters.Thefriendly
andopenatmospherewaskeptthroughoutthedayandtheparticipantswereconstantly
encouragedtospeaktheirminds,sharetheirownexperiencesandaskquestions.Twoofthe
participantshadonlybeeninDenmarkforfourweeks,whilethetwoothershadbeenthere
forroughlysixmonths.TheseniorconsultantexplainedthatfourweeksinDenmarkisa
perfectamountoftimeforsomeonetoattendthecourse,butthatsomewhotakeithavebeen
inthecountryforayear,whileothershavejustcomeofftheplane.Hecontinuedtoclaim
everythingisnewandexcitingwhenarrivingtoanewcountry,a“honeymoon”ofsorts,and
thatittakesalittlewhileforproblemstoemerge.Peoplewhowaittoolongbeforeattending
thetrainingmightontheotherhandencountersomanyproblemsthattheymightlosetheir
patienceandjustwanttogohomeinstead.
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 23
Oncethelecturestartedfor“real”theseniorconsultantstartedflippingthrough
Powerpointslides,ratherquickly,presentinganthropologyandthetraditionofstudying
cultures.Theslidesthemselveshadlittleinformation,someconsistingofbulletpointswhile
othersonlycontainedheadlinesandpictures.Somecontainedgraphsanddiagrams,mostly
usedtoillustrateextremedifferencesinstatisticswhenitcomestoDenmarkinrelationtothe
restoftheworld.Somepictureswere“funny”andclearlyintendedtomaketheparticipants
smile.AnearlyslidecontainedaclipfromthemovieBorat,wherethemaincharacterarrives
totheUSandbreaksagreatnumberofculturalnormsuponenteringtheairport,muchtothe
amusementoftheparticipants.Thiswasthenusedasaconversationstarter,gettingthe
participantstodiscusswhattheyhadseen,whattheythoughthappenedandhowsituations
ofculturalconfusioncanleadtofeelingsofinsecurityandanxiety.Theseniorconsultant
stressedthattrustisimportantwhenitcomestoacceptanceandthatpeoplecreatetrustby
sharingculturalbehavior.Whenculturalpatternsarebroken,trustislostandpeoplebecome
suspiciousofeachother.Hepointedtothatitwasnotlongagothatwewerelivingonthe
savannahinAfricaandthatourbrainshaveyettodeveloptothemultitudeofculturesthat
existintheglobalworld.Backthenhumansneededtobeabletotrustinordertosurviveand
inawaywearestilllikethat,whichmakesaglobalworldwithmanyunknownenvironments
problematic.
Hewentontodemarcatewhatculture“is”.Oneofthewayshedidthiswasbyaskingthe
participantswhentheystopsaying“goodmorning”.Theyallhadclear,butdifferent
conceptionsofthis.Theseniorconsultantthenpointedoutthatweknowtheanswer,butthat
wedonotknowwhywestopsayingitatacertaintimeofthedayandthatsayingitinthe
wrongplaceatthewrongtimemighthaveunforeseenconsequences.Oneoftheparticipants
claimedthathekeptsaying“goodmorning”untilnoon,somethingwhichsomeDanes,being
thesarcasticpeoplethattheyare,mightinterpretasimplyingthattheyarelateforwork.The
seniorconsultantwarnedtheparticipantsofaskingpeople“why”theyaredoingthings,since
traditionsandhabitsoftenareun‐reflected.Asking“why”onlyremindspeopleofthisand
mightembarrassthem.Insteadtheparticipantswereencouragedtoaskaboutwhathappens
incertainsituations,lettingthe“natives”explaintothemintheirownwords.Thesenior
consultantconcludedthatcultureisnotrationalandthattheyneedtounderstandthatifthey
aregoingtobeabletoliveinaforeigncountryforanextendedperiodoftime.Atthesame
timetheyshouldnotbeafraidtoaddressculturalissues.Hetoldthemthattheyareallowedto
trytochangethebehavioroftheirDanishco‐workersincaseitinterfereswiththebusiness
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 24
goals,buthealsostressedchoosingtheirbattlescarefullyandnotconfrontingevery
culturalissuefacedsinceitwouldbetooexhaustingandfrustrating.
Aftertheinitialpresentationofculturalawarenesstheparticipantsweretoldtolookin
thebackoftheirbinders,wheretherewasatextdescribinganumberofreal“casestories”
aboutculturalmisunderstandings.Theyreadandthendiscussedwhattheythoughtthe
problemwas.Theseniorconsultantpitchedin,explainingcertainbehaviorsand
contradictorystatements.Thecoursecontinuedwiththeparticipantsdiscussingthecultural
clashesanddifferencestheythemselveshadencounteredduringtheirtimeinDenmark.Some
ofthethingsthatcameupweretheneedforconsensus,conflictavoidance,strongdivision
betweenworkandpersonallife,relaxedattitude,trust,“hygge”andhealthylifestyle.The
seniorconsultantremindedthemtolookatwhattheywerecomparingagainst,whatitisthat
makesthesethingsstandoutasdifferent,thussheddingsomelightontheirowncultural
habits.Hethenaskedthemtoonceagainlookinthebackoftheirbindersforan“actionplan”,
somethingthattheycouldtakehomeandworkactivelywithtochangetheirbehavior.The
actionplanconsistedofthreefields:positivesandnegativesofthecurrentsituation,whatto
doaboutitandthedreamscenario.Theywerethenaskedtofillinthefirstandlastfield,i.e.
whattheircurrentsituationwaslikeandwhattheywouldlikeittobeinthebestofworlds.
Theythengottopresentwhattheyhadwritten.Mostofthedreamscenarioswerepersonal,
likegettingpersonalcontact,learningtospeakDanishandgenerallynotfeelingalienated.
AfterlunchthefocuswasplacedonDanishhistoryor,morespecifically,partsofDanish
historythattheseniorconsultantclaimedtohaveinfluenceontheDanishmentalitytoday.He
wentontospeakaboutDenmark:asaveryoldcountry;thatusedtobeverybigbutnowis
verysmall;thatreligionhasneverbeenextremelyimportant;thatallsocialrevolutionswere
nonviolent;thathasbeeninvadedbytheGermanstwotimesinrecenthistory;andthatthere
isatraditionofcollectiveownership.Allthesefactorsheturnedintoarrowspointingatthe
Danishcharacteristicsthathadpreviouslybeenmentioned.Hecontinuedbyrecountingabout
Danishsocietytoday,movingmoreandmoreintotheworldofbusiness,answeringmanyof
thequestionsposedbytheparticipants.Theissueoftrustwascentralinhisargumentandhe
claimedthattrustisthefoundationofthewaythatDanishsocietyworks.Inseveraloccasions
hesaidsomethinggeneralabouttheDanesonlytoaddtheopposite,e.g.“TheDanesaregreat
atworkingingroups,buttheyarealsoveryindividualistic”—constantlybeingcarefulofnot
paintinganovertlystereotypicalimageoftheDanes.Theparticipantswereallowedtoget
more“handson”withtheirquestionsandtheseniorconsultantgavemoredirectanswersand
suggestions.
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 25
Attheendofthedaytheparticipantswereonceagainaskedtopickuptheiraction
plansandfillinthesecondfield,“whattodo”,usingtheknowledgetheyhadaccumulated
duringthedaytomapawayfromtheircurrentsituationtotheirdreamscenario,withthe
seniorconsultantpitchinginwithsuggestions.Thesessionendedwiththeseniorconsultant
handingoutevaluationformsandtellingtheparticipantsthathe’dbehappytocomeoutto
theircompaniesandspeakifneedbe—forpay,naturally.Whentheformswerefilledout
everybodygotup,shookhandsandsaidgoodbye.
Thewholepackage
Seniorconsultant:“/…/butIthinkstillthatourmethodisquiteunique…Ithink,butIhavenoidea,it’sjusta
feelingIhaveandsometimessomethingIhearfromtheothers,theother,someofourclientswho’vebeentoone
ofthosecoursesandsay‘youaresoitcompletelydifferent’,whatweseethereissomeveryschematicthing
aboutthe‘others’,‘that’showtheyareinAsiaorChina’,buttheideaofculturalunderstandingisneglected.For
usit’sapackageandit’sveryimportantforustokeepitasapackage.”
AccordingtothemanagingdirectorofLivingInstitutethecompanywasthefirstmoveronthe
Danishcross‐culturalcommunicationmarketandeventhoughafewcompetitorshave
emergedsincethecompanywasfounded,boththeDirectorandtheseniorconsultantpride
themselvesonhavingauniqueandsuperiorproduct.Thecompanyputsemphasisonfinding
themostknowledgeablepersonstoworkasexternalconsultantsinordertoprovidedifferent
perspectivesintheeducationtheydeliver,aswellaskeepinguptodatewiththemostrecent
developmentsinthefieldofinterculturalcommunication.Whatreallysetsthecompanyapart
howeveristheanthropologicalperspectiveaddedbytheseniorconsultant,whousesLiving
Instituteaspartofhispersonalagendatopopularizeanthropologyandputittouseoutsideof
academia.Hereasonsthatinterculturalcommunicationtrainingonlygivessomeonethemere
basicsforoperatinginaforeigncultureandinteractingwith“others”,whichmightbeenough
tosurvive,buthardlytolive.Justteaching“thebasics”isalreadydonebythecompany’s
competitorsandthebareminimumdoesnotfitwithhisandthemanagingdirector’sideaof
highquality.Instead,LivingInstitutestrivestoconveyamoreanthropologicallyflavored
understandingofculture,encouragingtheclientstobecuriousaboutthe“others”theymay
encounterandtrytounderstandwhytheyareacting“differently”insteadofdismissingthem
asweirdorstupid.However,sincetheyareoperatingwithinabusinesscontext,heoften
pointsoutthattheclientsareallowedtochangethe“others”theyworkwithincasetheir
behaviorconflictswiththebusinessgoal.Inthatcase,adeeperculturalawarenesscanhelp
theclientunderstandwhatbattlestofightandwhentoletgo.
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 26
ThereisastrongambitionwithinLivingInstitutetokeeptheeducationtruetoits
scientificrootsandnot“cheapen”themessage.Whatthecompanystrivestodeliveriscultural
awarenessandnotsimpleanswersabout“howpeopleare”indifferentpartsoftheworld.
Becauseofthis,boththemanagingdirectorandtheseniorconsultantexpressreluctance
towardarrangingcourseswheretheydonothavesufficienttimefordelivering“thewhole
package”:
Managingdirector:“WhenwewereatIntertellIpromisedmyselffor50thtimethatIwillneverdothisagain.
Whenwehaveanhourandhalftotell50to60peopleaboutculturalawareness,‘WhyDanesareweird’or
whatever,andthenknowingthatwedidn'tevenscratchthesurface,butwhenwesaygoodbyetothesponsor,
thepersonwhoboughtthehourandhiredus,Icanhearthatshesays‘Thiswasgreat,goodbye,’andformewe
didn'tevenstartyetandIkeeppromisingtomyselfnottodothis.”
AnotherconcretemanifestationofthisisthattheLivingCrashCoursealwaysstartswitha
thoroughlectureonculturalawareness,totheextentthatthecourseleaderavoidsanswering
specificquestionsaboutDanishcultureuntilthepartonculturalawarenessisdone,as
mentionedabove,alltopreparetheparticipantsandmakethemrealizethattherearenoeasy
answers.Thecompanyusesthreesteps(seefigure1)forconveyingtheirmessagetothe
clients,thefirstbeingtopromote“culturalawareness”,i.e.anunderstandingforwhatculture
isandwhyitmatterstothem.
Figure1.Threestepstoculturalawareness
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 27
Thesecondstepiscalled“culturalmapping”,whereinfocusisputonthewaysinwhich
peopletendtodifferandculturalissuesthatareofsignificancetotheclient,pointingout“the
differencesthatmakeadifference”,astheseniorconsultantputsit.Hereinterculturalists
suchasHofstedeandTrompenaarsplayamoreactiverole,theircategoriesofcultural
differenceservingasawaytoillustrateculturalvariety.Thethirdandfinalstepaimstohelp
theclientsquestionandexploretheirownculture,thusmakingthemawarethatcultureisnot
justsomethingthat“others”carryandthatwhatonecarrieswithoneselfinevitablycolors
culturalencounters.ThusLivingInstitutecombineswhatHofstede(2001)callstheculture
specificandculturegeneralapproaches,dealingwithbothinformationaboutspecific“target”
culturesandculturalawarenessinabroadersense.Theclaimthatthiscombinationisa
necessityplaysacentralroleinthecompany’snarrative,sincetheformerisseenasuseless
withoutthelatter.Itfunctionsa“nodalpoint”ofsorts;anideaaroundwhichtheLiving
Institute’sculturalnarrativeisconstructedandwhichthisdiscoursestrivestoupholdastrue
(WintherJørgensen&Phillips,2000,p.33).
Theanthropologicalperspective,scientificvalidityandhighqualityareconceptsthatare
explicitlyheldinhighregardwithinthecompany,functioningaskeysymbolsaroundwhich
theephemeralproductscanbeconstructed.Theseniorconsultantdescribesthegoalas
turningalloftheirclientsinto“smallanthropologists”,makingthemsystematicallyinquisitive
andcuriouswhenfacingculturalfrictions.AgoodexampleofthisapproachisDoriswho
seemstofullyhaveembracedthisideology.Sheconstantlystrivestounderstandratherthan
explainandasaresultsheoftencompareseventssheexperiencesinDenmarktowhatsheis
usedtofromherhomecountry,weighingandcomparingdifferentapproaches.Shehasgone
ontonotonlybeinganalyticalaboutherownlifebutalsohelpingherexpatriatefriends:
Doris:“Thensheaskedtheperson‘Wouldyoulikemetotakesomething?WhatshouldItake?’,thenshelooked
attheperson‘Whatdoyoumean,whatshouldyoutake?’,‘Yeah,shouldItakesomefruitsorsomethingto
preparethepizza?’,andtheotherperson‘No,onlyyou’,‘Butareyousure?Icantakesomething,thereisno
problem’,‘Didyouhearme?It’sonlyyou’,thenIlookedatherwhenshewastellingmethisstorylater,Isaid,
‘Ah‐ah,youdidallwrong!Youshouldnotdothat,apersoninvitedyou.It’sbecauseshewantsyoutobethereat
herplaceandsheisoffering.Shewillprepareeverythingforyou.Youdon’tneedtoaskifyouneedtotake
anything.Ifshewantsyoutotakeanythingshewilltellyou’/…/It’snicebecausewecantalktoeachotherand
exchangeandhowwethinkandwhatisbehindthatsothat’swhyIalwayssay‘Whyisthequestion’,sowhen
youunderstandthepersonisinvitingyouandit’sherpleasuretohaveyouathometopreparethedinnerfor
you,sothat’ssomethingnice.”
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 28
Someoftheclientshadreceivedcross‐culturaltrainingpreviouslyfromothercompanies
andtheywerethusabletocomparetheirpreviousexperiencestothetrainingreceivedfrom
LivingInstitute.Inallcases,thecompanyrepresentsabetteralternativeandthetrainingthey
hadreceivedbeforecomparesbadlytothatofLivingInstitute.Oneoftheinformantshad
participatedinsomanycoursesthathecouldnotreallyspecifytheirnature.Oneinformant
describedcoursesthatwerenotthatsuccessfulas“lectureswithnicepictures”,yetanother
onedescribedtheonethatshehadattendedas“moreirritatingtome”andsheconcludedthat
shecouldhavegottenthesameinformationfromGoogle.
Theconvictiontodeliver“thewholepackage”mighthoweverputLivingInstituteat
oddswiththeirclients.Itisfarfromeveryonewhohastakenthemessagetohearttothesame
degreeasDoris.Manyoftheclientsareextremelybusypeople,asalreadymentioned,taking
acoursetosolveconcreteproblemstheyhavefacedintheirwork.Eventhoughallofthe
clientsinterviewedappreciatethecomplexityofthetrainingsomehavecomplaintsregarding
thelackoffocusonbusinessissues:
Thomas:“MaybeIwouldhavelikedtohavealittlebitmorebusinessrelated.Ireallycan’tputmyfingeron,it
wasnotthatbusinessorientedthatIexpected,likehowdoyounegotiateorhowdoyougetalongthethings
whenpeoplekeeponsaying‘yes’whentheymean‘no’andhowdoyouactually,ifyouwanttodothis,youare
goingthereandyouwanttoimplementanewthinganditisagainstsomethinganditisagainsttheirculture,itis
againstsomethingandtheywilljustnoteatit,sohowdoyoudothatlikesmallthingsbecauseitisdifferentand
itisdifficult.Thatcouldbenicetohave.”
Manfred:“Ithinkthewaythedayisstructuredyoucanre‐assesstomakeitmoreworthwhilefortheparticipant.
Whathappenedisthatduringthewholemorningtheconsultantwouldsay‘We’llgetbacktoit.We’llgetbackto
it.Let’sparkthis.We’lldiscusslater,we’lldiscusslater.’Ithinkyou’rebetterofftoopenupthedaywiththe
stereotypeDaneandyoudothisforthirty,forty‐fiveminutesjust,youknow,‘Thisishowweare,thisishowwe
are’/…/Ifyoujuststartedoffsaying‘ThisistheDane’andthenyoucompletewiththehistorypieceandthenthis
andthisandthis,Ithinkitwouldbealittlemoreeffectiveandthiswayyougetaroundthis‘We’llgetbacktoit,
we’llgetbacktoit’,butover‐allIthinkitwasagoodstructuredday.”
LivingInstitute’sclientsdonotalwaysseetheimportanceoftheculturalawarenesstraining.
Theyoftenapproachtheissuefromtheirownperspective,lookingforknowledgeandtools
thatarequickandeasytoaccess,deliveredinalanguagefamiliartothem.Simpletoolsfor
businessandstructurearebothhighlyvaluedandsoughtafterandthussomeoftheclients
expressamildfrustrationbecauseoftheextensivescopeofLivingInstitute’straining.The
questionthenbecomeswhobenefitsfromthefocusondeliveringculturalawareness,instead
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 29
ofquickanswers.LivingInstituteclaimsitisintheclients’bestinterest,regardlesswhat
theythinkthemselves.Onecanhowevernotoverlookthepurposethenarrativeconveying
thesevaluesserveasafoundationforacompanycultureandcorporateidentity,profiling
LivingInstituteagainstitscompetitors.AccordingtoCzarniawska(1998)itisimportantto
turnthenarrativeperspectivetoanorganizationinthiswayinordertounderstandhow
knowingandcommunicatingtakesplacewithinit.InthecaseofLivingInstitutethe
“knowing”isofparticularinterest,sinceitservesafoundationforteaching,somethingwewill
returntolater.Fornow,letuskeepourfocusontheconceptofculturalawarenessaswego
ontodiscussoneofthecompany’smainstrategiesformakingculture’ssignificancevisibleto
theclient.
Raisingculturalconsciousness
Seniorconsultant:“Thereissomuchtabooaroundculture,thatpeoplefeelthattheyarenotallowedtoaddress
itorsaysomethingaboutit.Iusuallyusethatoldpictureoftheelephantintheroomthateveryoneknowsis
therebutyoucan’ttalkaboutit.Youcanfeelit,youcansmellitandseeit,buteveryoneisjustpretendingthat
it’snotthere,youneedtogetbeyondthat.Youneedtobeabletofeelthatit’sallrighttoaddressandtalkabout
cultureandseewhenit’sthereandalsosometimesquestionit.”
Aswehavealreadymentioned;alargepartofLivingInstitute’strainingrevolvesaround
helpingtheclientsrealizethewaysinwhichculturematters.Sincesimplytellingtheclients
thatcultureplaysanimportantroleinday‐to‐daydealingswouldnotsuffice,thecompany
activelyputstheclients’ownexperiencestowork,encouragingthemtosharewitheachother
andLivingInstitutethroughnarratingtheirownviewsoncultureandculturalproblemsthey
havefaced.ThisbecomesmostapparentduringtheLivingCrashCoursessincethefullfocusis
turnedtotheexpatriates’livingconditionsinanewculture.Eventhoughitisnotexplicitly
statedbyLivingInstitute,thisprocesscanbeinterpretedasaformof“consciousnessraising”;
aconceptthatisanorganizationalformaswellasapoliticaltheoryandananalyticaltool,
originallydevelopedwithintheUnitedStates’feministmovementinthe1970s.
Consciousnessraisingtraditionallywasafeministmethodwheretheparticipantswould
gatherandsharetheirexperiencesofgenderedoppression.Eventhoughthesharingof
experiencesmighthaveatherapeuticeffectfortheparticipants,thisisnotthepointof
consciousnessraising.Instead,thegoalistocreateagreaterawarenessoftheindividual’s
placewithinacertaingroupandinsocietyasawhole.Bysharingstoriesaboutoppression,
theparticipantswouldbeabletoseethatwhattheyhadexperiencedwerenotisolated,
personalincidentsbutpartsofalargeroppressingstructure—andbydefiningtheproblema
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 30
moreeffectivemovementforchangecouldbemobilized.Thuspersonalexperiencewas
transformedintoapoliticalissueandtheindividualbecamepartofacollective(Gemzöe,
2003;MacKinnon,1982).
Whileitmightnotberelevanttospeakabout“oppression”whenitcomestothe
problemstheLivingInstitute’sclientsface,onecanclearlydrawparallelsbetween
consciousnessraisingandthewayinwhichthecompanystrivestocreateculturalawareness.
Byencouragingtheclientstosharetheirexperiencesandthoughtsonbeinginanewculture
orcountry,LivingInstitutecanturntheparticipants’attentiontothewaysinwhichculture
affectstheirlives.Thisofteninvolveschallengingtheclients’viewofthemselvesas“normal”,
makingtheirownculturevisibletothem,helpingthemmovefrom“thisisjustnormal”to“oh,
thisisactuallyspecificbehaviorthatcouldjustaswellbecompletelydifferentifIwasbrought
upinadifferentenvironment”,astheseniorconsultantputsit.Duringthetrainingsessions
thatwereobserved,theparticipantswereactivelyencouragedtospeaktheirminds,share
experiencesandaskquestions.Anecdotesaboutculturalfrictionswerefrequentlyusedbythe
seniorconsultanttoillustrateproblemsortoserveasastartingpointfortheclientsinorder
forthemtosharetheirexperiencesonasimilartopic.Theparticipantswereaskedtodiscuss,
analyze,listandcomparedifferentempiricalcasesonseveraloccasionsduringtraining
sessions.Oneresultofthiswasthattheclientsstarttosharetheirexperiencesonsimilar
eventsandsituationsthattheyhaveexperienced,evenwhennotexplicitlyasked.Thus
individualnarrativestheclientssharewitheachotherbecomepartofLivingInstitute’s
greaternarrativeandtheproblemsorchallengesthattheynarratearemoldedintoacultural
shape.Whattheindividualhasexperiencedisnotanisolatedincident,butpartofagreater
structure,i.e.culture.Thusthetrainingsessionsserveasaframingdeviceofsorts,puttingthe
everydayexperiencesinaframedefinedbyLivingInstituteasculture.Thisisawayforthe
companytoexertdiscursivepowerbyusingscientificauthority,claimingtherightto
interpretindividualexperience.
However,thereisnaturallynoguaranteethattheclientswillinterprettheirown
experiencesasproofofvalidityinLivingInstitute’snarrative.Thereisalwaysariskthat
experiencesareframedinanotherway,formingadiscursiveresistance—somethingValerie
doesonseveraloccasions.Shehaschosenpersonalityastheprimaryframeforunderstanding
behavior,thusshedoesnotfeelherexperiencesfitthenarrativepresentedbyLivingInstitute,
eventhoughthecompanymightstilluseherexperiencesasatoolforraisingcultural
awareness.AccordingtoethnologistPer‐MarkkuRistilammi(2000)itisoflittleimportance
whethertheparticipantsataneventarecriticalornotsincetheirpresenceinitselfisenough
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 31
tosanctiontheevent.Onecouldgosofarastoarguethiskindofresistancehaslittledirect
relevanceforLivingInstitutesincethepresenceoftheclientdoesinitselfconfirmthe
presenceofculture,oratleastofsomekindofproblemthattheclientshavenomeansof
solving.Theclientsarerepresentativesofculturalproblemsmerelybybeingpresent.
Whiletheconsciousnessraisingprocessallowstheclients’narrativestobecomepartof
agreaterculturalnarrativedefinedbyLivingInstitute,theysimultaneouslyshapethe
company’sorganizationalnarrative.LivingInstituteusesitsclients’storiesasawaytoput
fleshontotheoreticalbones,toadjustthenarrationtothelistenersandasawaytogather
furtherevidenceforthevalidityoftheirclaim:
Seniorconsultant:“WhenIstartedout,whatIdidwasthatIwasreallylookintotheclassics,allthe
anthropologicalclassics,andalltheculturalunderstandingI’velearnedthereandalltheexamplesfrom
fieldworksinAfricaandthatsortofstuff,butafterwardsIjustgotsomanyexamplesfrombusinesslifethat
basicallytoldthesamestoriesbutwithotherexamplesandjustwithotherissues,soIusedthatinformationin
myexamplegivingandIjustchuckedawaythetheoreticalstuff/…/So,themoreexperienceofworkingwith
peopleinbusinesslifeandtheiragendashasreallychangedtheformatandthecontents.”
Inasense,thecoursesserveasaformoffieldworkwhereLivingInstituteisabletogather
empiricalmaterialtofurtherdeveloptheeducationitdelivers.Oneshouldalsoconsiderthe
airofauthenticitythattheuseofexamplesfrom“reallife”givestothetrainingsessions,
lettingshortanecdotesillustrateacertainproblemorserveasabasisforadiscussion.By
instigatingaculturalconversation,LivingInstitutewantstoencouragetheclientstokeep
talkingaboutcultureafterthetraining,keepingawarenessaliveandspreadingittoother
peopleintheworkplace.Theanalyticalprocessisstartedthroughspeechanditisby“talking
abouttheelephant”thattheclientsaresupposedtobeginaculturalanalysisoftheirown.The
presenceof“culturalexperiences”thusmakesthetrainingmoreefficient;themoreexamples
theparticipantsthemselveshave,themoreconcreteexamplesofculture’seffectscanbe
given:
Doris:“SomethingIcouldn’tunderstandandIwasveryangryaboutthemandthenwhenIwenttotheLiving
Instituteandwedidthiswholedaycourse,myfriend,Ididitwithafriendaswell,SouthAmerican,andwewere
theonesthathadthemosttimeinthatgroupinDenmarkandwecouldseethatitwasmuchmorebenefitforthe
bothofusbecausewewereaskingquestionsallthetime,wehadexamplesandwewerejustkeentoextract
whateverwecouldgetfromhim,sowehadalotofthingstodiscuss/…/”
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 32
Inpractice,thiscanseemabitcontradictorysincethis,forexample,wouldmeanthe
foreignexpatriateshouldwaitbeforeattendingtheDanishLivingCrashCourse,gaining
valuable“culturalexperiences”byrunningintoproblemsintheireverydaylives.The
inexperiencedclientwhohasyettomakehisorhermistakesmightavoidsomeofthemby
attendingatrainingsession,butwouldpotentiallynotbeconsciousabouttheminthesame
way,makingthelessoninvisibletohim/her.Thesharingofculturalexperiencesisalsohugely
dependentontheparticipants’willingnesstotalkaboutthefrictionstheyhaveencountered.
Consideringthatexperienceslikethesemightbeofaverypersonalnature,oftenrevolving
aroundpotentiallyembarrassingmishapsinsocialinteractions,thisishardlysomethingone
cantakeforgranted.ThechallengeforLivingInstitutethusbecomestocreatean
environmentthatencouragestheclientstoshare,whichwewillexplorefurtherinthe
followingchapter.
TheEdutainer
Closelyrelatedtothecompany’sidealofcreatinganopenandwelcomingatmosphereduring
theirtrainingsessionstofacilitatesharingexperiences,istheideathatthetrainingshouldbe
funandentertaining.Inthetrainingsessionsweobservedanumberofstrategieswereused
tocreate“fun”,rangingfromtellingsmalljokesaboutDanishpeculiaritiestoshowingclips
fromthemovieBorat,exemplifyingculturalfrictionthroughtheKazakmaincharacter’s
chaoticarrivalinNewYork.However,theentertainingaspectsaretightlyintertwinedwith
scientificreasoningandreference,inordertoprovecertainpointsortoserveasabasisfor
furtherdiscussionwithinthegroup.Naturally,noteverylittlejokeservesananalytical
purpose,buttheyhelpcreateanatmosphereoffriendlinesswheretheparticipantsfeelfreeto
speaktheirminds.OneoftheconsultantswhohaveworkedwithLivingInstituteonafew
occasionsgivesanexampleofhowexercisescanbemadeentertainingatthesametimeas
theyarethought‐provoking:
“Basicallythegroupgetssplitintotwo,/…/,Ithinkwehad30people,sohalfofthemstayedinsidetheroom
withthemanagingdirectorandtheotherhalfcameoutwithmeintothehallway,soclosedofffromoneanother.
Thegroupinsidewiththemanagingdirectoristold‘Allright,we’regonnaformareceivingline,andwe’regonna
actlikewe’remeetingthequeenandthisisgonnabevery,veryformalandwe’regonnabevery,veryseriousand
trynottobreakourcomposure’.Withmygroup,I’mtellingthem‘Allright,we’regonnagoinandtheyaregonna
beonalineandwearegonnagoupandshaketheirhands,butIwantyoutodosomethingwhenyoushaketheir
hands’(Sheshakestheauthors’handandticklestheminthepalmwithonefinger)/…/So,thisissortoftheplan,
youknow,somepeoplearegonnagetitandsomepeoplearen’tandsoIstarted,therewasacircle,andsoIgave
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 33
thehandshaketoonepersonandthenIsaid‘Passitaroundtoeveryoneelse’andtheycan’tseewhatyou’re
doingwithyourhandswhenyoudothishandshakesoeverybodyjuststartslaughingwhentheygoaroundin
thiscircle,passingonthehandshakeandwhatitmeansis‘Iwanttosleepwithyou’/…/It’sbasicallybarculture
andlaterwhenweweretalkingaboutitoneofthewomensaid‘Yeah,youknow,Ihaven’thadthatkindofthing
happenedtomesinceIwasnineteengoingatthebarsincollege’/…/Sothepointoftheexerciseis:Howdidyou
adaptyourbehavior?Ifyouknewwhatitmeantandyouknewyouhadtopassthisontosomebody,didyou
changesomehow?Didyousmileattheminacertainwaytoletthemknowthatthiswasajokecomingup?And
forthosewhodidn’tgetitandhadtopassiton,youknow,didyoutrytoactlikeitwasfunnyeventhoughyou
didn’tthinkitwas?Sothewholeconversationthenopenedupandbecame…thisishowthingshappenwith
culturalawareness.Theremaybeacustomthatyoudonotunderstandbutyouhavetothinkfast.HowamI
gonnareact?IfIlaugh,aretheygonnagetinsulted?Andifyoudoknowwhatitmean,howamIgonnamanage
mybehaviortobeappropriate?/…/sothathelpedbreaktheicewiththewholegroup.“
Thecompany’sambitionto“edutain”isexplicitandthereasoningbehindthisisthatpeople
becomemorereceptivewhenhavingfunandarenotasdefensiveabouttheirownvaluesand
habitsastheymightotherwisehavebeen.Ristilammi(2000)haspointedouthowthe
managementofexpectationsandsuspenseareimportantwhenarranginganykindofevent,
butespeciallywhentheparticipantsareexpectedtoactandnotmerelyobserve.Bybeing
emotionallystimulating,aneventwillengageitsparticipantstoahigherdegree,makingthem
morelikelytocontinuetheprocessinstigatedattheeventafterward.
Oneconsequenceoftheambitiontokeepthemessageentertainingandengagingisthat
LivingInstitutehascutdownontheoreticalcontent,avoidinglecturingaboutcultural
theoriesandfocusingonconcreteexamplestheparticipantscanrelateto.Theattitudes
withinLivingInstitutetowardthisseemtoberatherambivalent:whilethepreachingof
theoryisnotheldasimportantinitself,thegoalisstilltoteachandtheedutainmentismerely
atooltogetthere.Whilemostoftheclientsinterviewedseemtohaveenjoyedthehumorous
approachandciteditasoneofthecompany’sstrengths,Valerie,whotooktheLivingCrash
Courseandenjoyedit,wasratherdisappointedwhenherco‐workersthattookthecourse
afterherdidnotseemtocomeoutofitwiththesamequestionsandcuriosityasher:
Valerie:“/…/someofthecolleagueswhoparticipatedinthecourseandaskedabouttheiropinionandtheyall
said‘Yeah,itwasquiteinteresting’,andIsaid‘Okay,whatdidyoutakeoutofit?’,‘Yeah,itwasquiteinteresting’.
So,Idon’tknowiftherewasreallyaneye‐opener.Itwasinterestingtohearsomethingaboutdifferentcultures–
thereitisagain‐anddifferentcountries,historyofdifferentcountries,butwhatyoureallytakeoutofthisin
yourdailybusiness,Ireallydon’tseeanyhugeimpact.”
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 34
Beingentertainingisabalancebetweenbeingengagingandmerelybeingasourceof
amusement.WhileLivingInstitute’sintentionsareclearonecannotguaranteewhatthe
participantstakewiththemwhenleaving.O’Dell(2005)discussesthisproblem,pointingout
thatexperiencesalwaysaresubjectiveandindividual,buttheenvironmentinwhichtheyare
experiencedcanbeplannedandorganized.Thisistheonlyformofcontrolthatan
organizationsellingexperiencesasproductscanhaveoverwhatitsclientsactually
experience.Judgingfromtheclients’praise,LivingInstituteseemstohavearathergood
routineforcreatinganenvironmentforpositiveexperiences.Onecanonlytheorizeabout
whatitwouldhavemeantfortherestofthecompany’sproducthaditnothadcompetent
eventmanagingcapabilities.ItishoweverimportanttonotethatwhatLivingInstitutesellsto
alargeextentisdefinedbytheformatinwhichisdelivered,notonlyfunctioningasamere
formofentertainmentbutalsoasawaytoengageandgettheparticipantstoopenup,making
iteasierforthemtosharetheirexperiences.
Danes–Thewaytheyare
TheactiveparticipationoftheclientsisacentralpartofLivingInstitute’strainingsessions,as
wehavediscussedintheprecedingchapters.However,alargepartofthetrainingalso
revolvesaroundthestoryoftheDanesandDanishculture,regardlessofclientele.While
givinganoverviewofDanishhistoryandsocietytoday,thefocuseventuallyendsupon
factorsthatarerelevantwhendealingwithDanesinabusinesscontext:Danesareanti‐
authoritarianandcraveconsensus;theyviewtheircultureassuperiorwhileavoidingbold
claimsonapersonallevel;andtheyareverydedicatedatworkbutdonotletitintrudeon
theirprivatelife.Thelistcangoonandon,thepointherenotbeinghowLivingInstitute
describestheDanes,butwhy.
WhentrainingforeignexpatriatesthestoryabouttheDanesservesasasourceof
information,ascriptofhowtoactinthenewcontext,butalsoaswhatEhnandLöfgren
(2001)calla“symbolicalinversion”(p.49);bymakingtheDane’scultureexplicitthe
expatriatecancompareandmakeherownculturevisiblebyseeingwhatitisnot.When
trainingDanes,thestoryservesasasurfaceforreflection,illustratingthatcultureisnotjust
somethingthat“others”carry.ThestoryoftheDanesthusfunctionsasatoolforcultural
understandingonseverallevels,fundamentallybecominga“we”or“others”,displayingthe
categoriesofculturaldifferencethataredeemedrelevantbyLivingInstitute.Thisservesas
oneofthecornerstonesinLivingInstitute’sphilosophy,allowingforclientstobereflective
abouttheirownculturesotheymaymoveonandexploreothers’.
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 35
However,bytellingthestoryabouttheDanes,LivingInstitutedoeswhatittellsits
clientstoavoid;createastereotype.TheconsultantsofLivingInstitutetakegreatcarein
pointingoutthatitisinfactastereotypeandthatfewpeoplein“reallife”actuallywill
correspondtoit.OnecouldcompareittowhatHofstede,PedersenandHofstede(2002)
wouldcalla“syntheticculture”;theexaggerationandsimplificationofnationalelementsof
culturewiththegoaltoillustratecultural“dimensions”relevantfortheclient.Thereis
howeverananxietywithinthecompany,regardingiftheclientsactuallyunderstandthe
pedagogicpurposeofthestereotypeandnotjustincorporateitatfacevalue.
UsingtheDanesasatoolinthiswaycanbetracedbacktoLivingInstitute’sidealof
retainingscientificaccuracy.SincethecompanyoperateswithintheDanishmarketand
continuouslystrivestostayuptodatewiththelatestresearchonDenmark,itdoespossessa
lotofinformationonhowDanishsocietyfunctionsonbothasocietalandculturallevel.The
DaneinLivingInstitute’snarrativeisn’tamerestereotype;itisanextremelywellgrounded
stereotype.Onemightalsoarguethat,fromthecompany’sstandpoint,theDanesarea“safe”
alternativeforusingasapedagogicstereotypesincetheonestellingthestoryareDanes
themselves.Alotofhumorisputintothepresentation,withtheaimtomaketheclientslaugh
aswellasthink,somethingwhichhardlywouldhavebeenpossibleifusinganother“other”.
WhileitisimpossibletosayhowthestoryoftheDanesisputtouseintheclients’
everydaypractices,wecanseehowitisputtouseonadiscursivelevel,functioningasa
sourceforexplanationforwhythingsareastheyareinthekingdomofDenmarkinthestories
ofbothDanesandexpatriates.Oneexampleofthisisthe“tribe”concept,usedbyLiving
Institutetoexplainthelowculturalvariation,highleveloftrustandlowrespectforauthority
withinDanishsociety,thatmakerepeatappearancesinsomeoftheclients’stories.Inthis
caseThomasusesittoexplainhowhemustchangehismanagerialapproachwhengoing
abroad:
Thomas:“Ithinkalotofthisisactuallyalsothatwelearnhowwearetootherpeopleandthewayweactand
behavebut,forinstance,thisbeingatribe;whatcanyousaycomingfromatribecountryandtoanothercountry
thanatribecountry?Wequestiontheleaderallthetimebuttheyneverquestionanythingthemanagerdown
theresays/…/”
Thisgoestoshowthegreatexplanatorypotentialoftheseconceptsatthesametimeasit
highlightsthepotentialriskofunreflecteduse,turningpedagogicimageintoatruthaboutthe
selforthe“other”,turningcultureintoa“being”ratherthana“doing”.Onceastereotypeis
transmitted,forwhateverreason,thereislittlecontroloverhowitisputtousewhen
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 36
enteringnewcontexts,whichonceagainillustratesthedelicatebalanceLivingInstitute
musttreadbetweenusingconceptsthataresimpletounderstandanduseaswellas
explainingthecomplexrealitiesofculture.
Anotherriskwhenemployingstereotypesistheopposite—thatthepicturepaintedis
rejectedalongwithallthepaintandbrushesusedtocreateit.Ifwhatisdescribeddoesnot
correspondwiththeexistingunderstanding,thenthereisariskthatnotonlywillthe
stereotypebeseenasfalse,butsowilleverythingthatcomesalongwithit.Manfredhasonly
hadthreeweekstoreflectuponwhathelearnedduringtheDanishLivingCrashCourseand
whiletherearemanythingshepraisesaboutit,therearesomepointsinthestoryaboutthe
Daneshedoesnotrecognize:
Manfred:“Soit’salotaroundthisspeed.Speedindecisionmaking,speedinaction…alotwasdiscussedatthe
courseabouttheDanishproductivity(sigh),I’mnotsureIseethat,I’mnotsureIseeit.It’salotofmeetingsand
alotof,don’tgetmewrong,butwastedtimeortimeinvestmentthatyoumakethattakesquiteabittoproduce
something,soI’mnotyetthere,I’mnotyetahundredpercentconvincedthattheDanisharesoproductive.Not
sureyet.”
Valerierepresentsamoreextremeresultofthis,apparentlyrejectingtheconceptofculture
altogethersinceshedidnotfeeltheinformationshereceivedhelpedhersolvetheproblems
shefacedatwork.
ThestoryoftheDanesmighthoweverserveanadditionalpurposeandthatisasanideal
pictureorwarningsign.Thelevelof“truth”presentinthestereotypebecomeslessofanissue
inthiscase,itsmainfunctioninsteadbeingtoserveasacatalystinaprocessofchange.This
approachbecomesmostapparentinthestoriesofDorisandAnne.Doris,comingfromSouth
America,regardstheDanishstyleofworkasmoreefficientandrationalthanwhatsheisused
tofromherhomecountry,somethingshewantstoattain.Anne,whoorderedaworkshop
withthegoaltogetanAmericanandaDanishteamtoworkbettertogether,pointsouthow
thestrengthsandweaknessesofLivingInstitute’sDanehelpedthemseewhattheteams
couldlearnfromeachother:
Anne:“Werecommendedtoeachother,whatcantheAmericanslearnfromtheDanish?Onethingthatcameup
thattheycouldlearnfromuswastrust,learntotrustus,becausewetrustthem,buttheyshouldalsolearnhow
totrustus.Ithinkthatwasthemainthingthatcameoutfromthat.Ithinkforwhatwecouldlearnfromthemis
thatthediversity,itisaverydiversesocietytheycomefromandwecanlearnfromtheminmanagingthat.”
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 37
Whiletheseapproachesalsocanbeinterpretedasexamplesoninternalizeddiscoursesof
difference,withanenclosedriskofessentializingculture,theycanalsobeseenasthe
opposite.Usingstereotypesasaninspirationalmodelfundamentallybuildsonthe
assumptionthatwecanchange,thatwecanlearnfrom“others”andthatourcultureisnota
lifesentencethatwemustcarryaroundonourshoulders.
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 38
Culturalexperiences
HavingexaminedthecentralvaluesandpracticesofLivingInstitutewewillnowturnourgaze
toclientsandtheculturalfrictionstheyhaveencountered.Firstly,in“Overcomingculture”,we
willtakealookatwhatkindofculturalissuestheclientsencounteredthatmadethemcontact
LivingInstituteaswellashowandifthetrainingtheyreceivedhelpedthemresolvetheseissues.
Inthetwofollowingchapters,“CosmopolitanCulture”and“Whenyou’restrange”,wewill
furtherexploreissuesthatseemtohighlightorobscurethesignificanceofcultureinthestories
oftheclients.
Overcomingculture
Inthischapterwewillemploymostbasicformofnarrativeanalysistoshedsomelighton
whatwaystheclientshavefoundthetraininguseful.AccordingtoCzarniawska(1998)a
narrativeconsistsofaminimumofthreeelements:anoriginalstateofaffairs,anactionoran
eventandtheconsequentstateofaffairs.Inthiscasewehavealreadyexploredtheevent,
namelythetrainingdeliveredbyLivingInstitute,sowewillinsteaddirectourattention
towardtheoriginalandconsequentstateofaffairs,i.e.thecausesforandconsequencesofthe
training.Itisworthnoting,however,thattheclientshavenotreceivedtheexactsametypeof
training(seefigure2)andthetimethathaspassedsincetheyreceiveditvariesgreatly,
rangingfromthreeweekstomorethantwoyears.Thismeanstheinformantshavebeenin
verydifferentsituationssincethen,whichreflectsintheirindividualstories.Inthefollowing
wewilllettheclientsdescribetheirperceptionsandexperiencesofthetrainingreceived.
Whatdidtheylikeordislike?Whatdotheyrememberandcanstillrelateto?Whatthingsdo
theyfindimportantandnotthatimportant?Whatwouldtheyhavedonedifferently?Whatare
thethingsthatremainwiththeclientsaftersometimehaspassedby?Whatkindof
knowledgehavetheybeenabletoputtouse?
ManfredwasinterviewedjustthreeweeksafterhehadparticipatedintheDanish
LivingCrashCourse.Duringtheinterviewhewasstillinthephaseofputtingthetraininginto
useandprocessingtheknowledgereceivedduringthetraining.AftermovingtoDenmark
Manfredquicklyencounteredculturalfrictions,despitehavinglivedandworkedinmany
differentcountries.OneofthereasonswhyManfredattendedthetrainingwasthathehada
hardtimecopingwiththeDanishmeetingstructureatwork.Thecustomofhavingmeetings
uponmeetingsuntilreachingconsensusdidnotsitwellwithwhathedescribesashis
“Germanic”managementstyle.Accordingly,histendencytomakequickdecisionsandmove
onmadehisco‐workersfeeluncomfortable.AnotherworkrelatedchallengeforManfredwas
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 39
Figure2.Overviewoftheclients
tounderstandthestronglyembeddedelementoftrustintheDanishculture.Hedescribesthat
beforethecoursehehadspenttoomuchtimeandenergyworryingwhenpeopleworked
fromhomeinsteadofin‐office.Hedoubtedthemotivesoftheemployeesandhadconcerns
regardingwhethertheworkgotdoneornot.Afterthecoursehestartedre‐thinkingthisand
adjustedhisstrategies,whilealsochanginghispersonalworkingpracticesbydoinglesslong
hoursattheoffice:
Manfred:“Thecourseactuallyhelped.Ithinkwenowhavefoundamuchbetterbalance,not‘we’,Ihavefounda
muchbetterbalancebetweenoneextremeandtheotherextreme.Soinsteadofhavingfivemeetingsandinstead
ofhavingnomeetingswenowhaveoneortwomeetings,wediscuss,butthenI’mleadingthegroupmore
towardsagroupdecisionwhichisstillwhatIthinkistherightthingtodo,sometimesit’snot,sometimesit’sjust
thattheyhaveaverygoodpoint,so,thathaschanged.”
ThewayManfredtalksabouthisexperiencesitseemsthathehasreallyincorporatedthe
messagefromtheDanishLivingCrashCourseandhehasliterallyusedtheactionplanthathe
sketchedduringthecourse.ThestoryManfredtellsusimplieshehassucceededin
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 40
transferringtheknowledgefromthecoursetoeverydaypractice.Heisnotsurewhetherit
wasgoodorbadthathewaitedsuchalongtimebeforetakingthecourse:Ontheonehand,he
alreadyhadalotofexperienceofbeinginDenmark,whichmadeiteasiertoparticipate.On
theotherhand,hecouldseemanyproblemsthathepossiblywouldhavebeenabletoavoidif
hehadparticipatedsooner.Inconclusion,hesaysthecoursehelpedhim“calibratehis
expectation”,helpinghimgoaftergoalsthathecanactuallyreachratherthanstickingtoold
ideals.
Approximatelyfourmonthsbeforewemethim,ThomasreceivedCulturalAwareness
trainingaspreparationforashortbutimportantbusinesstriptoAsia.Hewaslookingfortips
andguidelinesonhowtocommunicatesuccessfullywithhisAsianbusinesspartnersinorder
toreachamutualagreementduringhisshortvisit.HeheardfromcolleaguesthatLiving
Institutehadprovidedcross‐culturaltrainingforemployeesofMicrocatorpreviously.Since
heneverhadtraveledinAsiabefore,Thomasorderedthecourse,wantingtoavoidthemost
commonmistakesofWesternbusinesstravelers.Hisaimduringthetrainingwastogetas
muchinformationaspossible.SincehehadneverbeeninAsiabeforehehadagreatnumber
ofquestions,butitalsomadeitdifficultforhimtopredictpotentialproblems.Hereceived
traininginthebasicculturaldifferencesbetweenAsiaandDenmark,buthewasespecially
interestedinbusinessrelatedmatters.HewantedtolearnhowtoshowrespectfortheAsian
businesspartners,whichhealsodid:
Thomas:“Iwantedtoknowexactlyaboutbusinessrelations.Howdoyoudoandwhatcanyousay:touching,
clothing,sayinghello;goodbye.Whateverhowyoucanbehavetoshowalittlebitofrespect,likenottosayhello
withthelefthandandstufflikethat.Smallthings.Bringasmallpresent.Yes,itwasveryspecificstuffIasked
about,becauseIhadalimitedtimeandIwasgoingtwodayslaterorsomethingsoIneededtoknowthesmall
things.”
Afterourinterview,ThomaswasgoingtogobacktoAsiaasecondtime,thistimetaking
DanishmanagersworkingwithAsianteamswithhim,managerswhohaven’treceivedany
trainingfromLivingInstitute.Hetellsusheisalsoguidingandtryingtotraintheother
managershimself.Heseesthisasareturnoninvestment,beingabletoforwardthemessage
toothers.Whileherecognizeshewillnotbeabletogivethemthesamelevelofdetail,butcan
helpthemwiththebasicsofculturalawareness,preventingthemfrommakingthemost
commonmistakes.
AnneandhercolleagueshadtakenpartinaworkshoponDanishandAmericanworking
cultureapproximatelysixmonthsbeforetheinterview.Thereasonforthiswasthat
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 41
controversiesbetweenthemembersoftheteamsintheUSandDenmarkhadbecome
commonplacesinceNordhealthinstigatedaglobalizationprocess,forcingthedivisionsto
workmorecloselytogether.Thereweredifferencesincommunicationstyle,whichledtoa
largeamountofchagrinandfeelingsofdistrustbetweenthetwoteams.Annehadjust
experiencedasimilarsituationinherpreviousworkplaceandsawtherewasneedforanopen
discussionabouttheculturaldifferencesofthetwodivisions.AnnefoundoutaboutLiving
InstituteontheInternetandaftercontactingthemanagingdirectorshebecameconvinced
thatshecouldusethecompany’scompetencies.Agroupconsistingofroughlyfifteenpeople
fromboththeUSandDenmarkattendedawholeday’strainingduringaglobalmeetingin
Copenhagen.
Anneisextremelycontentwiththetrainingsheandtheteamsreceived.Shetalksabout
itasinteractiveandhandson,describingitasanimportantwake‐upcallforpeopleinher
organization:
Anne:“Yes,Ithinkitwasgood,bothagoodtoreleasethebadtensiontherewasinthegroup,butalsoasateam
buildingevent.Itfeltfunny,itwaslikeagame.Wewereplayinggamesatsomestageinthatrespect.Itwaslike
teambuildingeventandthatwealllearnedsomethingfromitandmorethanjustsimplething,butalsoIthink
thatwelearnedintellectually,wegotalotoutofitandIthinkthatitisimportantinthegroupwhereyouhave
veryintellectualpeopleworking.”
Annehadherowntheoriesastowhatmighthavecausedthemisunderstandingsandthe
courseofferedhermoretheoreticalandpracticalperspectivestohelpherdealwithcultural
issuesandguideothersinherworkplace.Duringthetrainingitwaspointedoutthatthe
frictionbetweentheteamswasmainlycausedbydifferencesincommunicationstyleand
expectations.ThewayAnnedescribesit,theknowledgefromthetrainingturnedouttobe
reallyuseful,leadingtosignificantchangesinthecommunicationstyleofbothDanesand
Americans.Shenowplaysacentralroleinthecommunicationbetweentheteams,being
somethingofaninternalinterculturalistintheorganization,oftenbeingconsultedbyherco‐
workersashowtobestestablishcommunicationwiththeAmericandivision.
WemetValerieforaninterviewaboutoneyearaftershehadattendedtheDanish
LivingCrashCourse.Valeriehadbothpersonalandprofessionalmotivesfortakingthecourse.
Mostimportantly,shehadreceivedalotofcriticalfeedbackatworkbecauseofher
managementstyle.ShehadbeentoldonseveraloccasionsthatherGermanmanagementstyle
didnotworkinaDanishcontext.Valerieattendedaone‐dayDanishLivingCrashCourse,
includingdinner,withapproximatelytwelveotherparticipants.Shedescribestheexchangeof
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 42
informationandsupportbetweentheparticipantsasthemostrewardingpartofthe
course.ShevaguelyrecallsthepartofthecoursethatfocusedonDanishhistoryandthe
picturesshowingfunnyDanishhabits,likeleavingbabiestosleepoutsideintheircarriage.
Sheexplainsshereallycannotrememberanyimportantkeypointsinallofit,butthatitwas
reallynicetomeettheotherparticipantsandtopreparedinnerwiththemattheendofthe
evening.
AftertheDanishLivingCrashCourse,Valerieaspentlotoftimethinkingaboutcultural
issues,claimingshetriedtoanalyzeandinterpretherownbehavior.Shebelievesshedidher
besttorespectDanishcultureandadjustherownpracticesatworkbygivingfull
responsibilitytotheemployeesandlettingthemworkontheirowninsteadofbeingas
controllingasshehadbeenbefore.Thisdidnotturnoutasshehadhopedandshedidnot
thinkanythinggotdone,thussherevertedbacktoheroldmanagementstyle,notfeelinglike
herselfinhernewrole.Shestartedtothinktheproblemsdidnotstemfromculture,butfrom
thepersonalityofherco‐workersandthussheformulatedasomewhatdenyingattitude
towardcultureasasignificantfactorinhumaninteraction.Thismeansshegetsveryannoyed
whenpeopletellherhowsheshouldbehaveinordertofitintoDanishsociety.
Valeriehasathree‐yearcontractinDenmarkandsheishasalreadydecidedtocontinue
asanexpatriatesomewhereelse.Shedescribesshewillnotbetakingculturaltraining
anymore,sayingitissomethingthatcannotbetrainedbutmustbeexperienced.Eventhough
Valerienowclaimsshedoesnotrecallthekeypointsfromthecourseaswellasadenying
culture’ssignificance,shedidorganizeculturalawarenesstraining,providedbyLiving
Institute,forhercolleaguesatwork.Sheexplainsthisbysayingthatshedidnotwanttobe
theonlyoneintheworkplacethinkingaboutthoseissues,butthatthetrainingdidnotseem
tochangeanything:
Valerie:“No,theonlypositiveeffectIsawoutofthiswerethatwewerestartingjokingaboutourowncultural
behaviors,ourownhabits,likeRitterSportchocolateorwhatever,yeah,somethinglikethis.Itisthefirststepif
youcanmakejokesaboutyourownculture,insteadofbeingtooproudaboutyourbackground,thatyouare
gettingjustangrywhensomebodymakesjokesaboutthis,thisissomethingyouhavetoletgo/…/soitwasthe
positiveeffectIwouldseeoutofthis.Theseniorconsultant,hemadesomejokesandtoldsomefunnystories
andwelaughedaboutthis/…/andhealsomadesomejokesactuallyabouthimself/…/butotherwiseIdidnot
seeanychangesinbehaviors.Imean,youdon’tchangeyourhabits,youdon’tchangeyourbehavior,personality
justbecausefourhoursculturalcourse/…/”
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 43
WeinterviewedDianetwoyearsaftershehadparticipatedinaCulturalAwareness
Workshopthatwasorganizedonthreedifferentoccasionsforhercompany’smanagers.
QualityHelphadproblemswiththe“newDanish”employeesleavingtheirworkstationsearly
andnotfollowingtheirinstructions.Themanagershadproblemsmanagingsincetheywere
afraidtobecalledracist,somethingwhichhadhappenedearlierinthefirm,andtheydidnot
knowhowtoactinmanyofthesituationstheywereconfrontedwithineverydaywork.A
CulturalAwarenessWorkshopwasorderedforthemanagerswiththegoaltoenhancetheir
skillsinmanagingthemulticulturalworkforce.
Dianedescribesthatduringtheworkshoptheywereshownimagesandoneseriesof
picturesseeminglycapturedherattention.ShedescribesanimageofMecca,withpeople
walkingaroundtheKaaba,somethingsheconsideredexotic.Thiswasfollowedbyapictureof
aChristmastreeandpeopledancingaroundit.Thisseemstohavemadeastrongimpression
onDiane,illuminatingthepeculiaritiesofherowncultureandthatsheisasdifferentfromthe
“others”.Dianeregardstheworkshopasfunwake‐upcallforalltheparticipants.Accordingto
heritwasveryinteractiveandnotjusta“talkinghead”standinginfrontoftheaudience.
Dianetalksabout“thestayingpower”ofthetrainingonapersonalaswellasonan
organizationallevel.Shedescribesthetrainingmadeherrealizeshewantstolearnmoreand
sheproceededtoeducateherselffurther,turningtothefieldofdiversitymanagement.In
QualityHelpthemanagersarenotjustfacedwithfrictionsstemmingfromnationalculture,
butfromsocialdifferencesaswellandthusshehaspushedforanincreaseinmanagement
strategiesacknowledgingthis.DianewasveryimpressedbyLivingInstitute’sworkshop,but
shefeelshercompanyprobablydoesnotbelongtoLivingInstitute’stargetgroup.
DorishadtakenpartintheDanishLivingCrashCoursetwoyearsbeforeourinterview
andshehascountlessexamplesofeverydayissueswhereherwayofdoingand
understandingthingsclasheswithwhatsheperceivestobeDanishculture.Peoplepushing
herwithoutapologizingsurprisedherandatworkherwayofcommunicatingviae‐mail
causedconfusion,sinceshelikestowritelongandverywellphrasede‐mails,asopposedto
theshortandstraighttothepointstylepreferredbyhercolleagues.Sheseemedtohavebeen
tryingtoorganizeandanalyzetheDanesaccordingtoherowncategories,buttherewastoo
muchthatshewasnotabletomakesenseofwhichmadeherfeelannoyedandconfused,
whileatthesametimebeingcuriousandwantingtounderstand.
WhenshefinallyattendedtheDanishLivingCrashcoursethepiecesseemedtofallinto
place.Shewasreallyimpressedbythecourseandthroughitsheobtainedsomeofthefacts
sheneededtocontinueherinvestigationoftheDanishsociety.Eventwoyearsafterthe
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 44
course,Dorisisstillusingtheknowledgegainedtoconstantlycategorizeandanalyzeboth
herownbehaviorandthebehaviorofothers,whichmostofthetimemeans“theDanes”.
Dorisspeaksverypositivelyaboutthecourseandpointsoutshewouldhavebeeninterested
insomeformofcontinuity.TheDanishLivingCrashCoursehelpedhertoreorganizeherown
existingcategoriesandrefitthemtoherrealityinDenmark.ThishasresultedinDorispaying
evenmoreattentiontobehavioraldetails.Sheisevenactingasculturaltranslatorbetween
herSouthAmericanfriendandthemysteriousDanes.
Whilealltheclientshavefaceddifferentproblemsandfounddifferentsolutions,the
trainingreceivedfromLivingInstituteseemstohavefunctionedassortofturningpointforall
ofthem,leadingthemintheirrespectivepathstochange.Formostithasbeenapositive
experience,whileithasbeenmoreproblematicforothers.Whatwecangleanfromthisis
howeverthatculturedoesseemtomatteranditaffectsboththeprivateandprofessionallives
ofLivingInstitutes’customers,regardlessofhowtheythemselveschosetointerprettheir
problems.Itdoesalsoseemlikethewayinwhichtheknowledgefromtrainingsessionsisput
intousedependshighlyontheclients’ownexpectationsandattitudes,emphasizingthe
challengeofmakingpeopleinterpretamessageasintended.
Cosmopolitanculture
Havingdiscussedtheindividualchallengesoftheclients,wearenowgoingtoturnour
lookingglasstoamoregeneralthemeinordertogainfurtherunderstandingofculture’s
influence.WhileallofLivingInstitute’sclientsoperateinatransnationalcontext,some(first
andforemostthecurrentandformerexpatriates)formaspecialcategoryofclientsthatwe,
withsocialanthropologistUlfHannerz’(1996)terminology,chosetocall“cosmopolitans”.
AccordingtoHannerzthisisagroupofpeoplethathasemergedduetothe“new
supernationalrestructuring”oftheWesternworld,aconditionwherenationalbelongingno
longerisemphasized(p.104).Instead,cosmopolitanculturestendtoemergearoundcertain
transnationalworkmarkets,oftenshapedinafashionsuitedforprofessionalsfromWestern
EuropeandNorthAmerica.Cosmopolitanstendtobeofacertaindisposition,beingwillingto
engagewiththe“other”andkeepinganopenmindtowarddivergentculturalexperiences,
whileavoidingcommittingtothem,alwaysknowingwheretofindtheexit.Theyareoften
partofseveralculturalnetworks,bothterritorialandtransnational.
InpracticethismeansthatmanyofLivingInstitute’sclientsoperateinaculturalsphere
wherenationalbelongingdoesnotplayaprominentrole,whereEnglishisthe“official”
languageandwheretransnationalmobilityishigh.AprimeexampleofthisisManfred,whose
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 45
familywillsoonrelocatefromColombiatoSpain.EventhoughhewillstayinDenmarkhe
stillsaystheyaremoving“here”,thedistancebetweenCopenhagenandBarcelonabeingof
littlesignificancetohim.AnotherexampleisValerie,whothoroughlyenjoysworkingina
transnationalcontextandmeetingpeoplefromallovertheworld.Infact,herexperienceof
workingtransnationallyhasplayedacentralpartinherrealizationofculture’sinsignificance:
Valerie:“Thereisnoculturaldifferencevisibleanymorefrommypointofviewandrecentlyactuallysome
events,likeforexamplewehadaglobalsalesmeetingfromourcompanyinIceland.Therewereseventypeople
fromthirty‐fivecountries,soabouttwopeoplefromeverycountryinaverageanditwassointernationalandso
greatandwewerealltalkingEnglish,wewereallnotonourownplayground,nobodycamefromIceland,soit
wasreallyagoodplatform/…/”
Thisperspectiveisbasedontheassumptionthatcultureissomethingintimatelytiedto
nationalbelonging,whichValerieandhercolleagueshavetranscended.Inthiscaseitseems
likeValeriedecidedonculture’sinsignificanceafterattendingtheDanishLivingCrashCourse,
otherwisethisperspectivemighthavepreventedherfromseeingtheusefulnessofcultural
trainingaltogether.ForLivingInstitutethismayprovideachallengesincethecompanymay
haveshowtoclientswiththisdispositionthattheyarestillculturallybound.Atthesametime
itcouldprovetobeanadvantageincaseonedoeswanttomakeapointofnationalitynot
alwaysbeingthemostprominentfactorinthegenerationofculturalfriction.
Whilehedoesnotoutrightdenythesignificanceofculture,Thomas’experienceasa
cosmopolitanhasgivenhimaperspectivethatmightalsoproveproblematicforLiving
Institute:
Thomas:“No…Ihavebeentravelingalotreally,reallybusinesstravelingalotsoformeitwasjustanother
businesstravelandIamnotIhavebeenbusinesstravelingsomuchthatIreallydon’tcarewhereIamgoing.Itis
justabusinesstravel.Itisjustanotherhotel,airportandtaxiandIhavebeendoingallthemistakesofbusiness
travelinglike,‘Okay,nowIamgoingmaybefivetimestothiscountrysoIneedtoknoweverythingaboutthe
countryandthecityandallthat’andIdon’thavethetimetodothatanymoresoitisjustabusinesstravel.It
soundssad,littlebitsad,butitisnofundoingbusinesstravel.”
Extensiveexperienceofoperatinginthetransnationalarenahaslefthimsomewhatjaded,
simplynotthinkingthatthatitisworththeefforttobecuriousandinquisitive.Hehashad
enoughofbeingacosmopolitananditmightprovetobeachallengetogetsomeonewiththis
perspectivetoembraceamoreopen,anthropologicalapproachtoculture.However,beingan
experiencedcosmopolitanmightalsohavetheadverseeffectasinthecaseofManfred,who
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 46
arguablyisthe“most”cosmopolitanamongtheclientinterviewed.Inhiscasetheextensive
experienceofworkingindifferentculturalcontextshelpedhimunderstandthathehadcome
upagainstchallengeshecouldnotsolvewithoutdeeperunderstandingoftheunderlying
causes.
Whenyou’restrange
Thecosmopolitansdescribedinthepreviouschapterareinasenseathomeanywhereinthe
world,buttherearealwayssituationswherenowherefeelslikehome,whenyoufeelleft
outside,whenyoufeelstrangeandestranged.Insomeshapeorformthisismanifestedinall
oftheclients’stories,albeitindifferentways.Tosomeitisaquestionoffailedcommunication
atwork,whileitforothershasbeenapersonalcrisis.Inessences,itissituationslikethese
thatLivingInstitutewantstohelpitsclientsavoid,oratleasttohelpthemhandleandget
somethingoutof.However,asmentionedinthechapter“Raisingculturalconsciousness”,
clientsbeingexposedtosituationslikethesearenotnecessarilyabadthingfromLiving
Institute’sperspective.Itisinsituationslikethesethatculturebecomestangible,manifesting
itselfasemotionsandconcreteproblems.Itisalsothroughsituationslikethesethatculture
canbecapturedandmarketedasaproduct.
AccordingtoHofstede,PedersenandHofstede(2002)situationslikethesearetobe
expectedwhenimmersingoneselfinanewculturalcontextandtheycanrangefrommere
culturalmisunderstandingstofullyfledgedculturalshock,astateinwhichfeelingsof
frustrationandconfusionbecomeoverwhelming.Givenenoughtime,mostpeopleovercome
culturalshockandadapttotheirnewsetting,buttime,asalreadymentioned,isoftenascarce
resourceintheworldofbusinessand“ridingoutthestorm”mightnotalwaysbedeemed
profitable.Asaresult,culturalshockmightendupcostingcompaniesalotofmoney,e.g.
throughthefailedintegrationofanexpatriate(Hofstede2001).Thisisoneofthemain
argumentsforcompaniestoinvestinthekindofculturaltrainingLivingInstituteoffers.
However,thisperspectivehardlycapturesthefrustratingandsometimespainfulprocessa
persongoingthroughaculturalshockexperiences.Wehavealsochosentoavoidusingthe
conceptofculturalshockthroughoutthisthesis,speakinginsteadofculturalfrictions,sinceit
putsfocusonthecontextualandinteractiveaspectsofculture,ratherthantreatingitasa
statetowhichonesuccumbs.Thisdoeshowevernotmeanthattheconceptiswithoutuse.
Thefeelingofbeingdistant,bothgeographicallyandculturally,fromwhatisfamiliarcantake
onmanyshapes,likeinthecaseofDoris,whenshefirstarrivedtoDenmarkfromSouth
America:
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 47
Doris:“/…/myfirstexperiencewasthefirstdayIcamehere.ItwasFebruary28thanditwassnowingandit
was‐15andIcomefromacountrythatis30degrees.SothefirsttimeIputmyfootoutsidetheairportandI
look,itwasdark,three‐fouro’clockintheafternoon,somethinglikethatandIsaid‘What?’.Ilookedoutside,‘I
wanttogohome!’(laughs).ItwasaverydifficultperiodbecauseatthattimeIdidn’tunderstandmuchofthe
DanishcultureandtobeinDenmark,it’scompletelydifferent.AlthoughIworkedwithDanesinBrazil,itwas
onethingandinanotherenvironmentwherethere’ssun,whereyouhavefun,whereyouleavefromworkatfive
andhaveabeer,butit’snothere.Hereit’scoldandit’smuchmorefamilyrelatedsoyouleaveworkatthree‐
four,youpickupyourkidsandyougohome.Nottimeforbeerwithafriend,onlyifyoubookmonthsinadvance
(laughs).Ifounditreally,reallydifficultinthattime,in2006andIsaid‘Idon’twanttocomehere,Iwanttogo
home/../’”
ValeriedescribesherpreviousexpatriateexperienceinChinawithequallystrongemotion.
UnlikeDoriswhoreturnedtoDenmark,shedecidedtoleavethecountryasaresultofit:
Valerie:“So,yeah,thatwasquitestrangeandafterhalfayearIreallyhappytoleavethecountryagainandwe
hadsomeexperiencealsowhenwereoutsidethenormalareas,theinternationalareaslikeBeijingorShanghai,
soinsmallercitiesandwhenwecameintosupermarketthepeoplewerecrowdingaroundus.Theyhadnever
seenEuropeanpeopleandespeciallywithmyboss,tallman,greyhairandtheywerelookingatthesizeofhis
shoesandtouchingtheshoesandlaughingandrunningawaysoitwasreally(laughs),itwassostrange…an
experience,somethingthatIwasneverthinkingthatIcouldexperiencesomethinglikethis,itwasreallystrange,
butitasreallyfeelinglikeastranger,likeanaliensomewhere/…/”
Storieslikethesecanbefoundrepeatedlyinthenarrativesofcurrentandformerexpatriates
amongtheclients.Inmanycases,likethetwoabove,theculturalfrictionmightseem
overwhelmingwithsmalllikelihoodfortheindividualtoovercome.Thismighttriggera
defensivedisposition,dismissingthe”others”asstrangeandturningtheexpatriatefurther
awayfromwantingtounderstand,focusinginsteadonthestrengthor“superiority”ofthe
individual’sownculture.Usingaphenomenologicalperspectiveonecouldclaimtheremight
beaninheritfearoflosingoneselfinsituationslikethese,wherethelifeworldisturned
upsidedownandthelackofthefamiliarenvironmentsinwhichonefeelsathome,prevents
onefromfeelingathomeintheself.AnthropologistMichaelJackson(2005)claimsthisfearof
“falling”,oflosingsenseofone’splaceintheworld,canseverelyhamperaperson’s
willingnesstoopenuptotheculturalencounter.AccordingtoHannerz(1996)theadaptation
toanewcultureisnoguaranteeforavoidingfeelingsofdisjuncture,somethingwhichisalso
exemplifiedbyValerie:
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 48
Valerie:“Yeah,somehow.InoticedthatI’mcomingbackagaintobemyself.ItriedtoplayarolewhenIcame
herefirst,yeah,‘cosIwasreallytoldfromeverysidethat‘Youhavetodolikethis,andyoucannotdolikethat
hereandyouhavetochangethisoneandthisisnotworkinghere’andsoon,andyoustartnottobeyourself
anymore,youstartbeingsomehowanentertainerandsomehowlessofapersonandalwaystryingto…because
ifyouarethestrangeryoualwaystendtobehavetobeacceptedsomehowandthatmakes,justchangeyour
personal,thatdon’tmakeyouauthentic/…/”
Theincorporationofstrangeidealscanbeanotherwayof“notfeelingathome”inoneself.
Needlesstosay,thisoutsetmakesadaptingtoanewculturalcontextfarmorecomplicated
sincetheforeigncultureisregardedasdirectlythreateningone’sownidentity.
Forsome,culturalfrictionshavenotbeenprimarilyapersonalissue,butratheran
organizationalone.InAnne’scaseitmeanttryingtomanagetwoteamswithincreasing
culturalmisunderstandingsbetweenthem,leadingthemintowhatLivingInstitutecallsa
“spiralofdistrust”whereeveryactiontakenchipsawayatthetrustforthe“other”,going
fasterandfastertowardthebottom.ForDianeitwasaquestionofmanagementnotknowing
howtohandleaculturallydiverseworkforcewithoutbeingcalledracist.ForThomas,partof
thechallengewastomaketheAsianexpatriateswithinhisorganizationfeelwelcomein
DenmarkandhelpingthemandtheDanishteamadapttoeachother.Handlingthecultural
frictionsthusbecomesmoreaquestionofleadershipandofemanatingculturalawareness
intotheorganization.Thismightleadtoanothertypeofproblemsinceitnolongeristhetrust
andcuriosityofLivingInstitute’sclientthatisinquestion,buthisorherabilitytosummonit
inothers.Justbecauseapersonknowsaboutthe“locals”andtruststhemdoesnotguarantee
theopposite,which,accordingtoHannerz(1996)mightalsoleadtofeelingsofestrangement.
Itishoweverimportanttoremembermostculturalclashesfacedbytheclientsarefarmore
mundanethantheexamplesgivenhere.Itisalsoimportanttonotetheclients,withfew
exceptions,havebeenabletohandletheirculturalfrictions,findingsolutionsbothontheir
ownandwiththehelpofLivingInstitute.
Another,moreobvious,sourceoffeelingsofdistanceandestrangementislanguage.Not
understandingwhattheco‐workersinthecafeteriatalkaboutcanunderstandablymakeone
feelisolated.Inmostcases,atleastfortheexpatriatesinDenmark,thisismitigatedbythefact
thatmostofthenativesaremoreorlessfluentinEnglish.Anextendedstayinaculturewhere
communicationisnotpossible,likeinthecaseofValerie’sstayinChina,canleadtoextreme
frustration.ForAnnetheproblemwasnotthattheAmericanandDanishteamcouldnottalk
toeachother,butpartofwhatledthemintothe“spiralofdistrust”wasthefactthatthe
DanishteamfeltreluctanttocalltheirAmericansbecausetheydidnotfeelliketheirEnglish
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 49
wasgoodenoughfortalkingoverthephone.TheAmericans,inturn,didnotlike
communicatingviaemailandasaresultneitherteamcommunicatedwiththeother.Speaking
thesamelanguageisnoguaranteeforsuccessfulcommunicationeither,somethingwhich
Manfred(whoisfluentinGerman,EnglishandSpanish)hasexperienced:
Manfred:“Byfar,byfarthemostdifficultcountryIeverlivedinwasChileandthatisbecausetheChileans…well
Iguessthefirstmistakewasonme.ThefirstmistakewastobelievethatbecauseIhadlivedinColombiaand
Mexico,ChilebeingaLatinAmericancountry,Spanishspeaking,pieceofcake!Majormistake.It’slikepeople
goingfromGermanytoAustriathinking‘It’sjustadifferentdialect’oryouguysgoingfromDenmarktoSweden,
thereisdifferences/…/Ithinkit’s,overallspeaking,thebiggestriskwhenyougotoanothercountryisthatyou
andthecountrybelievethatbecauseyouhaveacommonlanguageplatform,youwillunderstandeachother.I
thinkthat’sthetrick.ThefacteverybodyherespeaksEnglishdoesn’tmeanthatwewillunderstandeachother,
soIguessthatisanothergoodlearninghere,sothisappliestotheothercountries.”
Believingthatasharedlanguageleavesnoobstacleforclearcommunicationacrosscultural
bordersmightleaveoneopenforanevenbiggerculturalshock,oratleastaculturalsurprise,
whenonetripsandfallsovertheculturalpracticessurroundingalanguage.Itisperfectly
possibletobea“fluentfool”,knowingalltherightwordsbutstillbeingatalossinaforeign
culture(Hofstede,Pedersen&Hofstede,2002,p.18).
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 50
CriticalperspectivesonCulture
AfterhavingexaminedthepracticesandideologiesofLivingInstituteaswellasthecultural
frictionsfacedbyitsclients,thetimehasnowcometoexploretheconsequencesofcultural
awareness,puttingthespotlightonthemeetingbetweencompanyandclients.Inthischapterwe
willemployanumberofcriticalperspectivesfordelvingdeeperintorelationshipbetweenLiving
Instituteanditsclients,lookingforhowcultureisputtouseatthecoreoftheenterprise.Inthe
firstsubchapter,“Enactingabalance”,weshallexaminethetheoreticalsplitbetweena
functionalistandconstructivistperspectiveoncultureandhowtheymanifestwithinLiving
Institute.In“Differencesthatmakeadifference”wewill,asthenameimplies,discusswhatrole
differencesplayinthecompany’sdefinitionofculture.Thisisinturnfollowedby“Cultural
currencies”,asubchapterwherewelookcloserattherelationshipbetweeneconomyand
culture.Inthefourth,“Workinprocess”wecomparethecoursesofLivingInstitutetodiversity
management,inordertoshedsomelightonhowculturecanbeworkedwithasaprocess.In
“Learningalesson”,thefifthandfinalsubchapter,wewillsummarizesomeoftheinsights
gainedsofar,discussingtheeffectsofteachingculture.
Enactingabalance
ThereisaninherittensionwithinLivingInstitute,stemmingfromthetwodifferent
frameworksthecompanyemploysforteachingculture.LivingInstitutebalancesbetween
whatDahlén(1997)andLarsson(2010)refertoasafunctionalistandaconstructivistuseof
culture.Thefirstiscommonwithinthetraditionofcross‐culturalcommunication,where
cultureisoftenconveyedthroughcertaincategories,alongthelinesofGeertHofstede’s
(2001)culturaldimensions.Dahlén(1997)claimscontemporaryinterculturalistssuchas
GeertHofstedeandFonsTrompenaarsturnthenotionofculture“intoaseparatingdevice,
distinguishingandclassifyingculturesintermsofdimensions”(p.164).
Thesecondusecomesclosertotheapproachweourselvesuseinthisstudy,treating
cultureassomethingfluctuating,dependentoncontextandpeople.DuringCultural
AwarenessWorkshops,LivingInstituteusesHofstede’sdimensionsofnationalculturesand
valuesystems,whileatthesametimepromotingananthropological,constructivistuseof
culture.Oneofthecompany’sconsultantspraisestheusefulnessofHofstede’s,whileatthe
sametimebeingawareofhislimitationsandmentioningthateverystudentofcultural
science,atleastattheuniversitiesinDenmark,istrainedtocriticizeHofstede’stheoretical
frameworkandthewaycultureispresentedinit.
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 51
ThesamediscussionaboutHofstedereturnedinaninterviewwithaformer
consultantofLivingInstitute.Shesummarizeshispopularityinthefollowingway:
“Weareinbusinesswhereyouhavetoolsandtoolsareaskedforwhensolvingtheculturalproblem.Ifyoucould
doitinthetwohourscoursethatwouldbewonderful.IthinkthatiswhyHofstedeissopopular.Imean,hedoes
notgivearecipebuthehasverynicedimensionswhereyoucanseethedifferences,butthewayheisusedvery
oftenisexactlytothedirectionofarecipe/…/”
Hofstede’simpactonthefieldofinterculturalcommunicationisdiscussedbyLarsson(2010),
emphasizinghisfrequentuseamongconsultants.ThispopularityisexplainedbyDahlén
(1997),claimingthe“advantageoftheconceptionofcultureassomethingwithitsown
properties,rathertangible,bounded,atemporal,andinternallyhomogeneous.Ittherebyhas
anadvantageouscommodityform,beingreadilyaccessible.”(p.178).Hofstedeand
Trompenaarsuselargenumbersofcharts,diagramsandtables,somethingthatmakesthem
easytointerpretincontextsapttointerpretingquantitativedata,asmostbusinessdriven
contextsoftenare.ThisisanapproachadoptedbyLivingInstitutetosomeextent,using
chartsofHofstede’sculturaldimensionstoillustrateextremedifferencesinnationalculture.
LivingInstituteusesHofstede’sculturaldimensionsinthesamemanner,employingthemas
toolsfortrainingpurposesinordertoemphasizecategoriesofdifferenceandtocreate
stereotypes,whichinturncanbeusedtomakeculturaldifferencesmoreaccessibleand
tangiblefortheclients.
WhilebeingwellawareofthecriticismdirectedatHofstede,thecompanyputhis
theoriesandotherslikehistouse,albeitputtingitintopracticewithananthropological
touch.UsingDahlén’s(1997)definition,LivingInstitutecouldmostdefiantlybereferredtoas
“interculturalists”,i.e.consultantsinthefieldofinterculturalcommunication.Heclaimsthat
theserarelykeepuptodatewiththecurrentdiscussionsinanthropology,beingtoobusyto
stayabreastandinsteadrelyonoldanthropologicaltheoriesthathavebeentriedandtested.
InthecaseofLivingInstitutehowever,theinterculturalistisananthropologist,mergingthe
constructivistandfunctionalistapproaches.Muchlikeanyculturalanalyst,LivingInstitute
combinesdifferentperspectivesinordertogainadeeperunderstandingoftheissueathand,
beingawareofthelimitationsofdifferentperspectives.Consideringtheanthropological
theoriesLivingInstitutebuildsuponitishardlysurprisingthatmoststaticinterpretationsof
culturecanbenegotiated,nottreatingfunctionalisttheoriesas“truths”butastools.Whether
ornotthisreflexiveapproachispickedupbytheclientsisanotherquestion,whichwewill
explorefurtherinthefollowingchapter.
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 52
Thedifferencesthatmakeadifference
GiventhecontextinwhichLivingInstituteoperates,withitshightempo,focusonprofitand
littlespacefortheoreticalextravagances,itishardlysurprisingthatthecultureconcept
providedtotheclientsissomewhatlimitedincomparisontohowitisnormallyusedwithin
anthropology.Oftenthemainfocusisputon“thedifferencesthatmakeadifference”,asthe
seniorconsultantputsit.Asineverysituationwhereoneusescategoriestohelpmakethe
worldeasiertograsp,somethingsaremagnifiedwhileothersbecomeblurred,outoffocus.In
general,theexplanationofcultureprovidedbyLivingInstituteintersectswithHofstedes’s
(2001)categoriesofculturaldifference,toldthroughthestoryoftheDanes.Distributionof
powerwithinthecountry,attitudetowardauthorityandtherelationshipbetweenmasculine
andfemininevaluesareallthemestouchedupontoillustratedifferentpointsofDanish
culture.Lookedatfromfartherawayonecansaythatthenarrativecirclesaroundthethings
thatsetDanesapart,thepeculiaritiesoneneedstoknowifoneisgoingtointeractwiththe
Danes.Inessence,itbecomesastoryaboutdifference,turningcultureintoalistof
distinctionsoneneedstokeepinmind.Hereonecandiscernthefunctionalistperspective
beingattheforefront,lookingforexplanationstothepotentialproblemsthattheclients
mightencounterintermsofculturalbelonging.Onthelevelofdiscourse,thisequatesculture
withdifferenceoratleastassomethingwhichisonlyrelevantwhenitmanifestsitselfas
difference,especiallyasdifferencesbetweennationalterritories.
Theuseofnationalcultureasawayforexplainingculturaldifferencescarrieswithita
numberofproblematicimplications,oneofthemosteasilydiscernablebeingthe
contradictorypotentialitcarrieswithit.TheDanesareheldtobeawellorganized,efficient
peopleatwork,somethingwhichDorisreflectsupon:
Doris:“TheDanesareveryfocused,so,asIsaid,theydon’thavetimetolose,sowhenyouare,between8and3
or8and4,youaretheretoworkandyousticktoyourplan.Ifyouhaveameetingyougotothemeeting,clearly
whatisthemeetingaboutandwhatisexpectedasanoutputandyouhavetoleavethemeetingwiththat.A
Braziliancangotoameetingandtakehoursdiscussingalotofthingsandyoudon’tcomeupwithaconclusion
oryoucomeupwithsomeotherthingsthatarenotwhatyouexpectedtogetoutfromthemeetingsowelosea
lotoftimedoingthree,four,fivethingsatthesametimeandtheDanes,no,theytakeoneandthen‘I’mdoingthis
todayandthisisgonnabetheoutputofthistaskthatIhave.’So,it’sverymuchfocusedandtheBraziliansare
not.”
Manfred,however,doesnotrecognizethisdescriptionofproductivityoftheDanes,insteadhe
findsthemtobeaninefficientpeople.Hethinkstheirmeetingcultureisverytimeconsuming
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 53
andwastefulandheisnotyetconvincedthattheDanesareasproductiveaspointedout
duringtheDanishLivingCrashCourse.Theseviewsillustratewhathappenswhencultureis
treatedasapropertyandnotasaprocessofrelationships.Italsopointsoutapotential
problemforLivingInstitute.Asalreadymentioned,pointingoutwhatsomething“is”givesthe
clientanopportunitytodisproveit,potentiallysowingaseedofdistrust.
ThecloserelationshipbetweencultureandnationalityinLivingInstitute’snarrative
carrieswithitawholecomplexofproblems.AccordingtoHannerz(1996)nationalbelonging
hasatendencytoovershadowotherkindsofbelonging,eventhoughitisahighlyincorporeal
kindofbelonging,notdependingonpersonalrelationships.Afactorthatsetsitfartherapart
isthefactthatitmostofthetimeistiedtoageographicalterritory.Sincepeoplemove
around,nationalbelongingandcultureistransportedintoamultitudeofcontexts,all
bestowingnewmeaninguponthem.EthnologistRenéLéonRosales(2005)pointsoutoneof
thelargestrisksofequatingculturewithethnicornationalbelongingisthateveryonesharing
nationalityisseenassharingculture,missingthefactthatbelonginghishighlycontextual,
dependinglargelyonthesituationapersonisin.Makingnationalitytheprincipalexplanation
forculturealsoshadowsotherimportant“genresofdifference”.Classandgenderare
examplesofcategoriesthatarenotclearlyvisibleinthenarrativeofLivingInstitute,
somethingnoticedbyDianewhowentontoworkwithdiversitymanagementsinceshedid
notfeeltheculturalawarenessperspectivecouldhelpheraddressclass‐dependentproblems
withinherorganization.InthecaseofValerie,whoconsequentlydeniestheimportanceof
culture,genderistheonecategorywheresheherselfrecognizestheinfluenceofcultureon
people’sactions:
Valerie:“/…/theotherthingiswiththedifferentviewonwomeninsomecountries.Thisistheonlythingthat
sometimesannoysme,I’mnotrespected,alsonotrespectedinmypositionsoasamanagerthere’snothing
worse‘cosIfeel,butthisisalsoquiteseldombecausethepeoplelivingincountrieslikethisbutworking
international,theyknowabout,thattheyknowthattheycan’tjustignoreme,youknow,theywanttomake
businesswithme.Butanyway,itisjustarepolitetomebecausetheywanttomakebusinesswithusisalso
somethingwhichyoucanfeelandthisisnothonestandthat’swhat’squitenegative,butIdon’tknow.Thismight
beaboutcultureoratleastaboutthecountry,behaviorofthecountry,maybemoreorlessaboutthe
religion/…/”
Unlikenationalbelonging,however,genderandclassareconceptsthatcarrywiththem
certainpoliticalconnotationsthatmightbeproblematictoconfrontcertainclientswithand
onecannothelpbutwonderifthisisonereasonforlettingthesecategoriesstandbackin
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 54
favorofthelesscontroversialandmoreeasilyappliedconceptofnationalmembership.
Everydifference,failingormisunderstandingcanhowevernotbeattributedtoculture,oras
theseniorconsultantputsit:
Seniorconsultant:”Thatisalsoimportantforustotellfromtimetotime;‘Well,it’sbecauseofhisculturethathe
isdoinglikethis,itisimpossibletoworkwith’,no,hemightbeanidiot.Hesimplymightjusthaveapersonality
disorder(laughter),ithasnothingtodowithculture!He’sjustanidiot”
Culturepresumesthatwehavesomethingincommonanditcanthereforebeanimprecise
conceptfromtimetotime.Insomecasesitismoreusefultospeakabouttheindividualand
identity.However,identitiesdonotexistoutsideofculture,beingconstructedthroughtheuse
of“culturalprops”andprocessesofdifferentiation(Alsmark,1997,p.11).Iftheindividual
identityistreatedasanalternativetoculturalbelonging,explainingdifferencesbecomesa
caseof“either/or”,turningtherelationshipbetweenindividualandcultureinvisible.This
furtherillustratestheproblemofequatingculturewithnationalbelongingsinceitmakesthe
individual“cultureless”insituationswherethenationalisnotjudgedtobeimportant,asin
thecaseofThomas:
Thomas:“Sotherearesomemajordifferences,butwhatIhavealsotoldtopeoplehere,thatwecanusealotof
timeandwecanusealotofexcusesandcallthemculturethingsbutwhenitcomestoworkingrelationsitisalso
justtwohumansbeingsworkingtogether,likeoneofficedowntherewithanofficeuphere,sowecannotput
everythingintotheculturebasket.Therearesomeculturethingsandthenwecometojusthumanrelations,
businessrelations.”
ForValeriethisisexpressedevenstrongerandshechallengestheexplanatorypowerof
cultureonadiscursivelevelsincethenationalconnotationsheassociateswithculturedoes
notexplaintheproblemsshefacesinherworkplace.Insteadofworkingasanexplanation,
sheperceivescultureasascapegoat,somethingpeoplehidebehindwhentheyarenotwilling
totakeindividualresponsibility:
Valerie:“Yeah,finallyitwasjustnothingdone,soitdidnotworklikethis.ThetaskIgavewithcompletefreedom
werenotsolvedintheendlikeIaskedforit,soIdon’tknowifthisisnowDanishornotDanishorwhatever,this
isjustnothingrelatedtothecompanyandit’sjustabouthowpeopleworktogetherandhowpeopleareableto
workorhowtheirattitudeofworkis,whichisalwayscomingfromtheirpersonalityanditalwayscomesbackto
personality.”
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 55
Naturallycultureisnotalwaysafruitfulconceptforinterpretingtheworld,butwhenone
equatesculturewithnationalityorputsitasanoppositeofindividualidentityonelosessight
oftheculturaldimensionthatispresentineverythingmadebyman.
Thisbringsusbacktothesplitbetweenafunctionalistandconstructivistperspectiveon
culture.WhatLivingInstitutedoesisproducecertainlogicsofdifferenceandbelonging,based
onaconstructivistapproachbutexpressedthroughafunctionalistone.Thecompanyis
largelydependentontheexplanatorypowerthattheformercarries,butkeepsthecomplex
understandingofthingsasoneofitscorevalues.Whenitcomestoexplainingcultural
differencehowever,thefunctionalistapproachappearstobedominant.AccordingtoLarsson
(2010),thereisalwaysaninheritriskwhenusingstereotypesfordescribinganational,
regionalorethniccommunityortreatingcultureassynonymouswithethnicityornationality
inapedagogicsituation,sincethereflexivenuancesareeasilylostinthetransferalof
knowledge.Thestrongdiscursiveconnectionbetweennationalityandculturehasatendency
toovershadowothercategoriesofculturaldifferenceinthestoriesoftheclients.Withouta
moreintersectionalperspectiveondifference,assuggestedbydelosReyesandMartinsson
(2005),thereisariskoflosingtrackofhowdifferencesarecreatedinspecifichistoricaland
geographicalcontextsandofthewaysinwhichtheyareboundtothepowerrelationsthat
existthere,insteadtreatingthemasstaticproperties.
Culturalcurrencies
LivingInstituteisinthebusinessofwhatGoldschmidtSalamon(2005)referstoas“turning
valuesintovalue”(p.48),whichmeansturningtheoftenephemeralandcontextuallybound
conceptofcultureintosomethingthatcanbepackagedandtraded.Incidentally,thisisdone
byhighlightingthevalueofvalues,illustratedbyhowtheseniorconsultantduringaDanish
LivingCrashCourseexclaims“Itisworthmoney!”whentalkingabouttheroleoftrustin
Danishculture.TheprimaryframeofdiscourseLivingInstituteoperatesinisthatofbusiness,
withculturemerelybeingatoolforincreasingvalue.Culture’splaceintheworldofbusiness
ismotivatedbyitspotentialforraisingprofitsandpreventingfailure,theeconomicaspectof
culturebeinganodalpointaroundwhichallotherdefinitionsoftheconceptareorganized:
“Culturematters…forthebottomline”,beingtheimplicitmessageofLivingInstitute’sslogan.
Naturally,thislimitsthemeaningsLivingInstitutecaninscribeintothecultureconcept:
Seniorconsultant:“Ilearnedthatwhatmatterstothesepeoplearethebottomline;‘Howcanwemakemoney
outofthis?Andifitisnotrelevantforbiggerresults,thenit’snotrelevantforus’,andthat’sjusthowyouhaveto
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 56
dobusinesswhenyou’reinbusinesslife,sothatmakesmeveryfocusedonhowcanthisbemademore
efficientandbetterandhowcanweavoiddisastersandmisunderstandingsandallthat,it’smuchmorefocused
onthatnowthanitwasinthebeginning.”
Evenwhencultureistaughttoimprovetheclients’privatelifeitisdonewithinthebusiness
discourse.Ifanexpatriatecannotnavigatethecultureinwhichhe/sheliveshe/shewillsuffer
fromculturalshock,withprivatelifethusthreateningtheprofessional.However,the
expatriate’sintimateconnectionbetweenprivateandprofessionallifealsoillustratesanother
importantaspectoftheculturethatLivingInstituteteaches.Whilethesignificanceofculture
ismotivatedineconomicalterms,itseffectsmightreachfarandwideoutsidethediscourseof
business.WhileacompanymightpayLivingInstitutetotrainoneoftheirexpatriatesinorder
forhimorhertoaccomplishamission,thetrainingislikelytogiveheorshecompetences
thatmakehisorherprivatelifeinaforeignculturemucheasieronbothanemotionaland
practicallevel.UnderthebestconditionsLivingInstitute’straininggivessomethingbackto
theclientthatcannoteasilybemeasuredinmoney,a“qualityoflife”forlackofabetterterm.
Culturebecomesanpracticaleffect,helpingtheclientorganizeandmakesenseofthenew
context,recognizingitsinheritlogicsandcategories,highlightingthemostbasiccurrencyof
culture;tounderstandthemeaningof“order”inagivensetting.
Toshedmorelightonwhatisbeingtransferredwhenthetrainingisboughtwewilluse
Bourdieu’smetaphorof“capitals”.Amongsttheclientsinterviewed,theproblemdoesnot
seemtobealackofcapitals,sincetheyallarewelleducatedwithlargesocialnetworksand
employersthatseeminglydonothesitatetopayforpriceyculturaltraining.“Class”which
Bourdieuoriginallyexaminedthroughthecapitalmetaphor,isnotacategorythatseemstobe
activehere,sowhatkindofcapitalisLivingInstitutedealingin?Formostoftheclients,the
aimofthetrainingisnottoincorporatenewculturalhabitsbuttogainthecompetenceto
recognizeandberecognizedinaforeignculturalspace.Theproblemcouldbeinterpretedas
thefailuretotransformtheculturalandsocialcapitaltheypossessintosymbolicalcapital,
renderingthempassive.AccordingtoBourdieu(1999)thecapitalsonepossessesmustbe
acknowledgedbysocialactorswhohavethecompetencetorecognizeandevaluatethem
beforetheycanbeascribedavalueandgivetheowneranyadvantagesorbetransferredinto
otherkindsofcapital.WhatLivingInstitutedoes,inexchangeforeconomicalfund,istogive
itsclientstheculturalcompetencetorecognizeandcommunicatewithactorslikethese,in
effecttransformingeconomiccapitalintosymbolicandgrantingthemgreatermobilityinthe
socialfield.Forthistobepossiblehowever,theclientmustrecognizeandacknowledgeLiving
Institute’sauthority,turningthecompany’sculturalcapitalintosymbolicvalue.
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 57
Wantingtoavoidsome,butnotall,theconnotationsofBourdieu’sculturalcapitalone
couldclaimLivingInstitutedealsinaculturalcurrencywhereaninitialeconomicpayment
guaranteesasubstantiallylargerreturnofinvestmentinthefuture.Thiscurrencyisan
amalgamationofsocialandculturalcapitalthatallowstheclienttotransformthecapitalheor
shealreadypossessesintosymboliccapitalinthegivencontext.Itisimpliedtheeconomic
investment,overtime,willpayforitselfmanytimesoveratthesametimeasitprovidesa
higherqualityoflifetotheclient.Whileoneshouldalwayskeepinmindthattheseare
metaphorsandnotempiricalpositions,theydoshedsomelightonhowLivingInstituteand
itsclientsnegotiatepositionsinthesocialfield.
Theuseofthebusinessdiscoursecanalsobeinterpretedintermsofcapital,sinceitis
bygivingtheLivingInstitute’sculturalcapitalaneconomicveneerthatitcanobtainsymbolic
valueandbemadeactiveinthecompany’sfieldofbusiness.Thecompanyisinapositionof
power,dictatingtheconversionratebetweeneconomicandculturalcurrencies,butitneeds
tousetherightsignsandlanguagetoreceiverecognitionfromitscustomerbase.Thisgoesto
showthatwhatiscentralinacompany’sdiscourseisnotnecessarilyacorevalue.Naturally,
moneyisimportanttothecompany,butitisnotheldabovetheidealsofdeliveringaunique
highqualityproduct.CultureisthebusinessofLivingInstitutebutthatdoesnotmeanthat
cultureisonlybusinessanditdoesnotmeanthatitissomethingaddedasanafterthought,
beingsomethingpermeatingfromwithinratherthanmere“icing”onthesurface.
Workinprocess
Diane,ourinformantfromQualityHelp,describedhowtheCulturalAwarenessWorkshopwas
thefirststeponthecompany’spathtowardincreasedcorporateresponsibilityandamore
activeapproachtomanagingdiversityintheworkplace.InQualityHelp’scase,knowledge
fromtheCulturalAwarenessWorkshopwasusedtofurtherinvestigatetheroleofculturein
organizationalinteraction,leadingtothediversitymanagementstrategy.Thisilluminatesa
weaknessofLivingInstitute.Whiletheinitialtrainingservedasinspiration,thecompanywas
notcontactedforthecontinuousworkwithculturalissuesinQualityHelp,beingseenastoo
focusedonnationalcultureaswellasaproviderofeventsratherthanasafacilitatorfor
processes.Theremaybeadiscrepancyherebetweenhowthecompanydefinesitsproducts
andhowtheclientsviewthem.ThefollowingdefinitionofCulturalAwarenessWorkshopis
fromLivingInstitute’swebsite:
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 58
“CulturalAwareness”‐forpeopleworkinginterculturallybyapplyingbasictoolsyouwillbeabletounlockany
givenculture–swiftlyandefficiently.Aworkshopforemployeesworkinginaninterculturalenvironment.
Duringtheworkshoptheparticipantswilllearnhowtobridgeculturalgaps,gaininsightstoandoperate
efficientlyinunfamiliarculturalsettings.Theparticipantswilllearnhot(sic!)touseandapplybasic
anthropologicaltoolsthroughexperimentalexercises,fieldwork,cases,debatesandpresentations.”
TheCulturalAwarenessWorkshopsfocusongivingtheoreticalandpracticaltoolsforworking
withpeoplefromdifferentnationalitiesinatransnationalcontext.Theemphasisisoncross‐
culturalism,nationaloriginandonmisunderstandingsorfrictionsthatthesecategoriesmight
causeinabusinesscontext.
Asdescribedbefore,LivingInstituteusesauniqueanthropologicalapproachandthe
CulturalAwarenessWorkshopsaredividedinthreephases:culturalawareness(togivethe
participantsanimpressionofwhatcultureis),culturalmapping(showingthecultural
differencesthatmakeadifference)andfinallytomaketheparticipantsopentheireyesand
learnaboutthemselvesinrelationtotheothers.Allthesestepsaremoreorlessinterwoven
withnationalculture,butculturalfrictionscanarisefromother“genresofdifference”aswell,
suchasgender,age,ethnicity,classandeducation.Itmightbethattwopersonsfrom
cosmopolitancitiesthathavesimilareducationalbackgroundbutdifferentnationalitieshave
moreincommonthanafarmerfromthecountrysidehaswithacompatriotlivingurbancity
lifeinthesamecountry.Theseotherfactorsandthewaythattheyareaffectingbehaviorand
worldviewsaretoneddowninLivingInstitute’snarrative.Thesewerehowevertheissues
thatQualityHelpwasstrivingtomanage,beinganexampleofwhatMorBarak(2005)calls
“intranationaldiversity”(p.29),i.e.adiverseworkforceoperatingwithinonecountry,as
opposedtothetransnationalcontextmostofLivingInstitute’sclientsoperatein.
AccordingtoKandolaandFullerton(1998)andWrench(2007)diversitymanagementis
abusinessstrategywhichwasdevelopedwiththeaimtogetrepresentativesofnormally
excludedminoritiestobeincludedinemploymenttoahigherdegree.Theauthorscontinue
pointingoutthatthestrategyissaidtodifferfromothercommonemploymentstrategiesin
numberofways:Itsgoalistoimprovecompetitivenessandefficiencyintheorganization.It
aimstoemphasizetheimportanceofrecognizingculturaldifferencesandmakingallowances
inpoliciesaroundthese.Itistoencourageculturaldiversity,whichmakesitpossiblefor
peopletoworkincreativeandproductiveenvironmentsusingtheirfullcapacity.Itissaidto
beapositivemanagementstrategycomparedtoatraditional,morenegativeapproach
focusedonavoidingcertainanti‐discriminationlaws.Andfinallyitshouldcontainaprofound
elementofactivelymanagingthediversitytoaddvaluetotheorganization’sefficiency.So,
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 59
whatisdiversityinthiscontext?AccordingtoWrench(2007)thereisanongoing
discussionandanumberofdefinitionsonwhatdiversityisinorganizationalpolicies.The
maindimensionsaresex,age,´race´andethnicity,butthereareothersinterpretingdiversity
intighterormorelooseterms.
Diversitymanagementintersectswithculturalawarenessintheactiveintentionto
recognizeculturaldifferences,addressthedifferencesandincreasegeneralcultural
knowledgeandunderstandingamongpeople.WhatdiffersisLivingInstitute’s
anthropologicalapproachtothetraininganditsfocusontransnationalcontexts,asopposed
todiversitymanagement’sfocusondiversitywithinanorganization.Theemphasison
nationalityisreplacedwithafocusonotherdimensionsaffectingthesocialinteractions,such
assex,ageandethnicity.Diversitymanagementisalsoregardedasaprocess,asopposedto
theclearlydemarcatedeventsdeliveredbyLivingInstitute.Bymakingthiscomparisonwe
wanttospotlighthowtheissuesaddressedbyLivingInstitutecanbetackledinadifferent
way.TheexampleofDianeandQualityHelpmightbeextreme,butonecouldsaythatallofthe
clientsinterviewedinstigatedsomekindofculturalprocess,privateororganizational,after
attendingLivingInstitute’straining,withoutthedirectinvolvementofthecompany.While
thistosomedegreeprovestheimpactofthecompany’smessage,italsoraisestheissueof
LivingInstitute’sseeminglackofcontinuouscontactwithitsclients.Thisalsomakesit
relevanttoexaminethewaysinwhichLivingInstitute’sknowledgeflowsintoother
organizations,oftenenteringatamanageriallevel,nodoubtaffectingmanagerialstrategies.
Severaloftheclientsclaimtofunctionaswhatwechosetocall“champions”,spreadingthe
wordofculture’simportanceintheirrespectiveorganizationsandfunctioningascultural
translatorswhereneedbe.Therelationshipbetweenthesingleeventandtheprocessalso
mirrorsthediscussionsurroundingtheconceptofcultureitself,raisingthequestionifculture
canbeunderstoodasanisolatedentityorifithastobetreatedasanever‐evolvingsetof
relationships.
Learningalesson
Managingdirector:“Yes,the‘do'sanddon'ts’,everytimewhenIamapproachedbyaclientwhowantsto…like
theguywhojustcalled,theyallsayand‘Wewanttools!’,‘Ithastobeapplicable!’Myfirstansweristhat‘Thefool
withthetoolisstillafool!’.”
ThroughoutthisstudywehavelookedathowLivingInstitutepackages,promotesandsells
cultureasacommodity.Thecompany’sgoalistoprovideaprofoundtheoreticaland
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 60
methodologicalframeworktotheclientsinorderforthemtounderstandhowculture
affectsthemandthushelpthemovercomethechallengesofoperatinginacross‐cultural
context.InlinewithLivingInstitute’sideals,theclientswehaveinterviewedseemtothink
thetrainingheldhighquality.However,competentteachingdoesnotnecessarilytranslate
intosuccessfullearning,inthesensethattheclientsdonotnecessarilyincorporatethe
understandingforculturethatLivingInstitutepromotes.Howtheclientschosetointerpret
theknowledgereceivedandtranslateitintopracticeoncebackintheireverydaycontextis
outsideofthecompany’scontrol.Thesamekindofcoursecantriggervastlydifferentkindsof
reaction,aswehaveseen,rangingfromValerie’sdenialofculture’simportancetoDoris’nigh
anthropologicalapproach.DrawinganoutlineforwhatLivingInstitutesellshasbeen
relativelyeasy,butwhatisitinactualitythattheclientsbuy?
Asmentionedin“Culturalcurrencies”,LivingInstitute’sbusinessmodelbuildsuponthe
ideathatyouhaveto“spendmoneytomakemoney”,encouragingpotentialclientstoinvest
inits“culturalcurrency”inordertomakeexistingassetsactiveinanewcontext.Byusing
profitabilityasthemainargumentforculturaltraining,LivingInstitutegivestheirown
productlegitimacywithinthefieldofbusiness.Thispositionisconsolidatedfurtherbythe
formatinwhichthetrainingisprovided.Thetrainingevents’focusontheparticipantsturns
themintopedagogicsubjects,creatingasocialspacewithacommongroundforidentification.
Byinscribingitselfinmemorytheeventcontinuestoexistfortheclients,materialized
throughtheculturalfrictionstheyfaceintheireverydaylives.However,memoryisunreliable
andthustheeffectsofaneventareunpredictableovertime.Theorganizer,LivingInstitutein
thiscase,canonlyhopethelessonsoftheeventtransformintoembodiedpracticeandeven
thenonecannotguaranteethewaysinwhichitispracticed(Ristilammi,2000).Living
Institutefollowsthistrainofthought,regardingthetransformationintopracticeasthekey
foracontinuedculturalawareness:
Seniorconsultant:“Well,Ithink,forpeopletorememberwhatI’vetaughtthemtheyneedtodoit,theyneedto
gooutthere.Justsittinginanofficeandnotreallydoinganykindofcross‐culturalwork,thenIthinkitwillbe
difficultforthemtostick,soitisimportantforusthattheydogivethemselvesthosechallengesallthetime.”
ThisinturnmeansoneofthecentralmissionsforLivingInstituteistoprovidetheconfidence
fortheclientstoenactthetraining,turningtheculturalcurrencyintoanembodiedpractice.
AsBourdieu(1999)pointsout,theconnectionbetweenthesymbolicandeconomiccapitalis
oftenvague,eventhoughitmightappearotherwise.Inthiscaseitmeansthecultural
currencyclientsbuyfromLivingInstituteishighlydependentontheirowncapabilityto
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 61
transformitintosymbolicvalue,renderingitactivethroughpracticaluse.Howandifthis
happensishardforustosaysincewehavenotbeenabletoobservetheeverydaypracticesof
anyofLivingInstitute’sclients.However,followingthislineofreasoning,thesymbolicvalue
ofthetrainingmustberecognizedbytheclientinordertoberenderedactiveandthusbe
perceivedasuseful.
ReturningtoHofstede(2001),heclaimsthetrainingofinterculturalcompetenceis
possible,albeitinalimitedway.Accordingtohim,theacquisitionofinterculturalproficiency
passesthroughthreestages:Awareness,knowledgeandskills.Thefirststep,awareness,
translatesintoafundamentalrecognitionofpeopleexistingwithinculturalframeworks,
includingoneself.Thisinturncanbetranslatedintoknowledgeofparticularculturesand
theirsymbols,ritualsandthelike.Knowledgeandawarenesscanbetaught,buttoacquire
skills,onemustputthesecompetencestopracticaluseandseewhattheymeaninalived
context,muchinthesamewayasLivingInstituteclaimstheirtrainingonlybecomesactivein
use.Assumingthisperspective,onecandiscernapotentialchallengeforLivingInstitute,
rootedinthecompany’suseofitsclients’ownexperiencesinthetraining.
Byprovidinganenvironmentinwhichtodevelopculturalawarenessalongwithcultural
knowledgedeemedvaluable,LivingInstituteprepareitsclientsforgoingoutinthe“real”
worldtodeveloptheirculturalskills.However,manyoftheclientshavealreadyoperatedin
cross‐culturalcontextsforanextendedperiodoftime,havingdevelopedtheirownsetof
skillsforhandlingculturalissues.Thesuddenintroductionofanalternativeperspectiveof
culturemightseemincompatiblewithanalreadyfunctionalsetofskillsandmaythreatenthe
assumptionsonwhichtheyarefounded,thusriskingtoberejectedortweakedintofitting
existingpractices.Ontheotherhand,theintroductionofculturalknowledgeandawareness
mayhavegreatexplanatorypower,assistinginthesense‐makingofunreflectedpractices.
Conversely,culturaltrainingforsomeonelackingexperiencefromthecross‐culturalfieldis
notaslikelytochallengeexistingskills,butatthesametimeitwillnotsolveanyexisting
problemsandthusitsusefulnessmightnotbeevidentfortheclient.Thisalsoillustrates
anothercontradictorypropertyofculturalawarenesstraining.Asdiscussedearlier,culture
mainlybecomesvisiblewhenitmanifestsitselfasfrictiongeneratedbyculturalissues,the
goalofculturalawarenesstrainingbeingtominimizeissueslikethese.Intheorythismeans
thatwhenworkingoptimally,culturalawarenessskillsareinvisibletotheuser,helpinghim
orhernavigatepointsoffrictioncarelessly.Usingconcreteexamplesthatmovetheclients’
perceptionscanthushelptoserveasamanifestationforculturalawareness—Anne’sstoryof
thepicturesofKaabaalongwithaChristmastreebeingaperfectexampleofthis.Thisalso
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 62
providesachallengeforanybodywantingtoevaluatetheeffectsofculturaltrainingsince
onecannotbecertaintheinformantsarefullyawareoftheusefulnessofthetrainingthey
havereceived,notseeingthe“non‐frictions”.
Onseveraloccasions,representativesfromLivingInstituteexpressanxietyconcerning
whethertheclientswillactuallyunderstandthepedagogicpurposeof,forexample,
stereotypesandnotjusttakethematfacevalue.However,whenstudyingtheclients’
narrativesitbecomesapparentthecultureanalyticalconceptsofLivingInstitutetoagreat
extentareincorporatedasexplanatorydiscoursesratherthanasanalyticaltools.Onecan
choosetointerpretthisinseveralways,dependingonifonewantstopointoutthepositiveor
problematicaspectsofthecompany’straining.Atfirstglance,itmightseemlikethecultural
awarenessoftheclientsisnotextensiveenoughtousetheconceptsinthewayintendedby
LivingInstitute.Inthesamevein,onecouldalsoregarditasafailureonthecompany’spart,
nothavingsufficientlyinformedtheclientoftherelativisticaspectsofdifferentcultural
concepts.Ontheotherhand,onecannotdenytheimpactLivingInstitute’sdiscoursehashad
ontheindividualclients’narratives.Manyconceptspresentedbythecompanyreturninthe
clients’stories,helpingthemtomakesenseoftheireverydaylivesandproblemsthey
encounter.EveninthecaseofValerie,whohasrenouncedculture’ssignificance,onecantrace
conceptsfromLivingInstitute’straining,albeitunderadifferent“flag”,re‐framedas
“personality”.Thisgoestoshownodiscoursecanevertotallydefineanddominatemeanings
andthatpeoplecanputdiscoursestouseinordertosuittheirownneeds.Discoursemay
functionasarepertoireforpersonalnarratives,butpeopleusethemactively,notjust
carryingthempassively“ontheirbacks”(WintherJörgensen&Phillips,2000).Accordingto
Ristilammi(2000)thesignificanceofanyformofeventisonlyrealizedwhenrecognizedbya
thirdparty,notpresentattheeventitself.Ineffect,thismeansthepoweroverdefinitionof
thediscoursepromotedbyLivingInstituteislimitedtoitsusefulnessintheclients’everyday
practices,despiteitsscientificauthority.
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 63
Conclusions
Inthis,ourfinalchapter,wewillsummarizeandconcludeourfindings.In“Strikingabalance”
wediscussthechallengingbalancingactsthatLivingInstituteperforms,aswellasthe
consequencesthishasfortheconceptofculture.Thisisfollowedbyanumberofsuggestionsfor
LivingInstitutein“Insights”.Finally,in“Applyingoneself”,wetouchuponthesignificanceofthis
studyforthefieldsofappliedculturalanalysisandinterculturalcommunication.
Strikingabalance
Theaimofthisthesishasbeento,throughthestudyofLivingInstituteanditsclients,shed
somelightonhowtheconceptofculturecanbepackaged,soldandtaughtinthemarketplace
andhowitistransformedintheprocess.Inthefollowing,wewillgiveabriefrecountofthe
theoreticalframeworkonwhichthecompany’sproductisbased,howthisknowledgeis
packagedandhowitwasreceivedbytheinterviewedclients.Thiswillbefollowedbyan
outlineoftheissuesweperceiveascentralforunderstandingthecompanyanditschallenges,
intheshapeoffive“balancingacts”.Finallywewilldiscusswhatweperceiveasthe
consequencesfortheusesoftheconceptofcultureinsuchasetting.
LivingInstituteisacompanythatbycombiningtheoreticalperspectivesfrom
anthropologyandcross‐culturalcommunicationstrivestodeliveracomplex,yetaccessible
understandingofculturetoitsclients.Theanthropologicalperspectiveisusedtourgeclients
togodeeperandtrytounderstandculturaldifferencesinordertoresolveculturalfrictions.
Theoristsincross‐culturalcommunication,suchasHofstede,provideculturalmodelsthat,
becauseoftheirextensiveuseofquantitativedata,areeasytoadapttothebusinesssettingin
whichthecompanyoperates.Typically,theLivingInstituteemploysathree‐stagemodelfor
conveyingthistotheclients.Thefirststep,“culturalawareness”,aimstogivetheclientsan
understandingofwhatcultureisandwhyitmatterstothem.Thesecondstep,referredtoas
“culturalmapping”,providesanoutlineofthefactorsonwhichpeoplefromdifferentnational
culturestendtodiffer,pointingout“thedifferencesthatmakeadifference”.Duringthethird
stepthecompanytriestomaketheclients’ownculturesvisibletothem,helpingthemsee
thattheyareas“different”asthe“others”.Throughthecombinationofthesethreesteps,
LivingInstitutedeliversamixtureoffunctionalist“facts”aboutcultureandencouragesclients
tobecurious,exploratoryandanalyticalratherthanjudgmental.
Forclientsthisthree‐stagemodeltranslatesintobothlisteningtolecturesand
participatingactively,forexample,bysharingtheirpersonalexperiencesofculturalfrictions.
Inordertomakeitsmessageevenmoreaccessibletoclients,LivingInstitutealsoemphasizes
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 64
theimportanceofkeepingthetrainingentertaining,claimingpeoplearemoreopento
challengingconceptswhentheyareconfrontingthemwithalaugh.Toconcretizeculture,
LivingInstitutefocusesonDanishculture,lettingthestoryabout“theDane”workasbotha
sourceofinformationaboutDanishsocietyandareflectivesurfacethatmakestheclients’
ownculturesvisible.
Theclientsinterviewedforthisstudyhaveunanimouslypraisedtheirtrainingaswell
executed,havingfounditengagingandinformative.Whilesomehaveexpressedcomplaints
concerningdetails,likeThomasandManfredwhodidnotthinkthesessionsweresufficiently
businessoriented,mostclientsclaimtobesatisfied.Thedegreetowhichtheclientshave
perceivedthetrainingasusefulvariesasdothewaysinwhichtheyhaveputittouse.One
thingthatunitesalloftheclientsisthetrainingtheyreceivedhasinstigatedsomekindof
process,eitheronapersonaloranorganizationallevel.Thethreeexpatriates,Manfred,
ValerieandDoris,allviewedtheireverydaylivesdifferentlyafterhavingreceivedtraining:
Theymadenewsenseofthethingstheysawaroundthem.Manfredclaimsthatthetraining
helpedhimtoadjusthisexpectationsandchangehismanagementstyle,leadingtodecreased
frictioninjustthreeweeks.ForValerie,itledtoanincreasedsenseofculturalfrictionand
thusshehasdecidedtodisregardculture.Sheneverthelessfoundthetraininggoodenoughto
organizeasessionforherco‐workers.ForDoris,itturnedouttobeapleasurableexperience,
turningculturalawarenessintoatoolforexploringandexplaininghersurroundings.For
Thomas,AnneandDiane,theworkshopswerethestartofaprocessthatcametospread
throughouttheirrespectiveorganizations.ForThomas,thetrainingwasfirstandforemosta
preparationforabusinesstriptoAsia,buthewasabletousewhathelearnedtoteachhisco‐
workerssomethingabouttheimportanceofculture.ThetraininggaveAnneandher
colleaguesthetoolstobridgethegapbetweentheDanishandtheUSdivisionsinher
company,facilitatingcooperationbymakingtheirculturaldifferencesvisibletothem.For
Diane,theworkshopbecameaneye‐openerthatledtoacompany‐wideturntodiversity
management.
BycreatinganextensiveethnographyofLivingInstituteanditsrelationstoitsclients,
wehavebeenabletoidentifyanumberofproblematicissuesthatwerelatetothehandlingof
cultureasacommodity.Onepointwehavehadoccasiontoreturntorepeatedlyinourstudy
isthenarrowpathLivingInstitutetreadsbetweenafunctionalistandaconstructivist
approachtocultureinrelationtoitsclients.Thisishoweverjustoneofseveralsimilar
balancingacts(seefigure3)thecompanyperforms,constantlyoscillatingbetweendifferent
approachesandinsomeinstanceskeelingovertooneside.Below,welookmorecloselyat
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 65
Figure3.Balancingacts
fivebalancingactsweperceivetobecentralforunderstandingthecompany,illustrating
manyofthechallengesofdealingwithcultureingeneralandtheteachingofcross‐cultural
communicationinparticular.
Event–Process:Inasense,whatthecompanysellsisanintenseexperience,limitedin
spaceandtime.LivingInstitute’sintentionistomaketheeventawake‐upcallforcultural
awareness,butoncetheeventisoverandtheclienthaswalkedoutthedoorthecompanyhas
verylittleinsightintowhatknowledgetheirclientstakewiththemorhowtheyputittouse.
WhileLivingInstituterathereasilycanreachbackwardintime,incorporatingtheclients’past
experiencesintoaculturalnarrative,itismuchmoredifficultandchallengingtomoveinto
theirfuture,retainingapresenceintheirdailyinterpretationsofcultureandtoensurethey
maintainthe“right”mindset.AlthoughtheactionplanpresentedtotheclientsattheDanish
LivingCrashCourseisonewayofdoingthis,theuseofastrongexplanatorydiscourseis
another.Thereisnoguaranteetheculturalawarenessperspectivewillsurvivebeyondthe
practicalproblemsoftheactionplananddiscoursesmightbecomeunreflectedexplanations
ratherthananalyticaltools.
Foralloftheclients,thetrainingsessionhasbeenthestartofsomekindofprocess,but
foramajoritytheendoftheeventhasalsomarkedtheendoftheirrelationshipwithLiving
Event Process
Theory
National
Private
Functionalism
Entertainment
Intersectional
Professional
Constructionism
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 66
Institute.Theclientshavebeensetontheirrespectiveways,butinmostcasesthereseems
tobeaneedforfurtherguidance.SomeoftheclientshavenotconsideredgoingbacktoLiving
Institutesincetheyhavenotperceivedthecompany’sareaofcompetencerelevantforthem
anymore;insteadtheyhavelookedforknowledgeinotherplaces.Othershavecontemplated
returningtoLivingInstitute,buthavenothadthetimeorresourcestodoso.WhileLiving
Institutedoeshaveacontinuousrelationshipwithsomeofitsclients,thecompany’swork
oftenconsistsofarrangingsessionsfornewincomingandoutgoingexpatriates,ratherthan
beingpartofanongoingprocess.Atensionresidesherebetweenwhatcanbeseenasasingle
eye‐openingeventloadedwithmeaningandthelong‐termexperientialprocessofcultivating
culturalawarenesspresentineverydaypractices.LivingInstitutedependsonthestaying
powerofitsmessageratherthanonamaintainedpresenceintheclient’sorganization.The
questionisifthecomplexunderstandingofculturethatthecompanyadvocatescanbe
successfullyconveyedthroughasingleevent,orifamoreprocessualwayoflearningis
necessarytobecometrulyeffective.Thismirrorsthewayinwhichcultureoftenbecomes
objectifiedwhenpackagedandsold,asdiscussedbyO’Dell(2009),inrelationtotheculture
analyticalperspectiveoncultureasanever‐evolvingprocess.
Theory–Entertainment:ScientificvalidityandreasoningarecentraltenetsatLiving
Institute.Atthesametime,thecompanywantstoavoidbeingoverlytheoreticalandtofocus
insteadondeliveringculturalawarenessinamoreentertainingpackage.Atfirstglance,this
mightseemcontradictory,butourstudyofLivingInstituteshowsthetwoapproachescan
functioninconcert.Throughtheuseofparticipantexperience,jokes,pictures,moviesand
anecdotes,thecompanyisableteachtheoreticalconceptsinanimplicitway,immersingthem
inentertainingtropes.Theambitionto“edutain”ismorethanjustawaytodeliverthe
messageinanappetizingmanner.Asmentionedabove,italsobuildsontheassumptionthat
oneismorereceptivewhilehavingfun.Thereisofcoursealwaysariskofthe“fun”
overshadowingtheseriousnessoftheissueathand,incasetheclientdoesrecognizethe
impliedrelevance,thusturningthetrainingsessioninto“pure”entertainment.Thechallenge
thenbecomestoprovoketheclients,makingsuretherideisnottoosmooth.Thenagain,the
consultantsatLivingInstituteseemtoexcelatthistask.
ThefactthatLivingInstitutehandlesthisbalancingactwithgreatskillmakesit
somewhathardertodiscernthantheothers;thelackoffrictionmakingitslipbywithout
notice.Ifnotmanagedsowell,itcouldeasilyresultintrainingbecomingtoodulland
inaccessible.Orthetrainingcouldenduptoolightweight,withoutpracticalrelevance.Thisis
abalancingactthatanyonewhostrivestoworkwiththeoreticalconceptsoutsideacademia
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 67
mustface.Eventhoughitmightnotalwaysberelevanttospeakabout“entertainment”,it
highlightstheimportanceofaddressingtheaudienceinamannersuitabletothem.
National–Intersectional:ThewayLivingInstituteusescultureputsheavyemphasis
onnationaloriginbothasasourceoffrictionandasanexplanatoryfactorfordifferences.The
CulturalAwarenessWorkshopsaimtogiveparticipantstoolsforworkingwithpeoplefrom
variousnationalities.TheDanishLivingCrashCourse,forexample,circlesaroundthe
peculiaritiesofDanishculture.Hofstede’s(2001)dimensionsofculturaldifferenceare
broughttotheforetoillustratechallengestheclientsmightfacewhentheyenteraspecific
nationalculture.Wefindthistobeproblematicsincenationalbelonginghasatendencyto
overshadowotherkindsofbelongings,renderinginvisibleotherwaysinwhichpeopleare
similarordifferent.Intheclients’stories,nationalcultureoftenistheprimarytoolwithwhich
differencesareexplained.Thismayresultinthatissueswhichcannotbeexplainedbywayof
nationalculturenotbeingregardedasculturallydependentbutas“mere”individual
differences.WhilethisdemonstratestheexplanatorystrengthofLivingInstitute’scultural
discourse,italsoilluminatesthepotentialdownsideofthisstrongdiscourse.If
wholeheartedlyconsumed,itmayleadtosomeclientsincorporatingtheseexplanationsas
“truths”aboutthe“other”aswellasofthemselves.
WhileLivingInstituteclaimsitwantstodeliveracomplexunderstandingofculture,the
heavyfocusonnationalbelongingmakesthisbalanceseemabitlopsided.Onemusttakeinto
considerationthatLivingInstituteandother“interculturalists”maketheirlivingfromcultural
frictionsandthatitconsequentlymightbeintheirinteresttofocusondifferences,especially
thosethatareeasiertotalkabout.Nationalityisarelatively“safe”culturalcategorythatlacks
manyofthemoresensitivelypoliticalconnotationsofclassorgender.Onemustalsobearin
mindsomeofthecompany’smorecosmopolitanclientsneedabitofconvincingbeforeeven
recognizingthesignificanceofthisrelativelysafecategoryofnationalbelonging.Theuseofan
intersectionalperspectiveonculturemighthoweverbebeneficialforanyonewantingtoshow
that“culturematters”withoutgivinganoverlysimplifieddefinitionoftheconcept.By
applyingotherperspectivesonculturaldifference,onecanindicatethehighlycontextual
dependencyofculture,illustratinghowculturaldifferencecanexistwithinanation,for
example.
Private–Professional:LivingInstituteoperatesintheworldofbusiness,promoting
culturalknowledgeasatoolforsuccessinthetransnationalmarket.Theimplicitmeaningof
theslogan“culturematters”isthatitmattersintheworldofbusiness.Evenwhencultural
awarenesscanimprovetheclients’privatelife,itisimplicitlymotivatedbybusinessprofits.
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 68
Anexpatriatesufferingfrom“culturalshock”,withoutafunctioningsociallife,willnotbe
abletowork.Culturalawarenessbecomesatoolforresolvingproblematicsituations—a
strategichammerforbeatingdownnailsonewouldotherwisehurtoneselfupon.WhileLiving
Institute’strainingmainlyisfocusedonenhancingclients’businessskills,thisisachieved
throughtheexplorationofeverydaysocialsituations.Personalexperience,professionalor
private,isusedtoillustratetheeffectsofculture,transformingthemintoapartofacultural
narrative.
Ourpointhereisthatwediscernapotentialtensionbetweenthelevelofdiscourseand
livedexperience.WhilethesignificanceoflearningculturalawarenessbyLivingInstituteis
warrantedthroughitseconomicnarrative—whichsaysthetrainingwillbeusefulina
businesscontext—itseffectsstretchfarandwideoutsidetheworldofbusiness,afactwe
believemaybecomeobscured.Asweunderstandit,theknowledgegainedmighthelpresolve
issuesatwork,butitmayjustaswellhelptheclientfindnewfriendsorhelpsortouta
romanticrelationship.Naturally,LivingInstituterealizes,andteaches,thatitsclients’private
experienceswillinfluencetheirworklives.However,weseeadangerrelatedtothe
company’smarketingstrategythatrunstheriskofreducingtheemotionalstrainofcultural
frictionsintoadiscourseofbusiness.Ultimately,thisalsoillustratestheambivalenceof
severalclientswhoaskedformorebusinessrelatedtoolswhilesimultaneouslypraisinghow
thetraininghelpedthemresolvepersonalissuestheyhadbeenbroodingupon.Itseemslike
theculturalawarenessismorethanamerehammer,butthatitsotherusesmightnotbe
entirelyobviousforthepersonholdingit.
Functionalism–Constructionism:Asourfinalbalancingactwereturntothe
relationshipbetweenthefunctionalistandconstructivistapproachestoculture.Thesetwo
theoreticalbranchesmightseemincompatible;buildingonentirelydifferentassumptions
aboutculture’smeaningaswellascommunicatingthroughdifferent“languages”.ForLiving
Institute,however,theyfunctionmoreastoolsthanasepistemologicaltruths,servingspecific
purposesintheteachingofculturalknowledge.Thecompanyaimstodeliveracomplex
understandingofcultureinanaccessiblepackagebydrawingonconceptsfromboth
traditions.Theconstructivistapproachbyitselfmightappeartooacademicandmultifaceted,
withoutobviousapplicability.Thefunctionalistapproach,whileaccessible,runstheriskof
creatingasimplisticandstaticnotionofculture,toodistantfromthecompany’sidealsof
culturalawareness.Inawaythiscouldalsobeexplainedasthebalancebetweenidealsand
practice.WhileLivingInstitutemightpromoteaconstructivistperspectiveonculture,italso
mustconsiderwhatactuallyworksinrelationtotheclients.Thegoalistodeliverawareness
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 69
andknowledge,nottopreachtheoryfortheory’ssake.Thefunctionalistapproachcanthen
beinterpretedasaTrojanhorseofsorts,givingafamiliarshapetoanunfamiliarmessage
throughtheuseofbusiness‐orientedlanguageandimagery.
Yetanotherwaytointerpretthisbalancingactisasfindingthebalancebetween
deliveringexplanatoryoranalyticalconcepts.LivingInstituteendeavourstoavoidgivingthe
clientssimpleanswers,encouragingthemtoexploreandanalyzeforthemselves.Thereisno
guaranteetheclientswilluseanalyticalconceptsasintended,insteadviewingthemas
explanatoryexamples,aswehaveseenonseveraloccasionswherediscourseshavebeen
internalizedunreflexivelyandstereotypeshavebeentakenatfacevalue.
So,whataretheconsequencesfortheconceptofculture?WhileLivingInstituteprides
itselfonemployingacomplex,anthropologicalunderstandingofculture,muchofthe
complexityseemstogetlostduringitstransferaltotheclients.Culturebecomesmoreorless
synonymouswithnationalbelonging,overshadowingmostotherkindsofdifferencesand
belongings,alternativelyleadingtothemnotbeinginterpretedasculturallydependent.This
alsoobscuresthepotentialpowerrelationsresidingintheconceptofculture,turningcultural
differencesintomerequestionsofovercomingcommunicationproblems.Thefunctionalist
approachtocultureemployedbythecompanyfurtherreducesthisintospecificcategoriesof
differenceinnationalculture,meaningthatwearedifferentbutinthesameways.According
toÖhlander(2005),thisisawayofobjectifyingculture,turningitintoacategory
independentfromhumanexistence,whichisproblematicsinceitobscuresculture’s
contextualdependency.
Webelievethisreductionofmeaningtobehighlydependentonthebusinesscontextin
whichLivingInstituteoperates.Themessagehastobeadjustedtotherulesthatapplyinthe
businessworld,whichinmostcasesmeansithastobequicktoaccessandeasytoapply.To
retainaleveloftheoreticaldepth,LivingInstitutehaschosenthewayofthe“edutainer”,
creatingahybridofseriousproblemsandhilariousexamplesintheprocess.Theprominent
useofnationalcultureasasourceofexplanationislikelyalsoanoutcomeofthechallengeof
packaging,itbeinganuncontroversialsourceoffrictionthateveryonecanrecognizeandeven
laughat:“Oh,that’sjusttypicallyDanish!”Tobeappetizing,culturemustbeuseful,whileat
thesametimenotbeingthreateningandthusemphasisisputonthenationalandthewaysin
whichitmightcausearuckus.Thisalsoleadsustoanotherquestion:Iscultureacommodity
whereitispossibletoseparatecontentfromitswrappings?Theuseoftheclients’previous
experienceandemphasisoncreatingpositivenewonesasameansofconveyingcultural
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 70
knowledgeblursthelinebetweenmessageandenvelope,turningcultureintosomething
thatisexperiencedasmuchasitislearned.
Thefrequentuseoftheclients’ownexperiencesalsoturnsthemintoculturalbeings,
helpingthemseetheirownculturalbaggage.Tolearncultureisnot(only)tolearnaboutthe
wayspeoplediffer“overthere”,buttorecognizewealldifferandweallaresomewhat
peculiar.Whiledesigningthecoursesforeasyaccess,LivingInstituteseemstosteeraway
fromsimpleanswers,insteadstrivingtocultivatetheclients’curiosities.Bynotgivingallthe
answersandtellingthewholestory,thecompanyleavesspacesforinterpretationand
explorationopentotheclients.ThefinalandperhapsmostimportantthingLivingInstitute
doestocultureistoputitontheagenda.Byclaimingculturematters,thecompanymakesit
matter.Whilehelpingitsclientsreachculturalawareness,LivingInstituteinstillssomething
moreintothem,helpingthemnotonlytorecognizebutalsotoexploreandmanipulate
culturalfrictions,deliveringaculturalconfidenceofsorts.
Insights
FormerclientsofLivingInstitutehaveprovideduswithvaluableinsightsintotheir
experiencesbefore,duringandafterparticipatinginthecompany’strainingsessions.Wehave
analyzedandproblematizedthisinformationthroughoutthisthesisandaspartoftheprocess
wehavebeenabletoidentifyanumberofproblemareasandpotentialswebelieveare
relevantforthefuturedevelopmentofLivingInstitute.
Definingculture–TheconceptofcultureisatthecoreofLivingInstitute’senterprise.
Despitethis,thereseemstobesomeconfusionamongtheclientsastowhatcultureactually
meansandinwhatwaysitaffectsthem.WebelieveLivingInstitutewouldbenefitfromusing
aclearerandmoreinclusivedefinitionofculture,helpingtheclientsseeitisnotonly
nationalitythatinfluencesthemasculturalbeings.ThiswouldpotentiallyalsobroadenLiving
Institute’srangeofproducts.Sincethecompanydealsinculture,abroaderdefinitionwould
alsobeastatementforawiderrangeofcompetence.
Process,coachingandfollowups–Foralloftheclients,thetrainingreceivedfrom
LivingInstitutehasbeenthestartofapersonalororganizationalprocess.LivingInstitute
wouldbenefitfromimprovingitscapabilitytoharnessthiscatalyticeffect.Personalcoaching,
follow‐upmeetingsorprocessualworkwithentireorganizationsarecalledforandLiving
Instituteneedstomaketheclientsawaretheycanprovidetheseservices.Thiscouldrange
fromworkingwithfully‐fledgeddiversitymanagementtoopeningahotlineforcultural
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 71
emergencies.AcontinuouscollaborationwouldalsobeanopportunityforLivingInstitute
todeliveramorecomplexunderstandingofcultureovertime.
Culturalchampions–Manyoftheformerclientsturnintoculturalactivistsintheir
ownorganizations,becomingeverythingfromthedrivingforcebehindprocessesforcultural
changetotheco‐workers’culturalgo‐toguy.Couldthepromotionofculturalchampions
becomeaconsciousstrategyforLivingInstitute?Thetrainingdoesnotonlyinstill“cultural
consciousness”,but“culturalconfidence”,“culturalcreativity”andeven“culturalcourage”!By
makingthisevenclearertotheclients,LivingInstitute’sinfluencecouldreachanevenlarger
partoftheclient’sorganization.
ObservingInstitute–LivingInstituteisalreadyapplyingmethodsandtheoriesfrom
anthropology.Thiscouldbetakenastepfurtherthroughtheuseofquickethnography,
allowingforevenmoretightlytailoredproductssuitedtotheclients’needs.Direct
observationswouldallowLivingInstitutetoidentifytheproblemsthemselvesinsteadofonly
relyingonproblemdescriptionsfromclients.Adeeperrelationwiththeclients’organizations
wouldalsoallowLivingInstitutetoworkonabroaderscale,potentiallymovingbeyond
“culturalawareness”andintoimplementingsolutionsforentireorganizationsovertime.
DanishCrashCourse1,2,3–Someclientswanteasilyapplicablebusinesstools,
otherswanthelpwithsocialissuesandsomejustwanttounderstandwhatisgoingonaround
them.Itcanbehardtoencompassallneedsanddesiresinoneevent,especiallywhenthe
participants’previousexperiencesvary.Athree‐stepmodelDanishLivingCrashCourse
wouldallowtheclientstodecidetheirownlevelofengagement.Thefirststep,directedat
expatriatesfreshofftheplane,couldincludethebasicsfornavigatingDanishcultureand
business.Thesecondcouldbedirectedatclientscomingoutoftheir“honeymoon”,needinga
broaderculturalawarenesstodealwithincreasingfrictions.Thethirdwouldbetakenaftera
longerperiodoftime,onceinitialproblemshavebeenresolved,deliveringamorelong‐term
approachtolivinginaforeignculturalcontext.
Culturalmacaronipictures–AccordingtoRistilammi(2000)eventscontinuetoexist
byinscribingthemselvesintheparticipants’memories.Thiscanbeaidedbytheuseof
souvenirs,aphysicalobjectbecomingarecurringreminderofwhattheparticipanthas
learned.Inaway,LivingInstitutealreadydoesthisthroughtheuseoftheactionplan,butwe
believethiscouldbeimprovedfurther.Perhapstheclientscouldproducecultural“macaroni
pictures”,assemblingsomekindofphysicalobjecttheycantakehome,showtheirfamilyand
putuponthefridge.ThiscouldbeonewayforLivingInstitutetoretainapresence
throughouttheclient’sculturalawarenessprocess.
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 72
Applyingoneself
Needlesstosay,thewritingofthisthesishasbeenachallengingexperiencesincewe
ourselveshavebeenjugglinganumberofbalancingacts,themostprominentonebeingto
writeanacademicthesisatthesametimeastryingtocreateapplicableknowledgeforLiving
Institute.Obviously,thetwoarenotmutuallyexclusiveopposites,butattimesonepurpose
hasobscuredtheother.Inessence,itbecomesabalancebetweenbeingcriticalandbeing
creative,identifyingproblemsaswellaspotentials.“Applying”istoalargeextentaquestion
oftoningdownthescientificdiscoursewhileretainingtheknowledgecreatedthroughit.
Fromthisperspectivescientificvalidityalsobecomesamoreproblematicconcept.Ofcourse,
the“applying”shouldnotgoagainstscientificfindings,butonehasacertainfreedomof
interpretingconsequencesandsuggestingfuturecoursesofaction.
Asculturalanalysts,wearenaturallyinterestedinthewaysinwhichcultureisputto
use,especiallywhenitcarriestheanthropologicalconnotationsutilizedbyLivingInstitute.
Consequently,thisleadstoastingofdisappointmentwhenonefailstoseethepromised
complexityanditiseasytoappropriateacriticalstance.However,whencriticizingLiving
Institutefordeliveringasimplifiedconceptofcultureonemustalsorememberthiscriticism
comesfromabiasedposition.Asculturalanalystswehavehadseveralyearstodevelopour
culturalawarenessandweshouldknowbetterthananyonethatitisquitenaïvetobelievean
equallycomplexunderstandingofculturecanbetaughtandlearnedfromscratchduringan
hour,adayorevenaweek.Cultureandculturalawarenessareprocesses.WhatLiving
Institutedoesishelpinstigatethem.
Aswealreadyhavementioned,thisstudycouldhavebenefitedfromtheopportunityto
performparticipantobservationsintheclients’organizations.Theproblemtogainaccess
reflectssomeoftheissuesfacedbyLivingInstitute,demonstratingthechallengeoffindinga
placewithinthefast‐pacedworldofbusinessasanacademic.Directaccesswouldhavegiven
usabetterviewofhowculturalfrictionsaregeneratedintheirday‐to‐dayroutinesanda
deeperunderstandingofhowLivingInstitutecouldfitintotheseroutines.Closerobservation
wouldalsohaveallowedustoacquaintourselveswithhowtheclients’culturalskillsareput
intopractice,somethingwhichwecannotaddresswithcertaintyfromthedatawehave
collected.Therelationshipbetweenwhatpeoplesayandwhattheydoisoftencomplex,as
anthropologistDanielMiller(2001)pointsout.Often,thatwhichpeoplesayisfarmore
reflexiveandcriticalthanwhattheythenactuallydo.Ontheotherhand,onecouldarguethe
discourseofculturalawarenesstosomeextentisitspracticeandthatitisthroughlanguage
thatwecaninterpretandunderstandculture,asLivingInstitute’suseofparticipant
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 73
experiencesseemstoindicate.Nevertheless,inafuturestudyitwouldhavebeen
interestingtogetclosertothestudentsofinterculturalcommunication,especiallythe
expatriates,togainabetterunderstandingofhowcultureactuallyinfluencesthemandhow
theychosetotackletheseissues.FurtherstudiesofconsultanciessuchasLivingInstitute
wouldalsoberewarding,bothfortheconsultantsthemselvesandfromanacademicpointof
view.
InaccordancewithEhnandLöfgren(2009),webelievethereismuchtogainfroma
closerrelationshipbetweenacademiaandpracticingconsultantsandthatcollaborationhas
greatpotentialforthedevelopmentofnewskillsandmethods.Theutilitarianapproachto
theoryandmethodsonehastoadoptwhenapplyingacademicskillscanbeagoodreminder
oftheiractualpurpose—tohelpusmakesenseofthecomplexworldinwhichwelive.The
balancingactsLivingInstituteperformsarealsorelevanttoconsiderforanyonewantingto
applytheircultureanalyticalskillsoutsideofacademia.Strikingabalancebetween
theoreticaldepth,applicablesuggestions,methodologicalapproachesandrelevantlyadapted
communicationisnoeasytask,butitisonlybyconsciouslyperformingthesebalancingacts
thatwecanhopetoapplyourselveswhileretainingtheperspectivesthatmakeusunique.
Thereis,however,africtionbetweentheworldofacademiaandthatofconsultancy,
especiallyinthefieldofinterculturalcommunication.Thedisciplineseemstohavelosttouch
withitsanthropologicalrootsatthesametimeasanthropologistsseemunwillingto
contributetothediscussion,asDahlén(1997),Larsson(2010)andtheseniorconsultantall
pointout.Onereasonforthis,accordingtoHannerz(1996),mightbetheomnipresenceof
culture,resultingina“devaluation”oftheconceptandthusaneedto“guard”theirown
definitions.Thelackofanthropologistsandotherculturalanalystsparticipatinginthedebate
ordevelopmentofthefielddoesnotseemtobeaveryconstructiveapproach.Ifproponentsof
aconstructivistapproachtoculturesteerclearofthefield,thefunctionalistapproachisleft
unchallengedtodefinethewaysinwhichculturalawarenessistaught.Aswehaveshownin
thisthesis,theteachingofculturebringswithitmanyproblems—butaswealongwithLiving
Institutehopetohaveproven,thereismuchthatculturalanalysiscancontributetothefield
ofinterculturalcommunication.Afterall,weallagreethatculturematters.Thequestionis
justwhogetstodefinewhatthatmeans.
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 74
References
Alsmark,G.(1997).Inledning.InG.Alsmark(Ed.)Skjortaellersjäl?:kulturellaidentiteteritidochrum.Lund:StudentlitteraturArnstberg,K‐O.(1997).Fältetnologi.Stockholm:CarlssonsBokförlag.Bourdieu,P.(1999).Praktisktförnuft:bidragtillenhandlingsteori.Göteborg:Daidalos.Czarniawska,B.(1998).Anarrativeapproachtoorganizationstudies.ThousandOaks,Calif.;Sage.Dahlén,T.(1997).Amongtheinterculturalists:Anemergentprofessionanditspackagingofknowledge(Doctoraldissertation,StockholmUniversity,1997).Davies,C.(2008).ReflexiveEthnography:Aguidetoresearchingselvesandothers.London:Routledge.deLosReyes,P.&Martinsson,L.(2005).Olikhetensparadigm:Intersektionellaperspektivpåo(jämn)likhetesskapande.Lund:Studentlitteratur.duGay,P.,&Pryke,M.(2002).Culturaleconomy:anintroduction.InP.duGuy&M.Pryke(Eds.),CulturalEconomy.London:SAGEPublicationLtd.Ehn,B.,&Löfgren,O.(2001.)Kulturanalys:Ettetnologisktperspektiv.Malmö:GleerupsUtbildingAB.Ehn,B.,&Löfgren,O.(2009).Ethnographyinthemarketplace.CultureUnbound,1,31–49.RetrievedMay8,2010,fromhttp://www.cultureunbound.ep.liu.se/v1/a04/Fägerborg,E.(1999).”Intervjuer”.InL.Kaijser,&M.Öhlander(Eds.)Etnologisktfältarbete.Lund:Studentlitteratur.Geertz,C.(1973).TheInterpretationofCultures:Selectedessays.NewYork:BasicBooks.Gemzöe,L.(2003).Feminism:Stockholm:BildaFörlag.GoldschmidtSalamonK.L.(2005).Possessedbyenterprise.InO.Löfgren&R.Willim(Eds.)Magic,CultureandtheNewEconomy.NewYork:Berg.Hall,E.T.(1973).Thesilentlanguage:Ananthropologistrevealshowwecommunicatebyourmannersandbehavior.NewYork:AnchorPress/Doubleday.Hannerz,U.(1996).Transnationalconnections:Culture,people,places.London:Routledge.Hofstede,G.(2001).Culturesconsequences:Comparingvalues,behaviors,institutionsandorganizationsacrossnations(2nded.).ThousandOaks,Calif:SagePublicationsInc.Hofstede,G.,&Hofstede,G.J.(2005).Culturesandorganizationssoftwareofthemind:Interculturalcooperationanditsimportanceforsurvival(2nded.).NewYork:McGraw‐Hill.
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 75
Hofstede,G.J.,&Pedersen,P,.&Hofstede,G.(2002)Exploringculture:Excersises,stories,andsyntheticcultures.Yarmouth,ME:InterculturalPress.Jackson,M.(2005).Existentialanthropology:Events,exigencies,andeffects.NewYork:BerghahnBooks.Kandola,R.,&Fullerton,J.(1998).Diversityinaction:Managingmosaic(2nded.).London:CharteredInstituteofPersonnelandDevelopment,CIPDHouse.Larsson,I.(2010).Attbyggabroaroverkulturgränser:OmSvenskarskommunikationmedicke‐svenskarvidarbeteutanförSverige(Doctoraldissertation,LundUniversity,2010).LéonRosales,R.(2005).Likhetstecknetslogik.InM.Öhlander(Ed.)Bruketavkultur:Hurkulturanvändsochgörssocialtverksamt.Lund:Studentlitteratur.Löfgren,O.&Willim,R.(2005).Introduction:TheMandrakeMode.InO.Löfgren&R.Willim(Eds.)Magic,CultureandtheNewEconomy.NewYork:Berg.MacKinnon,C.(1982).Feminism,Marxism,methodandthestate:Anagendafortheory.Signs.JournalofWomeninCultureandSociety(Vol.7,no.31).Miller,D.(2001).Thedialecticsofshopping.Chigaco:UniversityofChigacoPress.Moeran,B.(2005).Thebusinessofethnography:Strategicexchanges,people,andorganizations.Oxford:Berg.MorBarak,E.M.(2005)Managingdiversity:Towardagloballyinclusiveworkplace.California:SagePublications.O’Dell,T.(2005).Experiencescapes.InT.O’Dell,&P.Billing(Eds.)Experiencescapes:Tourism,cultureandeconomy.Copenhagen:CopenhagenBusinessSchool.O’Dell,T.(2009).What’stheuseofculture?CultureUnbound,1,15–29.RetrievedMay8,2010,fromhttp://www.cultureunbound.ep.liu.se/v1/a04/Palmenfelt,U.(2000).Perspektivpånarrativitet.InU.Palmenfelt(Ed.)Aspekterpånarrativitet.Åbo:NNFPublications.Ray,L.,&SayerA.(1999).Cultureandeconomyaftertheculturalturn.London:Sage.Ristilammi,M.(2000).Culturalbridges,events,andthenewregion.InP‐O.Berg,&A.Linde‐Laursen,&O.Löfgren(Eds.)Invokingatransnationalmetropolis.Lund:Studentlitteratur.Skeggs,B.(1997)Attblirespektabel.Uddevalla:BokförlagetDaidalos.Sunderland,P.,&Denny,R.(2007)Introduction.InP.Sunderland,&R.Denny(Eds.)Doinganthropologyinconsumerresearch.WalnutCreek:WestCoastPress,INC.Trompenaars,F.,&Hampden‐Turner,C.(1998).Ridingthewavesofculture:Understandingdiversityinglobalbusiness(2nded.).NewYork:McGraw‐Hill.
StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 76
Wrench,J.(2007).Diversitymanagementanddiscrimination:ImmigrantsandethicminoritiesinEU.Hampshire:AshgatePublishingLimited.WintherJørgensen,M.&Phillips,L.(2000).Diskursanalyssomteoriochmetod.Lund:Studentlitteratur.Öhlander,M.(1999).Deltagandeobservation.InL.Kaijser,&M.Öhlander(Eds.)Etnologisktfältarbetet.Lund:Studentlitteratur.Öhlander,M.(2005).Inledning.InM.Öhlander(Ed.)Bruketavkultur:Hurkulturanvändsochgörssocialtverksamt.Lund:Studentlitteratur.SourcesontheInternetLivingInstitute’swebsiteonculturalawarenessfromhttp://www.livinginstitute.com/kurser_intercultural_crash_en.php