WEST meets EAST A story of

American & Korean Engineers

By Wiggly Ears

Who formWiggly Ears?

Overview• The Case

• Analysis• Task-oriented vs. Relationship-oriented

• Monochronic vs Polychronic

• 6D model

• Politeness

• Lingua Franca

• Team Formation & Commitment

• Conclusions

The Case

The CaseWho?

Two American/Indian Engineers:

• Senior Staff Engineer

• Senior Engineer: Linux Kernel

Korean clients and Engineers

When and Where?

December 2014 in Seoul, Korea

The CaseWhat?

• Solving issues related to kernel code (central part a system) for a chipset.

• Working styles were very different and this created conflicts and weakened relationships.

How?

• American/Indian engineers felt undermined and unacknowledged.

• Korean clients & engineers were only focused on prompt results.

Animosity IndifferenceBursts of

anger

Analysis

Polychronic vs Monochronic

Relationship-Oriented vs Task-Oriented

Relationship-Oriented vs Task-Oriented

Relationship-Oriented Task-OrientedEmphasis on interaction facilitation Emphasis on work facilitation

Focus on relationships, well-being and motivation

Focus on structure, roles and tasks

Foster positive relationships is a priority Produce desired results is a priority

Emphasis on team members and communication within

Emphasis on goal setting and a clear plan to achieve goals

Communication facilitation, casual interactions and frequent team meetings

Strict use of schedules and step-by-step plans, and a punishment/incentive system

Polychronic time vs Monochronic time

P- time M-timeConcentrate on an event happening around them

Concentrate on a task set before them

Are committed to people and relationships Are committed to the job and end results

Change plans often and easily Dedicate themselves to plansAre more concerned with community and shared connections

Are more concerned with privacy and individual ownership

Have strong tendency to build lifetime, familial relationships

Have strong tendency to build temporary, practical relationships

Hofstede’s 6D Model

Hofstede’s 6D model

40

91

62

46

26

6860

18

39

85

100

29

US Korea

Trust

• Working effectively as a team requires trust

• Trust in a collectivist culture

• Individualistic culture has looser relationships

“When the Koreans, visited India for a few weeks, they never even tried Indian food there. They found a Korean delivery and just ordered that.”

“Not recognizing that they have a

team of specialists here to help them

and complete disregard to

include us in the discussion”

KoreaObey rules

No small talk

Stick to time

Important power distance

Humble

Please crowd

Politeness

Forgetting being polite easily affects the

whole group

“The American traveling with me would always try to make conversation with them during lunch and he was ignored after a few questions and

they would continue talking in Korean amongst themselves”

USWill bend rules if necessary

Express themselves freely

Tolerate

Lingua Franca

Lingua Franca

• Lingua franca of the work group is English

• Koreans start English in age 10, but start speaking it later

• In Korea, university courses are in Korean, not in English (workplaces in Korean also)

• In India, most of the courses in the universities are in English. And the Indian had been living in the US for six years

• American person might have used expressions that are not familiar to the Koreans

“How do you expect us to solve your problems when you're

talking in a language we don’t understand...?”

Team formation & Commitment

Work team

Work group

Team Formation & CommitmentFacts:

• No previous communication

• No team bonding activities.

• Teams worked independently

Disadvantages of multicultural teams [Adler (2002)]

• Miscommunication

• Less interaction

• Language Problems

• Stress

Forming

Storming

Norming

Performing

• Meetings• Staff manager

(Leader)

• Clear goals• Disagreements

but no solutions

Team Formation & Commitment

• Recognize themselves as a distinct unit or department

• Actually work INDEPENDENTLY OF EACH OTHER to achieve their organizational goals

Work team

Work group

• May come from DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS within a business

• COLLABORATE TOGETHER to achieve some set purpose, goal or project.

• Attitudinal Commitment • Attitude towards the organization

• Identify with the goals and values of the organization

• Maintain their membership to the organization

• Continuance Commitment• Calculative attitude towards the organization

• Membership based on economic reasons, prior investments or lack of alternatives available

Team Formation & Commitment

“We were there to help the customers from our company, so we couldn't just get up and

walk out saying ’I’m done’, specially when the customer VP asks you to stay a little

longer...”

Conclusions

Conclusions• There needs to be trust between team members

• Rules of engagement are desired to avoid conflicts

• Knowing about the culture before going to a place is desired (smaller cultural shock)

• Go through all the stages of the team formation process

• Communicating and interacting more (before, during and after)

Thank you!

References1. Anzalone, Chris. "Differences between Task-Oriented Leaders & Relational-Oriented Leaders".

Demand Media. Retrieved 3 November 2012. 2. Manktelow, James. "Leadership Style". Mind Tools. Retrieved 2 November 2012.3. Differences Between Group Work & Team Work http://

smallbusiness.chron.com/differences-between-group-work-team-work-11004.html 4. Work team trust and effectiveness http://

www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/004834803104883605. Affective, Calculative and Normative Commitment: An Assessment of Relationship http

://www.wrbrpapers.com/static/documents/September/2012/7.%20Tommy.pdf 6. The Hofstede Centre http://www.geert-hofstede.com7. Trust and Reputation for Collectivist Cultures

http://www.bic-trust.eu/files/2012/10/BIC-trust-and-culture-SA.pdf