Hi, it’s David Ecklund from DavidEcklund.com. Welcome to Resilient Legacy Expat Dad Coaching and one of our Culture Chats. Today, we’re in the library, and we’ll continue our discussion on The Culture Map by Erin Meyer. In the last chat, we covered the first two of the eight cultural dimensions: Communicating and Evaluating. Today, we’ll dive into the next two dimensions: Leading and Deciding.
Leading: Egalitarian vs. Hierarchical
The first cultural dimension we’ll discuss today is Leading, which spans from egalitarian to hierarchical leadership styles. Now, this can be a bit deceptive because it seems fashionable to claim to be egalitarian. If you ask people straight out what leadership style they prefer, they will often say “egalitarian.”
However, when you really drill down and ask more specific questions—like what qualities they prefer in a boss in certain situations—you’ll start to see very pronounced differences. For example, in East Asia or Nigeria, the boss tends to be more “God-like” compared to the more egalitarian leadership styles in Scandinavian countries.
Power Distance: A Historical Perspective
This idea of power distance—the gap between various levels of hierarchy—is deeply rooted in history. Take the Vikings, for example. While they were known for imposing their will on the societies they plundered, they were surprisingly egalitarian within their own ranks. Hundreds of years later, this is still reflected in the highly egalitarian Scandinavian societies.
You can see similar patterns across Europe. In areas where the Roman Empire ruled, and later where Catholicism took hold with its hierarchical structure, societies tend to be more hierarchical. Meanwhile, in regions influenced by Protestantism—where the individual’s relationship with religious texts bypassed the church’s hierarchy—you find more egalitarian tendencies.
Hierarchical Leadership Across Europe
Here’s an impressive statistic that illustrates this cultural divide within Europe. A study asked respondents whether they agreed with the statement: “It is important for a manager to have precise answers to most of the questions that subordinates may raise about their work.”
The results were striking. In Sweden, only 7% agreed, while in Spain, close to 60% did—almost ten times more! This stark difference highlights the significant variations in leadership expectations across cultures, even within Europe.
Level-Hopping: A Key Indicator of Hierarchical vs. Egalitarian Societies
One final note on leadership before we move on to the topic of Deciding: consider the concept of “level-hopping.” In some cultures, it’s acceptable to bypass a direct superior and communicate with someone two levels above or below you. If this is allowed, you’re likely in a more egalitarian society. In more hierarchical cultures, this would be frowned upon, and you need to adhere strictly to the chain of command.
So, if you’re in a hierarchical society, be mindful of this. Always check the proper protocol before reaching out to someone up or down the chain.
Deciding: Top-Down vs. Consensus-Based Decision Making
Now let’s talk about Deciding. It’s important to note that decision-making styles can differ even within hierarchical and egalitarian societies. For example, a more hierarchical society might lean towards top-down decision-making, while a more egalitarian society may prefer consensus-based decisions.
However, there are exceptions. Japan, for instance, is both highly hierarchical and heavily consensus-based. This creates a unique system where decisions are made through consensus, despite the significant power distance in the hierarchy.
Decision-Making in Germany vs. the U.S.
I have more experience with Germany, where I live, and I can tell you that it’s relatively hierarchical compared to America. However, Germany is also more consensus-based than the U.S. In Germany, your boss isn’t just your buddy; there’s a clear distance. But at the same time, decisions are not made unilaterally. The boss makes sure to get everyone’s buy-in before making a decision.
Once that decision is made, it’s final—what we like to call a “Decision with a capital D.” Everyone is expected to execute without question and stay the course.
U.S. Decision-Making: Dynamic and Fast-Paced
In contrast, decision-making in America is much more dynamic. Decisions are often made on the fly, and there’s less emphasis on gathering consensus upfront. The reasoning is that circumstances can change so rapidly, making it difficult to predict what will happen in the long term. This flexibility allows leaders to adjust their decisions as new information arises, which fits the younger, less stable history of the United States compared to Germany.
Conclusion: Decision-Making Styles Around the World
This difference between capital “D” decisions in places like Germany and more flexible, provisional decisions in America highlights the cultural nuances in decision-making. Understanding these cultural dimensions can help you navigate leadership and decision-making more effectively in various parts of the world.
I hope you found this discussion useful! I’ll see you in the next Culture Chat.