Communication is all about involvement.

In our instant messaging hi-tech world it’s too easy to overlook that.

When approaching cultures or subcultures (anyone here come from a family?) that are even a little bit traditional–communication is about lasting involvement.

Rudyard Kipling was definitely onto something when he observed in verse how some Westerners–in particular–come with their grandiose plans to get quick results in the East.

Now it is not good for the Christian’s health to hustle the Aryan brown,

For the Christian riles, and the Aryan smiles and he weareth the Christian down;

And the end of the fight is a tombstone white with the name of the late deceased,

And the epitaph drear: “A Fool lies here who tried to hustle the East.”

The Naulahka

In anything but a very modernized culture (whether it be American, Chinese, Saudi, whatever), it takes time to develop trust. Lots of time. Words are seen as cheap. Actions matter. Lots of actions over lots of time. Character distills trust.

That’s why some of the most effective expats in Asia are “Old Asia hands.” Not all are. Some have 40 years in Asia with one year of Asia experience. Without cultural awareness and intelligence, some manage to relive the same cultural assumptions and blunders over and over like repeatedly watching old shows on Hits TV.

But with a sustained learner’s posture that gets you out of your cultural bubble and involved with diverse people, plus curiosity leading toward awareness, occasional coaching and a lot of persistence, you have a fair shot at surprising your peers and becoming one of those most effective intercultural people.

You dare not stir the pot too vigrously without engaging local, very local, knowledge. A case study will help you see this . . .

The Asian Financial Crisis of 1997-1998 threw SE Asia into serious instability. President (evidently-for-life) Suharto of Indonesia had governed for over three decades. But with economic turmoil felt by the masses a gutsy university professor announced that he would lead a “million man march” on the presidential palace to force change. He did everyone the favor of announcing the date many weeks ahead of time.

It was great to have that much heads up time. But it gave companies lots of time to build angst over what would happen to their staff when the country melted into anarchy.

One organization had recently managed a nail-biting crisis in Rwanda. After hesitating to order their staff to evacuate, they waited until it was too late to be done with any comfort. Their people ended up exiting in military Land Rovers mounted with heavy machine guns, fully expecting to run into deadly ambushes along the exit route. This experience made HQ staff uneasy about waiting to order the next evacuation.

Then, leading up to the last days before the march, multiple major US news channels accounced that they US Embassy in Jakarta was ordering all American citizens to evacuate the country on the day before the march. Only, that was not quite true. The embassy was ordering all its citizens within the cities of Jakarta and Surabaya to evacuate, but not those living elsewhere.

Jim was a team leader directing Americans who were living outside those cities. He received firm instructions from his company HQ in Colorado to evacuate his team.

Yet, when he and many other Americans who were bonded tightly with the culture gauged the mood where they lived and worked, it didn’t seem likely to become dangerous. It had felt dangerous, but almost inexplicably the mood on the street had settled down to an unanticipated calm.

Jim was in a bit of dilemma. He needed to be compliant with orders. But his deep local knowledge told him this was probably not the best decision from his superiors. He reflected on the fact that his boss, like him, had worked for the military in former careers. He wrote a quick communication to his boss. “Is this to be an organized or a disorganized retreat?”

I’ve never been in the military, but Jim tells me that it is the dread of every military commander to be remembered for ever calling for a disorganized retreat. After a pause, a reply came back from his HQ. “Make it an organized retreat. How long will you need?”

Jim made a bunch of calls and a lot of planning. He replied, “For an organized reteat we need two weeks.” Perhaps reluctantly, because this would put them past the flash point of the march on the presidential palace–his boss agreed.”

The night before the march a brave presidential confidant approached and convinced Suharto to do the unthinkable–to resign. To everyone’s utter shock, he did. There were very violent riots against the relatively wealthy Chinese in Jakarta, and some in Surabaya and against businesses owned by Suharto’s family. But then things calmed down.

Locals appreciated those who stuck with them through their hard time. Expats who stayed, and avoided those localized riots, were very glad they did.

Leaders at HQ made what seemed like a due diligence command decision. But they also listened to their good people on the ground. That interaction resulted in a positive result.

Once again, any decision uninfomed by first-hand, very local knowledge, is almost always a fumbled decision.

How does managing a team overseas in crisis change when directors have unique knowledge that the people on the ground simply don’t have access to?

Before reading this, it’s really vital that you engage the previous case study found here. https://www.culturerays.com/what-is-ecoaching-and-how-does-it-work/

In the previous case study from Indonesia when Suharto fell from power, confusion reigned.

When the US Embassy ordered American citizens in two major cities to evacuate the day before a mass march on the presidential palace, and US news outlets reported it as a blanket order for all Americans throughout the country–I was rattled. My family and colleagues did not live in either of the two cities where the order applied. But we lived a two hour drive from one of the airports. The vibe on the street seemed safe. Should we evacuate, or not?

I called the US Consulate, described my dilemma and asked for advice.

The diplomat said, “May I speak frankly?”

“Sure!”

Then angrily he exclaimed, “We here in the US Consulate have no idea why Secretary of State Albright ordered this evacuation. We didn’t see any need for it. The Embassy in Jakarta didn’t ask for it. We’re already on a skeleton staff with not enough people to do routine work, much less arrange a mass evacuation of every American in these two major cities. What’s she thinking?! We have no idea why she gave this order!”

“So, if you sense that you’re safer hunkering down in your home, and that it might actually be more dangerous exposing your friends and family on the road to the airport, then we in the Consulate are not going to tell you that you have to evacuate. We’re not telling you what to do either say–you’ve got to decide and the results are on you. But that’s the best we can tell you because we have no idea who someone at the top made this decision!”

My family stayed, hunkered down for a couple days in our home watching marathon movies, until it was clear that the crisis had passed, and we could go out and about again.

It seemed a classic example of high management overreach into things they didn’t know enough about. They should have just gone with what their diplomats on the ground were telling them–first hand, local knowledge.

But then, month later a piece came out on Stratfor.com. Something had happened that my colleagues and I–pretty embedded in the local culture, and even the US Embassy, could not possibly know. Madeline Albright had received NSA signal intelligence that cadres of Indonesian generals were laying concrete plans to make a full military takeover of the government. They were about to go to civil war–particularly in Jakarta and Surabaya. She knew that, couldn’t reveal her source without letting the Indonesian military know that she could evesdrop on their conversations. So she made the call.

Which all goes to encourage humility. No matter how well you embed yourself into a culture and are able to read its pulse on the street, and no matter how savvy you may think you are as a diplomat or other professional expert, there’s always the possibility that now and then someone far away in the “ivory tower” knows something you don’t know and just might be making a rational call.

So, even if you’re the high CQ professional in the field, check your assumptions, and still listen to others. They may just know something you don’t know.