January 29, 2025 • 47 mins
Around 70% of most change initiatives are unsuccessful in organizations around the world. How can we create organizations that have the agility to successfully create real change?
Join us as Marco Blankenburgh, International Director of KnowledgeWorkx, shares his insights into how agility has shifted from sports and military roots to a key component in business leadership and development. Together, Marco and Shelley explore the significance of collaborative cultures inspired by sports teams and military units, and the journey of agility's integration into business, especially in project management and software development, while tackling the real challenges of change management in the corporate world.
The conversation takes a cultural spin, navigating the complexities of implementing agile methods across diverse global landscapes. Cultural interpretations of agility can vary dramatically—sometimes even clashing with established hierarchical structures and traditional leadership roles. Dive into discussions on what truly defines a healthy organization beyond Western-centric norms, and the impact of different organizational structures on productivity and effectiveness. The episode untangles the assumptions tied to organizational health and their influence on agility implementation across various cultural contexts.
In a world where organizations are increasingly global, Intercultural Agility becomes indispensable. Learn from real-world examples how businesses have adapted their processes to respect cultural nuances, ensuring global success. Marco and Shelley discuss the "two spotlights approach" for fostering agile cultures, emphasizing the need for collaboration and creating pockets of success as catalysts for broader cultural change. With insights from John King's book "Tribal Leadership," discover how transitioning from competitive to collaborative modes propels organizations to the "we" level where true agility thrives. Join us to unlock strategies for building agile, culturally aware organizations ready to conquer the global stage.
| In this episode, you will learn:
-- About the linguistic and cultural issues that need to be taken into account when developing an agile environment.
-- The role of hierarchy within agile systems: directed vs directive destiny.
-- How to gauge when your organization has 'global DNA' and is ready to take on other geographies.
| Learn More about:
-- Global Leadership - How to Become a Culturally Agile Leader
-- How Global is Your Company's DNA?
-- Looking for a book to take your cultural agility to the next step, check out the Ultimate Intercultural Question Book brought to you by KnowledgeWorkx.com
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Marco Blankenburgh (00:00):
And just be ruthlessly honest, because the
reality is, if you have a supercompetitive organization, you're
not likely to become agileanytime soon, because people are
not collaborating, theorganization is not set up for
collaboration and therefore thewe stage will not be achieved.
And that's where agility reallyshows up.
(00:21):
And I've seen that on sportsteams.
Where agility really shows up.
And I've seen that on sportsteams.
I've seen it in the military,with special forces, where
everybody knew how to jump inwhen something went wrong,
everybody could rely on oneanother to have each other's
back, to have the skills and thecompetencies to take over if
necessary.
Welcome to the Cultural AgilityPodcast, where we explore the
(01:03):
stories of some of the mostadvanced intercultural
practitioners from around theworld to help you become
culturally agile and succeed intoday's culturally complex world
.
I'm your host, marcoBlankenberg, international
Director of KnowledgeWorks,where every day, we help
individuals and companiesachieve relational success in
that same complex world.
Shelley Reinheart (01:32):
Welcome to the Unlocking Cultural Agility
podcast.
We are here today with MarcoBlankenberg, International
Director of KnowledgeWorks.
Marco, welcome.
Marco Blankenburgh (01:43):
Thank you.
Shelley Reinheart (01:44):
Glad to have you.
We're going to talk today aboutinterculturally agile cultures,
what they are, how to buildthem, how they can be
troublesome, and I'd love tostart off with just talking
about the word agility.
Marco Blankenburgh (02:02):
What is?
Shelley Reinheart (02:03):
it.
Why does it keep popping up?
Marco Blankenburgh (02:06):
Yeah, it's a word that's quite important in
organizations organizationaldevelopment, consulting work,
working with leaders and teamsand I think most of it has to do
with the fact that we live in acrazy world.
Yes we do.
There is a lot of change in ourworld.
There is rapid change andthere's a lot of forces at play.
(02:27):
There's geopolitical forces,there is climate, there is
artificial intelligencegenerative AI, some people say,
will be with us for the publicin the next five years, which
will turn everything upside down.
So companies, organizations,are struggling with never-ending
(02:47):
change, and that's where theword agility comes up.
So how do you stay agile in thatcrazy environment?
How do you run projects in thatenvironment?
Because you might have abeautiful project plan, but then
you start implementing andthings change before you're
finished.
So you need agility in projectmanagement.
(03:10):
You can't just do contingencyplanning as in if this happens,
we will do that, and if thathappens, we do something else,
because things come out of leftfield, as they say in sports,
and you need to be creative,agile enough to deal with it.
And that requires a wholedifferent way of thinking about
(03:30):
agility as leaders.
So the leader as a person needsto be almost wired in a
different way, and they need tothen lead teams and
organizations and projects in anagile way, and there's lots of
debate about what that actuallymeans, and what competencies,
(03:51):
skills, abilities do you thenneed to develop as a result?
Shelley Reinheart (03:54):
of that?
Yeah, yes, I can see that.
Yeah, so where does agilityeven come from the word itself,
and what's the history of how weuse the word?
Marco Blankenburgh (04:06):
Yeah, I'm not necessarily the expert on it
, but yeah, when you go back, itcame originally out of the
world of sports.
So the physical version ofagility and you can see that in
famous athletes, their grace andtheir ability to have their
whole body in sync.
It's always beautiful to watchand that's where the word agile
(04:28):
comes from, as well as themilitary.
So being able to be agile onthe battlefield or in in
military operations especiallythis, the special forces which
I'm familiar with are is eachperson in in the unit able to
take a variety of roles.
Can they even take the lead ifnecessary?
(04:50):
Could they?
If things go really bad, couldthey run solo?
So that's where agility alsocomes into play.
And from there it got into thebusiness world.
So in the 60s, 70s, especiallyin Japan, it got connected to
incremental improvement.
So the Kaizen method, six Sigma, came out of that.
(05:14):
And the interesting thing isSix Sigma has a belt system.
So if you're a black belt inSix Sigma, you really know how
to take an organization, look atit very carefully and make it
more agile, make it betterincrementally.
And from there it got into thesoftware development world.
(05:35):
So in the world of software,especially in the early days.
I still remember I had to codein university and even the
simple coding I was doing was afew thousand lines already.
Now imagine if you have to codebig, complicated software
products and you discover a fewthousand lines in that you made
(05:59):
a mistake.
How do you go back?
So how do you do softwaredevelopment in an agile way?
And that's where agile scrumscame from and taking pieces of
code that can be removed andadded, and ways to make sure
that mistakes are caught early.
So there's a whole system inplace now that gets ever better,
(06:22):
especially now with AI, andfrom there it really got into
the business world.
So project management I alreadymentioned that that had to
become more agile but also thenin running the organization as a
whole.
So a big problem that peopledeal with today is change.
Out of most change initiatives,give or take, 70% are not
(06:46):
successful, and very often it'seither that the culture is not
taken into account we might comeback to that later on or it's
because they still think thatthey can design a change plan
and run with the change plan andthat there's only small changes
that they need to make, whichin today's world is typically
not true.
So that's how.
(07:06):
Agile transformation, agileproject management, agile
strategy implementation all arebuzzwords that people are using
now in the business world.
Shelley Reinheart (07:20):
Yeah, Okay, so it's been around for a while
used in different ways.
What about in other languages?
Marco Blankenburgh (07:27):
Yeah, that's a bit of a challenge.
Yeah, how's it translated?
I still remember we ran aproject that was a
transformation project for oneof the big airlines and the word
agile came up and this airlinehas over 170 nationalities
working for them.
So we were asked to put thelanguage around the culture
(07:50):
transformation in place.
And when we started askingpeople about the word agile,
what ideas come to mind?
And for some languages it isindeed that athletic ability, so
it sounds positive.
If my team is more athleticallycapable, quote-unquote, it's
(08:11):
good for our business, notphysically, but quote-unquote.
Athletically as a team Can weebb and flow and flex and
quickly change gears or changedirection.
But then other languages, itbecame problematic.
So in some languages the wordagile can be seen as evasive,
(08:36):
you know dodging, so that is notnecessarily a good thing.
So if you look at languages inthe Middle Eastern region so
Dari, farsi, arabic very oftenit's linked to gracefulness.
So it's not the agility of agazelle per se, but it's the
(09:01):
grace of a leader who stridesinto the room and who is
deliberate and present, hasauthority, and that's a very
different word.
It doesn't relate to what wetypically think about in English
when we use the word agility,so it's not always easy to
(09:23):
translate.
And then leaders say, no, Ican't be seen as being agile.
That's for young people.
You know, I'm a graciousstatesman or stateswoman and I
need to be seen that way.
The other thing is that leadersmight see agility as something
(09:46):
that doesn't add to theirposition of power or their
position of honor.
So they need to be seen asdeliberate, thoughtful.
Typically also linked to it isthis idea that I already know
where we want to go and Icontinuously say that to the
(10:06):
people around me.
Agility could create thatimpression that I need to be
able to say team, we've got aproblem and I don't quite know
how to deal with it, let'sfigure it out together.
And that way of dealing withagility is in many cultures but
not is frowned upon by leadersand it might give the leader a
(10:31):
low credibility rating, forinstance.
There's also a dilemma thathierarchical organizations
typically find it hard to beagile in the way that it's
typically explained.
So if you have hierarchy andyou want to be super agile, then
(10:52):
it becomes really difficult tomove the agility up the
hierarchical chain and thenquickly back down again.
So those organizations thereare other ways to also become
agile, but it often has to dowith different listening
functions that they need tocreate in the organization to
still have information flow upand down very quickly so that
(11:13):
decision making can be sped up.
But the quote unquote Westernway of thinking about agility is
often frowned upon if theorganization is more
hierarchical and and that linksit directly to power.
So agility automatically meansthat I need to give you a chance
(11:34):
to figure things out and to dothings your way.
So by default it it involvesempowerment, and some leaders
just don't want to let go.
So true, they just want to holdthe reins, they want to sign
all the checks, so to say, andthey want to be in charge of all
(11:55):
the ideation and thedecision-making.
And that's why, in what we calldirected destiny environments
versus directive destiny.
So directed destiny, the bosstells you what to do, and, and
that's where the idea of agilityoften is frowned upon.
So it there's cultural issues,there's linguistic issues, uh,
(12:18):
that need to be taken intoaccount yes, that's very clear
now.
Shelley Reinheart (12:24):
Yes, you know .
So we can talk about agileorganizations, but how do we
even just backtracking a second?
How do we talk about healthyorganizations?
How do we think about a healthyorganization even before
agility?
Marco Blankenburgh (12:45):
Yeah, I think that's a really important
question because, to be honest,although I'm a white-faced
European from Dutch descent,I've lived internationally for
30 years now and have tried tolearn from the 70 countries that
I've worked in.
But at the same time, it'sreally true that our definition
(13:06):
of a healthy organization is, atleast in the theory books and
in the assessments that havebeen created.
That definition is largely aWestern definition.
It's the Western way ofthinking about leadership, the
Western way of thinking abouthow organizations should run.
(13:26):
What is a healthy culture?
What's an unhealthy culture?
That, by and large, stilldrives most of the theory and it
drives most of the thinkingbehind the organizational health
assessments that have beencreated.
And that's an issue.
(13:49):
So, for instance, to make thatcome alive, like is it true, for
instance, that if anorganization has a flatter
structure that they are likelyto be more agile.
Is hierarchy an enemy of agility?
And that doesn't have to betrue.
And that doesn't have to betrue Is having a voice, so
creating agency in the system ofthe organization, which is a
(14:16):
more directive destiny way ofthinking about things is that
necessarily better.
Or is being told what to do?
Does that make you lessproductive, as having your own
thoughts turn into an action andthen you follow through on that
action Is that more productive?
And when you look at theresearch, that's inconclusive.
Shelley Reinheart (14:40):
Those are all good questions.
Marco Blankenburgh (14:42):
Yeah, and a lot of the organizational health
thinking makes assumptions onthose things and that becomes a
problem can sometimes be moreproductive than cultures where
(15:06):
you have a directive, destiny,orientation, where people are
always part of thedecision-making process.
They create their own wayforward, they bring their voice
to the group and they have tohave their say, which sometimes
can actually grind things to ahalt.
Shelley Reinheart (15:21):
I've seen it happen, yeah, sometimes can
actually grind things to a halt.
Marco Blankenburgh (15:24):
I've seen it happen, yeah.
So yeah, those are all thingsthat play a role in thinking
about what is a healthyorganization, and a big thing
that plays into that is how webuild trust, and that's maybe
something you know.
We have a great podcast ontrust.
How do you build trust within ahierarchy?
How do you build trust within ahierarchy?
(15:44):
How do you build trust within aflatter organizational
structure?
And I've heard people say Iimplicitly trust my boss and I
love working for my boss and ifmy boss tells me to do something
, I just go and do it because Ican trust my boss.
And if you have that type ofrelationship, it's great.
(16:05):
And I've seen the same withteachers, where teachers give
their pupils instructions andthere's a good trust
relationship.
The pupil loves to get thatinstruction from the teacher and
move on it.
So there are quite a fewassessments around that try to
measure organizational healthand they're beautiful
(16:27):
assessments.
But digging into them andfinding well, what assumptions
are they actually making?
And fortunately ourintercultural framework allows
us to find those assumptionsrelatively quickly and then we
can make adjustments.
So we've worked withassessments that do team
assessments or organizationalassessments, and once you know
(16:49):
what, if there are assumptionsin there, then you can adjust.
So if you know that they arepreferring uh to a more, you
know, give everybody a voiceapproach, for instance, um, then
you know you need to possiblyadjust for that when you work
with an intercultural team.
So a lot of these assessmentsthey they are a can be used, but
(17:16):
the the two issues really arethat they are created in the
image of the creator of theassessment.
So if the image the creator ofthe assessments has what we in
the Three Colors of Worldviewcall more an innocence-guilt
orientation, right and wrong,then words like equity and
(17:36):
fairness and agency are superimportant.
So they would assume that if ateam has those, then's a good
thing, yeah so.
And then to realize, no, thereare also other cultures where my
personal opinion is part of anecosystem, it's part of a
(17:56):
culture of communityaccountability, where honor is
pursued and shame avoided.
And when that's the case, thenwe need to make sure that people
are aware of those differences.
And then, when you startcreating culture, people need to
realize that there are maybeother ways for your voice to be
(18:19):
heard.
That might not be in public, itmight be anonymous, it might be
inside conversations, it mightbe more quiet.
But it might also be that, hey,if the team decides to go in
this direction or theorganization decides to go in
this direction, we all joinhands and we pursue it together
(18:39):
for the greater good of allinvolved.
So the idea that if I have torelinquish my personal desire or
my personal opinion, that meansI'm not true to myself, which
is another thing that comes outof the innocence guilt world,
that is not necessarily true.
(19:00):
I've heard many people say whocome from community
accountability cultures there isno internal struggle or
conflict if I have to, let myidea be put aside so that we
collectively can pursuesomething together.
And those types of ideas aretypically not favored in the way
(19:24):
people look at organizationalculture.
Shelley Reinheart (19:27):
And they're not brought out in assessments.
Marco Blankenburgh (19:29):
If that happens, it typically is an
orange or a red flag.
Okay, yeah.
Shelley Reinheart (19:36):
What can that look like in an assessment?
What can the results reveal?
Marco Blankenburgh (19:41):
Well, they would ask questions like is
there room for your opinion tobe heard?
Now?
Are they asking did my bossexplicitly ask me what do you
think about this situation?
Or are they asking no, my bossis a good listener and he's a
(20:02):
good indirect communicator.
No, our boss is a good listenerand he's a good indirect
communicator, and if I tell hima story or if he picks up a
story during a meeting, he knowswhat to do with that and I can
trust my boss that two monthsdown the line, changes will be
made or opportunities will becreated that fall in line with
that communication, that littleseed that was dropped two months
(20:24):
ago in the meeting.
So does that mean that my voicedoesn't get heard, and does it
have to be explicitly direct?
Or is a leader wise enough toindirectly harvest that type of
information and use that for thebetterment of the team, the
individuals and for their growthand development?
(20:45):
So there's these nuances thatyou often don't find.
Shelley Reinheart (20:51):
Right, yeah, right.
Have you ever used anassessment, or used an
assessment to decide the healthof an organization that just did
not land and had to adjust?
Marco Blankenburgh (21:02):
Actually, yes, we've had a situation where
a classical survey was used andit was designed in one part of
the world and then implementedin another part of the world,
and that already was somethingthat we shouldn't have done.
It was partnering with anotherorganization and we were sort of
the ears and eyes on the grounddoing the implementation,
(21:24):
building the stakeholderrelationships, and they were
doing the assessment, the data,the interpretation of the data.
And there was a classic example.
The organization we wereworking with was much more
honor-shame oriented.
There were some pockets of theorganization that were
power-fear oriented and therewas very strong community
(21:45):
accountability and ascribedstatus.
People that had long-servingyears in the organization were
revered to the point sometimesthat they were kept on the
payroll in an honorable role foreven after retirement.
And the survey had very directquestions with a Likert scale so
(22:12):
you could rate yourself on ascale Is this mostly true for
you or mostly not true?
And one of the questions was doyou know the mission, vision,
values of this organization?
And 40% of the people answeredyes, but they didn't exist yet
(22:32):
they were working on it.
As a classic example where youmake the assumption that the
questionnaire, the people whofill in the questionnaire are
more right, wrong, innocence,guilt-oriented, individual
accountability by default.
Most of the time people who arelike that culturally, they will
want to volunteer the rightanswer.
(22:53):
But now a survey designed forthat audience was used in a more
honor-shame-oriented audience.
So what does the survey takerthink?
When they see that question,they say, hmm, they're asking
about mission-vision values.
Oh, maybe it actually it mustsay, hmm, they're asking about
mission vision values.
Oh, maybe it actually it mustexist, otherwise they wouldn't
be asking about it.
So what is the most honorableanswer to give?
(23:15):
Yes, I know them, I'm supposedto know them, so I better say
yes.
And that's just a small example.
Another one was where we did asurvey that was supposed to lead
to organizational change.
It was with a big organizationin Africa, 19 countries and we
(23:35):
ran the survey together with theHR team and we had about 3,000
answers back and the head of HRsaid well, it's pretty good,
let's close the survey.
And I said to her well, let'slook at the names of the people,
because this was not ananonymous survey, we could
actually.
The names were given and, loand behold, almost all of the
(24:00):
names were names that alluded toa more Innocence,
guild-oriented way of thinking,and if they would have closed
the survey and designed a changeprocess based on that section
of the population, it would havetotally gone wrong.
So we had to wait and findother ways to get other people
(24:23):
also to contribute, who weremore power, fear, honor, shame
oriented, maybe a bit morecommunity accountability or
directed destiny.
So surveys are tricky.
There's actually quite a fewthings that potentially could go
wrong with them and that's why,knowing how to interculturally
navigate them, recognizing thatthey were typically created in
(24:47):
one part of the world and thenimplemented in many other parts
of the world, a lot of thesurveys have been around for a
long time, so they were oftencreated like from the 80s, 90s
onwards, and that meant thatthere was more of a monoculture
around them as they werecreating these health
(25:09):
assessments.
So it's knowing that and thenknowing how to be
interculturally agile enough tonavigate it and it's not always
saying, oh, this is rubbish andwe're not going to use it.
We've seen the same, forinstance, with some of the team
tools that we've used, but somesurveys are really problematic.
(25:32):
So I worked with one tool wherethe questions were so innocence
guilt-oriented.
They assumed people want tovolunteer the right answer and
they will want an accurateself-reflection.
And I got the survey resultsback in preparation for a
(25:55):
leadership initiative and Irealized these are all inflated.
And I started to look at it andit was roughly a 30% to 40%
inflation of the results where,in essence, the questions were
designed for a certain audienceand this audience was answering
the questions to make sure theylooked as good as possible and I
(26:20):
was still able to tweak thingsand to still use it for growth
and development.
But it it was and my firstimpression was okay.
I'm going to have to throw thisin the bin because the
questions were not embraced inthe same way as the audience for
which they were originallydesigned.
(26:40):
So we talk about socialdesirability.
So the more social desirabilityslips into the way the
questions are designed and theway people answer those
questions, the more tricky itbecomes to use the results of
those surveys.
Shelley Reinheart (26:55):
Yes, yeah, I see that.
Wow, there's a lot to consider,yeah, and it seems like,
because there are dangers toconsider that there's so many
pieces to considering, tocreating an agile culture.
Marco Blankenburgh (27:15):
Yeah.
Shelley Reinheart (27:17):
So I mean, if we're looking at intercultural
agility and creating agileculture, how are the two
connected?
Marco Blankenburg (27:25):
Intercultural agility- yeah, so look, we work
with organizations that areinherently intercultural.
How are the two connected?
Intercultural agility yeah, so,look, we work with
organizations that areinherently intercultural.
So they might have started inone part of the world, but when
we connect with them ittypically means they're on at
least four continents or more,and that automatically means
(27:51):
that the organization still haswhat Hofstede calls the
blueprint of the place where theorganization was founded, and
that is, of course, alwaysinteresting to look at.
So a German organization that'snow global, or I sit in the UAE
.
We have a number oforganizations in the UAE that
are now global.
Currently we're working withanother organization in the gulf
with that has gone global fromanother country and all of a
(28:14):
sudden give you an example oneorganization we worked with they
wanted to franchise thebusiness and we have a franchise
partner in singapore and wethey were invited in to do an
audit on can we do this, Canthis company be franchised?
And their conclusion was thatthe concept was going to be
(28:37):
likely, globally applicable.
Global clients would embracethe concept, but the culture of
the organization?
They said, if the culture staysthe same, you will struggle, at
least on three or fourcontinents in the world.
So is there a link betweenagile culture and intercultural
(28:58):
agility?
Absolutely.
We had another organization weworked with in California.
They got a brilliantopportunity to work with two of
their clients, very big names inJapan and China.
But this organization so farhad only worked on the west
coast of the US.
And we sat down with the ownersand they said, if we want to
(29:26):
work in China and Japan, we haveto change the way we do
business and the way we supportour clients, which means our
staff, our processes, ourworkflows, the way we do
financing in other countries,sourcing, All those things have
to change.
That level of agility they werenot ready to just to sign up
(29:48):
for, so they actually let it go.
Yeah, so using interculturalagility to decide.
You know, are we actuallyinterculturally agile enough and
we talk about?
You know, is your d DNA globalenough as a business?
Can you really go to othergeographies?
(30:10):
Is your organization able toabsorb staff and talent from
different parts of the world?
And I've seen, for instance,one of the.
There's a number of franchises.
I don't want to mention namesper se, but there's a number of
franchises.
I don't want to mention namesper se, but there's a number of
franchises either foodfranchises from North America
(30:31):
that tried to get into, forinstance, the Gulf region and
the culture.
The Midwestern culture did notconnect with people in the GCC.
There was another franchise Ican think of from South Africa.
They have a really, really goodconcept and their food is
amazing, but the concept failedin Southeast Asia and it wasn't
(30:55):
just the food, it was actuallyalso.
The food was accepted, but theculture of the organization was
not in that local context.
Right yeah.
Shelley Reinheart (31:02):
Wow.
So you're almost saying thatyou have to create the culture
of the organization first andthen add the method later?
Marco Blankenburgh (31:16):
Yeah.
So that is something that I'mbumping into in so many
disciplines now.
Now, so, for instance, one ofour facilitators, dr Omar Ayyash
, is a brilliant facilitator ondesign thinking and iterative
(31:38):
design which comes out ofStanford University, the D
School, and he used tofacilitate design thinking
workshops.
But one of the things he wassaying is that when you want to
bring techniques like that howto do design thinking, how to
come up with the craziestdesigns and craziest solutions
(32:00):
think outside the box or beyondthe box, he said the first thing
that has to happen you have tocreate the culture with the
group of people so that thosemethods can actually be used
successfully with that group.
So being able to create thethird cultural space first and
then say now, let's look at somesome creative fun.
(32:23):
You know ways of doing designthinking together.
And it was especially true withdesign thinking because in
design thinking you have to bewilling to, for instance, fail
quickly, fail early and failquickly, and in some cultures
that is not something peoplemight be used to.
So you have to first create aneutral zone where people say,
(32:50):
okay with this group of people,I'm okay with it or I'm learning
to be okay with it yeah.
So there's a number of thesetypes of disciplines where the
way that's that's the problem.
And you could think of aclassroom You've seen that,
(33:17):
shelley where your programculture in the classroom is in
essence saying the same, becauseit's like, no matter what
pedagogy you bring, if you don'tcreate culture in the classroom
, then you will have adisconnect between you and the
pupils, and probably amongst thepupils and maybe even with the
parents.
So create the culture first andthen find ways to be agile
(33:38):
within that context.
Shelley Reinheart (33:39):
And you said the third cultural space.
Can you describe that?
Marco Blankenburgh (33:43):
Yeah, that's the dilemma I mentioned in the
beginning talking about agileleadership.
And one of the things aboutagile leadership is that the
leader doesn't dictate theculture.
The leader helps create theculture is the facilitator of
the creation of the culture.
So in the old days, it was I'mthe boss, you're going to do it
(34:05):
my way.
In the old days it was I'm theboss, you're going to do it my
way.
In an agile organization withagile leadership, the leader
needs to now become a team coachto facilitate the process of
culture creation so thateverybody feels at home,
everybody feels they belong,they can thrive, they can bring
their best to work, and that's ashift in mindset.
(34:26):
And that third cultural space isnot the space of the boss, it's
not necessarily even the spacethat is dictated by the
organization.
I'm sorry to say that on themic, but we've often worked with
organizations where there isvalues defined and there's maybe
(34:47):
a definition of those values,and then you start working with
a team and they say, okay, thosevalues, we agree with them, but
how do we live them and whatdoes that look like on a
day-to-day basis?
So, even going to that pointwhere you say, yeah, we'll
adhere to these values.
But this is us, this is ourgroup, our department, our
(35:12):
division in the business, and wewant to move forward together,
create a culture where we can beagile in our sales interface,
in our logistics interface, inthe way we practice HR in this
organization interface in theway we practice HR in this
organization.
Shelley Reinheart (35:29):
That's amazing and sounds wonderful and
challenging.
And so what does it take then?
What does it take?
To create this agile team andagile organization.
Marco Blankenburgh (35:42):
Yeah, so there's a number of forces at
play, and the way we always liketo start is it has to do with
how we define organizationalculture.
So we believe that thecollective or the sum total of
the thinking, speaking andacting of the contributors that
(36:03):
eventually creates the culture,and a leader's role is to create
room for expressing that.
So the collective thinking,speaking and acting needs to be
expressed, needs to bequote-unquote, harvested, create
room for it and that becomesthe raw material you use to
(36:23):
build the culture.
But in order to do that, youneed to typically have a deeper
understanding of yourself and ofothers, so that you know who is
my colleague actually.
What are they bringing to workand what are they uncomfortable
with that?
They feel they are actuallymore or less forced to leave at
the door.
(36:44):
So we use tools for that,assessment tools either.
On the cultural side, We'vedeveloped the Three Colors of
Worldview and the culturalmapping inventory with 12
dimensions, and that's reallyanswering the question who am I
as a cultural human being, whichis really important if you want
to create culture together andthe other side is more the
(37:06):
psychometric side.
So who am I as a psychologicalhuman being and what am I
psychologically bringing to thisteam?
What are you bringing to thisteam and how do we go about
bringing that together in thatthird cultural space.
So we always like to startthere and then at team level or
(37:29):
at department level or businessunit level, and from there work
our way up.
Basically and yes, there'salways meeting Most
organizations nowadays havevalues, have definitions of
those values, some behavioraldescriptors, but we always like
to start in the smaller units ofthe organization and use those.
(37:54):
We call it the two spotlightsapproach.
So really answer those twoquestions who am I?
Who are you as a cultural humanbeing?
How does that influence yourthinking, speaking and acting?
Who are you as a psychologicalhuman being?
How does that influence yourthinking, speaking and acting?
Who are you as a psychologicalhuman being?
How does that influence yourthinking, speaking and acting?
And how can we use that tocraft culture together?
I?
Shelley Reinheart (38:15):
love that.
It's beautiful.
Yes, that sounds like aworthwhile goal, and so when
we're trying to create culturethat is not interculturally
agile, it does seem like thingscan be difficult.
So what do you say?
(38:38):
What do you think we shouldavoid in the future?
Marco Blankenburgh (38:44):
Yeah.
Shelley Reinheart (38:45):
And why do we struggle, just as organizations
, to create cultures like this?
What holds us back?
Marco Blankenburgh (38:53):
Yeah, it's fascinating that we
theoretically we know what itmight look like and a lot of
organizations talk about thatagile culture only really can be
created at the we level.
So when we create a collectivewe, then we can ebb and flow, we
(39:14):
can give and take, we can sowand reap much more easily in a
team.
So the we is always part ofagile in a team, so that the we
is always part of agile.
But statistically uh and I'mtalking about a friend of mine
who, john king, who wrote thebook tribal leadership they
(39:34):
discovered five possible waysthat cultures manifest in
organizations and the firstthree layers.
The first two are typicallyvery toxic, very aggressive.
People are literally stealingtime, stealing resources from
the company.
They are typically quiteaggressive with each other, etc.
(39:56):
The third layer is a supercompetitive layer where
colleagues are pitched againsteach other in sales and in KPIs
and key performance indicators.
And John King in his book,those first three layers of
organizational culture represent75% of all companies they've
researched.
(40:16):
So only 25% reaches the fourthlevel, the we level, and then
the fifth level.
There's very few up there.
They are more serving community, they're serving society and
they're profitable at the sametime.
But they have that much bigger,almost altruistic vision of why
(40:37):
their company exists.
So we're talking 25% is in theplace where agile culture more
naturally shows up.
And then people say, well, weneed to get there.
And then they don't realizewhere they are today and they
don't want to do the hard workto get out of that super
(40:59):
competitive mode.
Or sometimes they say no, weneed that competition, otherwise
our salespeople don't score,say no, we need that competition
, otherwise our sales peopledon't score.
Or we need that competition,otherwise people don't give
their best.
And there's a huge debate aboutthat where I won't mention
names, but there's a famoustheory of every year, 10% of the
workforce needs to go.
(41:20):
Because they are and throughthis aggressive way of pursuing
the business, you 10 always endsup at the bottom.
And then they have to go andand then they wonder why they
never reach that we stage?
Because everybody's alwayscompeting against everybody.
So, recognizing where you arein an organization and just be
(41:45):
ruthlessly honest, because thereality is, if you have a super
competitive organization, you'renot likely to become agile
anytime soon, because people arenot collaborating, the
organization is not set up forcollaboration and therefore the
we stage will not be achieved.
And that's where agility reallyshows up.
And I've seen that on sportsteams.
(42:08):
I've seen it in the militarywith special forces, where
everybody knew how to jump inwhen something went wrong.
Everybody could rely on oneanother to have each other's
back, to have the skills and thecompetencies to take over if
necessary, have the skills andthe competencies to to take over
(42:29):
if necessary, and that we stage.
You see it in sports teams thatfail, where that falls apart.
And you see in sports teamsthat succeed that we just shines
and comes alive.
And you see that people arefilling gaps.
Even if people make mistakes,they are quick to to to come
alongside and that's where it'sso hard.
So, for instance, a lot ofarticles right now are talking
(42:52):
about toxic work culture.
So they are all saying this isgoing wrong at work and this is
going wrong at work and peopleare leaving and sick leave, you
know, know, burnout and whoknows what.
And it's really, you know,disheartening to read some of
those articles and I really hopethat people who are in those
(43:18):
situations can get out of it.
But at the same time, they'renot digging into the why and the
articles almost create the ideathat quick fixes are possible,
but you need to then dig belowthe surface and really do the
hard work to reset some of thosecultural drivers at the bottom
(43:39):
end, and that's where, again,those two spotlights are really
important.
Who am I, who are you as acultural human being, as a
psychological human being?
And that's where, again, thosetwo spotlights are really
important.
Who am I, who are you as acultural human being, as a
psychological human being?
What is the organizationdriving us to do?
How is that potentially settingus up against each other, and
(44:02):
is that really the organizationwe want to have?
So, yeah, there's a lot ofthose forces at play where
creating agile culture actuallyit starts with you and me, goes
to the team, goes to thedepartment, goes to the
organization, and I prefer tocreate pockets of success than
create.
You know, try to create a largeorganizational shift and and
(44:30):
those pockets of success alwaysI call it the jealousy factor.
You create the jealousy factorwith a team that's successful or
a department that's successfuland that starts to attract
others who say I wish I couldwork, or can we have what you
have?
And then to get the leaders totalk to each other and say here
(44:50):
is what we did in order to getthere, and you could potentially
reach that as well, but youhave to be willing to roll up
your sleeves.
Shelley Reinheart (44:59):
That's excellent To get to the we to
get to that place.
Wow, that's brilliant.
Thank you so much, marco.
Marco Blankenburgh (45:10):
Thank you, this has been a great
conversation.
And it's such a needed topicand something that we, as
humanity, need to figure out,because we're talking about
organizational level now,because we're talking about
organizational level now, butit's the same between nations
and between tribes andgeographies, and we're not doing
(45:33):
a great job right now.
So I hope we'll learn better andI have high hopes for the young
generation, who naturally wantsto collaborate, wants to build
bridges, wants to do good in theworld more frequently.
So, yeah, I'm hoping we'll seesome fresh blood come into that?
Shelley Reinheart (45:52):
Yes, that's good.
Thank you so much.
We'll see you next time.
And to learn more aboutKnowledgeWorks, some of the
tools that Marco mentioned, andalso about getting certified as
an intercultural intelligencepractitioner, check out the
website in the notes below andlearn more.
Marco Blankenburgh (46:12):
Thank you, thank you everyone and thank you
, shadi again for a greatconversation.
Shelley Reinheart (46:16):
Absolutely.
See you next time.
Marco Blankenburgh (46:19):
Thank you so much for joining us for this
episode of the Cultural AgilityPodcast.
If you enjoyed today's episode,share it with someone.
The best way to help us out isby leaving a review on your
favorite podcast app or channel,or forward and recommend this
podcast to people around you.
As always, if any of the topicswe discussed today intrigue you
(46:41):
, you will find links toarticles discussing them in
greater depth in the podcastnotes.
If you would like to learn moreabout intercultural
intelligence and how you canbecome more culturally agile,
you can find more informationand hundreds of articles at
knowledgeworkscom.
Oh and, by the way, specialthanks to Jason Carter for
(47:04):
composing the music on thispodcast and to the whole
KnowledgeWorks team for makingthis podcast a success.
Thank you.
And just be ruthlessly honest, because the
reality is, if you have a supercompetitive organization, you're
not likely to become agileanytime soon, because people are
not collaborating, theorganization is not set up for
collaboration and therefore thewe stage will not be achieved.
And that's where agility reallyshows up.
(00:21):
And I've seen that on sportsteams.
Where agility really shows up.
And I've seen that on sportsteams.
I've seen it in the military,with special forces, where
everybody knew how to jump inwhen something went wrong,
everybody could rely on oneanother to have each other's
back, to have the skills and thecompetencies to take over if
necessary.
Welcome to the Cultural AgilityPodcast, where we explore the
(01:03):
stories of some of the mostadvanced intercultural
practitioners from around theworld to help you become
culturally agile and succeed intoday's culturally complex world
.
I'm your host, marcoBlankenberg, international
Director of KnowledgeWorks,where every day, we help
individuals and companiesachieve relational success in
that same complex world.
Shelley Reinheart (01:32):
Welcome to the Unlocking Cultural Agility
podcast.
We are here today with MarcoBlankenberg, International
Director of KnowledgeWorks.
Marco, welcome.
Marco Blankenburgh (01:43):
Thank you.
Shelley Reinheart (01:44):
Glad to have you.
We're going to talk today aboutinterculturally agile cultures,
what they are, how to buildthem, how they can be
troublesome, and I'd love tostart off with just talking
about the word agility.
Marco Blankenburgh (02:02):
What is?
Shelley Reinheart (02:03):
it.
Why does it keep popping up?
Marco Blankenburgh (02:06):
Yeah, it's a word that's quite important in
organizations organizationaldevelopment, consulting work,
working with leaders and teamsand I think most of it has to do
with the fact that we live in acrazy world.
Yes we do.
There is a lot of change in ourworld.
There is rapid change andthere's a lot of forces at play.
(02:27):
There's geopolitical forces,there is climate, there is
artificial intelligencegenerative AI, some people say,
will be with us for the publicin the next five years, which
will turn everything upside down.
So companies, organizations,are struggling with never-ending
(02:47):
change, and that's where theword agility comes up.
So how do you stay agile in thatcrazy environment?
How do you run projects in thatenvironment?
Because you might have abeautiful project plan, but then
you start implementing andthings change before you're
finished.
So you need agility in projectmanagement.
(03:10):
You can't just do contingencyplanning as in if this happens,
we will do that, and if thathappens, we do something else,
because things come out of leftfield, as they say in sports,
and you need to be creative,agile enough to deal with it.
And that requires a wholedifferent way of thinking about
(03:30):
agility as leaders.
So the leader as a person needsto be almost wired in a
different way, and they need tothen lead teams and
organizations and projects in anagile way, and there's lots of
debate about what that actuallymeans, and what competencies,
(03:51):
skills, abilities do you thenneed to develop as a result?
Shelley Reinheart (03:54):
of that?
Yeah, yes, I can see that.
Yeah, so where does agilityeven come from the word itself,
and what's the history of how weuse the word?
Marco Blankenburgh (04:06):
Yeah, I'm not necessarily the expert on it
, but yeah, when you go back, itcame originally out of the
world of sports.
So the physical version ofagility and you can see that in
famous athletes, their grace andtheir ability to have their
whole body in sync.
It's always beautiful to watchand that's where the word agile
(04:28):
comes from, as well as themilitary.
So being able to be agile onthe battlefield or in in
military operations especiallythis, the special forces which
I'm familiar with are is eachperson in in the unit able to
take a variety of roles.
Can they even take the lead ifnecessary?
(04:50):
Could they?
If things go really bad, couldthey run solo?
So that's where agility alsocomes into play.
And from there it got into thebusiness world.
So in the 60s, 70s, especiallyin Japan, it got connected to
incremental improvement.
So the Kaizen method, six Sigma, came out of that.
(05:14):
And the interesting thing isSix Sigma has a belt system.
So if you're a black belt inSix Sigma, you really know how
to take an organization, look atit very carefully and make it
more agile, make it betterincrementally.
And from there it got into thesoftware development world.
(05:35):
So in the world of software,especially in the early days.
I still remember I had to codein university and even the
simple coding I was doing was afew thousand lines already.
Now imagine if you have to codebig, complicated software
products and you discover a fewthousand lines in that you made
(05:59):
a mistake.
How do you go back?
So how do you do softwaredevelopment in an agile way?
And that's where agile scrumscame from and taking pieces of
code that can be removed andadded, and ways to make sure
that mistakes are caught early.
So there's a whole system inplace now that gets ever better,
(06:22):
especially now with AI, andfrom there it really got into
the business world.
So project management I alreadymentioned that that had to
become more agile but also thenin running the organization as a
whole.
So a big problem that peopledeal with today is change.
Out of most change initiatives,give or take, 70% are not
(06:46):
successful, and very often it'seither that the culture is not
taken into account we might comeback to that later on or it's
because they still think thatthey can design a change plan
and run with the change plan andthat there's only small changes
that they need to make, whichin today's world is typically
not true.
So that's how.
(07:06):
Agile transformation, agileproject management, agile
strategy implementation all arebuzzwords that people are using
now in the business world.
Shelley Reinheart (07:20):
Yeah, Okay, so it's been around for a while
used in different ways.
What about in other languages?
Marco Blankenburgh (07:27):
Yeah, that's a bit of a challenge.
Yeah, how's it translated?
I still remember we ran aproject that was a
transformation project for oneof the big airlines and the word
agile came up and this airlinehas over 170 nationalities
working for them.
So we were asked to put thelanguage around the culture
(07:50):
transformation in place.
And when we started askingpeople about the word agile,
what ideas come to mind?
And for some languages it isindeed that athletic ability, so
it sounds positive.
If my team is more athleticallycapable, quote-unquote, it's
(08:11):
good for our business, notphysically, but quote-unquote.
Athletically as a team Can weebb and flow and flex and
quickly change gears or changedirection.
But then other languages, itbecame problematic.
So in some languages the wordagile can be seen as evasive,
(08:36):
you know dodging, so that is notnecessarily a good thing.
So if you look at languages inthe Middle Eastern region so
Dari, farsi, arabic very oftenit's linked to gracefulness.
So it's not the agility of agazelle per se, but it's the
(09:01):
grace of a leader who stridesinto the room and who is
deliberate and present, hasauthority, and that's a very
different word.
It doesn't relate to what wetypically think about in English
when we use the word agility,so it's not always easy to
(09:23):
translate.
And then leaders say, no, Ican't be seen as being agile.
That's for young people.
You know, I'm a graciousstatesman or stateswoman and I
need to be seen that way.
The other thing is that leadersmight see agility as something
(09:46):
that doesn't add to theirposition of power or their
position of honor.
So they need to be seen asdeliberate, thoughtful.
Typically also linked to it isthis idea that I already know
where we want to go and Icontinuously say that to the
(10:06):
people around me.
Agility could create thatimpression that I need to be
able to say team, we've got aproblem and I don't quite know
how to deal with it, let'sfigure it out together.
And that way of dealing withagility is in many cultures but
not is frowned upon by leadersand it might give the leader a
(10:31):
low credibility rating, forinstance.
There's also a dilemma thathierarchical organizations
typically find it hard to beagile in the way that it's
typically explained.
So if you have hierarchy andyou want to be super agile, then
(10:52):
it becomes really difficult tomove the agility up the
hierarchical chain and thenquickly back down again.
So those organizations thereare other ways to also become
agile, but it often has to dowith different listening
functions that they need tocreate in the organization to
still have information flow upand down very quickly so that
(11:13):
decision making can be sped up.
But the quote unquote Westernway of thinking about agility is
often frowned upon if theorganization is more
hierarchical and and that linksit directly to power.
So agility automatically meansthat I need to give you a chance
(11:34):
to figure things out and to dothings your way.
So by default it it involvesempowerment, and some leaders
just don't want to let go.
So true, they just want to holdthe reins, they want to sign
all the checks, so to say, andthey want to be in charge of all
(11:55):
the ideation and thedecision-making.
And that's why, in what we calldirected destiny environments
versus directive destiny.
So directed destiny, the bosstells you what to do, and, and
that's where the idea of agilityoften is frowned upon.
So it there's cultural issues,there's linguistic issues, uh,
(12:18):
that need to be taken intoaccount yes, that's very clear
now.
Shelley Reinheart (12:24):
Yes, you know .
So we can talk about agileorganizations, but how do we
even just backtracking a second?
How do we talk about healthyorganizations?
How do we think about a healthyorganization even before
agility?
Marco Blankenburgh (12:45):
Yeah, I think that's a really important
question because, to be honest,although I'm a white-faced
European from Dutch descent,I've lived internationally for
30 years now and have tried tolearn from the 70 countries that
I've worked in.
But at the same time, it'sreally true that our definition
(13:06):
of a healthy organization is, atleast in the theory books and
in the assessments that havebeen created.
That definition is largely aWestern definition.
It's the Western way ofthinking about leadership, the
Western way of thinking abouthow organizations should run.
(13:26):
What is a healthy culture?
What's an unhealthy culture?
That, by and large, stilldrives most of the theory and it
drives most of the thinkingbehind the organizational health
assessments that have beencreated.
And that's an issue.
(13:49):
So, for instance, to make thatcome alive, like is it true, for
instance, that if anorganization has a flatter
structure that they are likelyto be more agile.
Is hierarchy an enemy of agility?
And that doesn't have to betrue.
And that doesn't have to betrue Is having a voice, so
creating agency in the system ofthe organization, which is a
(14:16):
more directive destiny way ofthinking about things is that
necessarily better.
Or is being told what to do?
Does that make you lessproductive, as having your own
thoughts turn into an action andthen you follow through on that
action Is that more productive?
And when you look at theresearch, that's inconclusive.
Shelley Reinheart (14:40):
Those are all good questions.
Marco Blankenburgh (14:42):
Yeah, and a lot of the organizational health
thinking makes assumptions onthose things and that becomes a
problem can sometimes be moreproductive than cultures where
(15:06):
you have a directive, destiny,orientation, where people are
always part of thedecision-making process.
They create their own wayforward, they bring their voice
to the group and they have tohave their say, which sometimes
can actually grind things to ahalt.
Shelley Reinheart (15:21):
I've seen it happen, yeah, sometimes can
actually grind things to a halt.
Marco Blankenburgh (15:24):
I've seen it happen, yeah.
So yeah, those are all thingsthat play a role in thinking
about what is a healthyorganization, and a big thing
that plays into that is how webuild trust, and that's maybe
something you know.
We have a great podcast ontrust.
How do you build trust within ahierarchy?
How do you build trust within ahierarchy?
(15:44):
How do you build trust within aflatter organizational
structure?
And I've heard people say Iimplicitly trust my boss and I
love working for my boss and ifmy boss tells me to do something
, I just go and do it because Ican trust my boss.
And if you have that type ofrelationship, it's great.
(16:05):
And I've seen the same withteachers, where teachers give
their pupils instructions andthere's a good trust
relationship.
The pupil loves to get thatinstruction from the teacher and
move on it.
So there are quite a fewassessments around that try to
measure organizational healthand they're beautiful
(16:27):
assessments.
But digging into them andfinding well, what assumptions
are they actually making?
And fortunately ourintercultural framework allows
us to find those assumptionsrelatively quickly and then we
can make adjustments.
So we've worked withassessments that do team
assessments or organizationalassessments, and once you know
(16:49):
what, if there are assumptionsin there, then you can adjust.
So if you know that they arepreferring uh to a more, you
know, give everybody a voiceapproach, for instance, um, then
you know you need to possiblyadjust for that when you work
with an intercultural team.
So a lot of these assessmentsthey they are a can be used, but
(17:16):
the the two issues really arethat they are created in the
image of the creator of theassessment.
So if the image the creator ofthe assessments has what we in
the Three Colors of Worldviewcall more an innocence-guilt
orientation, right and wrong,then words like equity and
(17:36):
fairness and agency are superimportant.
So they would assume that if ateam has those, then's a good
thing, yeah so.
And then to realize, no, thereare also other cultures where my
personal opinion is part of anecosystem, it's part of a
(17:56):
culture of communityaccountability, where honor is
pursued and shame avoided.
And when that's the case, thenwe need to make sure that people
are aware of those differences.
And then, when you startcreating culture, people need to
realize that there are maybeother ways for your voice to be
(18:19):
heard.
That might not be in public, itmight be anonymous, it might be
inside conversations, it mightbe more quiet.
But it might also be that, hey,if the team decides to go in
this direction or theorganization decides to go in
this direction, we all joinhands and we pursue it together
(18:39):
for the greater good of allinvolved.
So the idea that if I have torelinquish my personal desire or
my personal opinion, that meansI'm not true to myself, which
is another thing that comes outof the innocence guilt world,
that is not necessarily true.
(19:00):
I've heard many people say whocome from community
accountability cultures there isno internal struggle or
conflict if I have to, let myidea be put aside so that we
collectively can pursuesomething together.
And those types of ideas aretypically not favored in the way
(19:24):
people look at organizationalculture.
Shelley Reinheart (19:27):
And they're not brought out in assessments.
Marco Blankenburgh (19:29):
If that happens, it typically is an
orange or a red flag.
Okay, yeah.
Shelley Reinheart (19:36):
What can that look like in an assessment?
What can the results reveal?
Marco Blankenburgh (19:41):
Well, they would ask questions like is
there room for your opinion tobe heard?
Now?
Are they asking did my bossexplicitly ask me what do you
think about this situation?
Or are they asking no, my bossis a good listener and he's a
(20:02):
good indirect communicator.
No, our boss is a good listenerand he's a good indirect
communicator, and if I tell hima story or if he picks up a
story during a meeting, he knowswhat to do with that and I can
trust my boss that two monthsdown the line, changes will be
made or opportunities will becreated that fall in line with
that communication, that littleseed that was dropped two months
(20:24):
ago in the meeting.
So does that mean that my voicedoesn't get heard, and does it
have to be explicitly direct?
Or is a leader wise enough toindirectly harvest that type of
information and use that for thebetterment of the team, the
individuals and for their growthand development?
(20:45):
So there's these nuances thatyou often don't find.
Shelley Reinheart (20:51):
Right, yeah, right.
Have you ever used anassessment, or used an
assessment to decide the healthof an organization that just did
not land and had to adjust?
Marco Blankenburgh (21:02):
Actually, yes, we've had a situation where
a classical survey was used andit was designed in one part of
the world and then implementedin another part of the world,
and that already was somethingthat we shouldn't have done.
It was partnering with anotherorganization and we were sort of
the ears and eyes on the grounddoing the implementation,
(21:24):
building the stakeholderrelationships, and they were
doing the assessment, the data,the interpretation of the data.
And there was a classic example.
The organization we wereworking with was much more
honor-shame oriented.
There were some pockets of theorganization that were
power-fear oriented and therewas very strong community
(21:45):
accountability and ascribedstatus.
People that had long-servingyears in the organization were
revered to the point sometimesthat they were kept on the
payroll in an honorable role foreven after retirement.
And the survey had very directquestions with a Likert scale so
(22:12):
you could rate yourself on ascale Is this mostly true for
you or mostly not true?
And one of the questions was doyou know the mission, vision,
values of this organization?
And 40% of the people answeredyes, but they didn't exist yet
(22:32):
they were working on it.
As a classic example where youmake the assumption that the
questionnaire, the people whofill in the questionnaire are
more right, wrong, innocence,guilt-oriented, individual
accountability by default.
Most of the time people who arelike that culturally, they will
want to volunteer the rightanswer.
(22:53):
But now a survey designed forthat audience was used in a more
honor-shame-oriented audience.
So what does the survey takerthink?
When they see that question,they say, hmm, they're asking
about mission-vision values.
Oh, maybe it actually it mustsay, hmm, they're asking about
mission vision values.
Oh, maybe it actually it mustexist, otherwise they wouldn't
be asking about it.
So what is the most honorableanswer to give?
(23:15):
Yes, I know them, I'm supposedto know them, so I better say
yes.
And that's just a small example.
Another one was where we did asurvey that was supposed to lead
to organizational change.
It was with a big organizationin Africa, 19 countries and we
(23:35):
ran the survey together with theHR team and we had about 3,000
answers back and the head of HRsaid well, it's pretty good,
let's close the survey.
And I said to her well, let'slook at the names of the people,
because this was not ananonymous survey, we could
actually.
The names were given and, loand behold, almost all of the
(24:00):
names were names that alluded toa more Innocence,
guild-oriented way of thinking,and if they would have closed
the survey and designed a changeprocess based on that section
of the population, it would havetotally gone wrong.
So we had to wait and findother ways to get other people
(24:23):
also to contribute, who weremore power, fear, honor, shame
oriented, maybe a bit morecommunity accountability or
directed destiny.
So surveys are tricky.
There's actually quite a fewthings that potentially could go
wrong with them and that's why,knowing how to interculturally
navigate them, recognizing thatthey were typically created in
(24:47):
one part of the world and thenimplemented in many other parts
of the world, a lot of thesurveys have been around for a
long time, so they were oftencreated like from the 80s, 90s
onwards, and that meant thatthere was more of a monoculture
around them as they werecreating these health
(25:09):
assessments.
So it's knowing that and thenknowing how to be
interculturally agile enough tonavigate it and it's not always
saying, oh, this is rubbish andwe're not going to use it.
We've seen the same, forinstance, with some of the team
tools that we've used, but somesurveys are really problematic.
(25:32):
So I worked with one tool wherethe questions were so innocence
guilt-oriented.
They assumed people want tovolunteer the right answer and
they will want an accurateself-reflection.
And I got the survey resultsback in preparation for a
(25:55):
leadership initiative and Irealized these are all inflated.
And I started to look at it andit was roughly a 30% to 40%
inflation of the results where,in essence, the questions were
designed for a certain audienceand this audience was answering
the questions to make sure theylooked as good as possible and I
(26:20):
was still able to tweak thingsand to still use it for growth
and development.
But it it was and my firstimpression was okay.
I'm going to have to throw thisin the bin because the
questions were not embraced inthe same way as the audience for
which they were originallydesigned.
(26:40):
So we talk about socialdesirability.
So the more social desirabilityslips into the way the
questions are designed and theway people answer those
questions, the more tricky itbecomes to use the results of
those surveys.
Shelley Reinheart (26:55):
Yes, yeah, I see that.
Wow, there's a lot to consider,yeah, and it seems like,
because there are dangers toconsider that there's so many
pieces to considering, tocreating an agile culture.
Marco Blankenburgh (27:15):
Yeah.
Shelley Reinheart (27:17):
So I mean, if we're looking at intercultural
agility and creating agileculture, how are the two
connected?
Marco Blankenburg (27:25):
Intercultural agility- yeah, so look, we work
with organizations that areinherently intercultural.
How are the two connected?
Intercultural agility yeah, so,look, we work with
organizations that areinherently intercultural.
So they might have started inone part of the world, but when
we connect with them ittypically means they're on at
least four continents or more,and that automatically means
(27:51):
that the organization still haswhat Hofstede calls the
blueprint of the place where theorganization was founded, and
that is, of course, alwaysinteresting to look at.
So a German organization that'snow global, or I sit in the UAE
.
We have a number oforganizations in the UAE that
are now global.
Currently we're working withanother organization in the gulf
with that has gone global fromanother country and all of a
(28:14):
sudden give you an example oneorganization we worked with they
wanted to franchise thebusiness and we have a franchise
partner in singapore and wethey were invited in to do an
audit on can we do this, Canthis company be franchised?
And their conclusion was thatthe concept was going to be
(28:37):
likely, globally applicable.
Global clients would embracethe concept, but the culture of
the organization?
They said, if the culture staysthe same, you will struggle, at
least on three or fourcontinents in the world.
So is there a link betweenagile culture and intercultural
(28:58):
agility?
Absolutely.
We had another organization weworked with in California.
They got a brilliantopportunity to work with two of
their clients, very big names inJapan and China.
But this organization so farhad only worked on the west
coast of the US.
And we sat down with the ownersand they said, if we want to
(29:26):
work in China and Japan, we haveto change the way we do
business and the way we supportour clients, which means our
staff, our processes, ourworkflows, the way we do
financing in other countries,sourcing, All those things have
to change.
That level of agility they werenot ready to just to sign up
(29:48):
for, so they actually let it go.
Yeah, so using interculturalagility to decide.
You know, are we actuallyinterculturally agile enough and
we talk about?
You know, is your d DNA globalenough as a business?
Can you really go to othergeographies?
(30:10):
Is your organization able toabsorb staff and talent from
different parts of the world?
And I've seen, for instance,one of the.
There's a number of franchises.
I don't want to mention namesper se, but there's a number of
franchises.
I don't want to mention namesper se, but there's a number of
franchises either foodfranchises from North America
(30:31):
that tried to get into, forinstance, the Gulf region and
the culture.
The Midwestern culture did notconnect with people in the GCC.
There was another franchise Ican think of from South Africa.
They have a really, really goodconcept and their food is
amazing, but the concept failedin Southeast Asia and it wasn't
(30:55):
just the food, it was actuallyalso.
The food was accepted, but theculture of the organization was
not in that local context.
Right yeah.
Shelley Reinheart (31:02):
Wow.
So you're almost saying thatyou have to create the culture
of the organization first andthen add the method later?
Marco Blankenburgh (31:16):
Yeah.
So that is something that I'mbumping into in so many
disciplines now.
Now, so, for instance, one ofour facilitators, dr Omar Ayyash
, is a brilliant facilitator ondesign thinking and iterative
(31:38):
design which comes out ofStanford University, the D
School, and he used tofacilitate design thinking
workshops.
But one of the things he wassaying is that when you want to
bring techniques like that howto do design thinking, how to
come up with the craziestdesigns and craziest solutions
(32:00):
think outside the box or beyondthe box, he said the first thing
that has to happen you have tocreate the culture with the
group of people so that thosemethods can actually be used
successfully with that group.
So being able to create thethird cultural space first and
then say now, let's look at somesome creative fun.
(32:23):
You know ways of doing designthinking together.
And it was especially true withdesign thinking because in
design thinking you have to bewilling to, for instance, fail
quickly, fail early and failquickly, and in some cultures
that is not something peoplemight be used to.
So you have to first create aneutral zone where people say,
(32:50):
okay with this group of people,I'm okay with it or I'm learning
to be okay with it yeah.
So there's a number of thesetypes of disciplines where the
way that's that's the problem.
And you could think of aclassroom You've seen that,
(33:17):
shelley where your programculture in the classroom is in
essence saying the same, becauseit's like, no matter what
pedagogy you bring, if you don'tcreate culture in the classroom
, then you will have adisconnect between you and the
pupils, and probably amongst thepupils and maybe even with the
parents.
So create the culture first andthen find ways to be agile
(33:38):
within that context.
Shelley Reinheart (33:39):
And you said the third cultural space.
Can you describe that?
Marco Blankenburgh (33:43):
Yeah, that's the dilemma I mentioned in the
beginning talking about agileleadership.
And one of the things aboutagile leadership is that the
leader doesn't dictate theculture.
The leader helps create theculture is the facilitator of
the creation of the culture.
So in the old days, it was I'mthe boss, you're going to do it
(34:05):
my way.
In the old days it was I'm theboss, you're going to do it my
way.
In an agile organization withagile leadership, the leader
needs to now become a team coachto facilitate the process of
culture creation so thateverybody feels at home,
everybody feels they belong,they can thrive, they can bring
their best to work, and that's ashift in mindset.
(34:26):
And that third cultural space isnot the space of the boss, it's
not necessarily even the spacethat is dictated by the
organization.
I'm sorry to say that on themic, but we've often worked with
organizations where there isvalues defined and there's maybe
(34:47):
a definition of those values,and then you start working with
a team and they say, okay, thosevalues, we agree with them, but
how do we live them and whatdoes that look like on a
day-to-day basis?
So, even going to that pointwhere you say, yeah, we'll
adhere to these values.
But this is us, this is ourgroup, our department, our
(35:12):
division in the business, and wewant to move forward together,
create a culture where we can beagile in our sales interface,
in our logistics interface, inthe way we practice HR in this
organization interface in theway we practice HR in this
organization.
Shelley Reinheart (35:29):
That's amazing and sounds wonderful and
challenging.
And so what does it take then?
What does it take?
To create this agile team andagile organization.
Marco Blankenburgh (35:42):
Yeah, so there's a number of forces at
play, and the way we always liketo start is it has to do with
how we define organizationalculture.
So we believe that thecollective or the sum total of
the thinking, speaking andacting of the contributors that
(36:03):
eventually creates the culture,and a leader's role is to create
room for expressing that.
So the collective thinking,speaking and acting needs to be
expressed, needs to bequote-unquote, harvested, create
room for it and that becomesthe raw material you use to
(36:23):
build the culture.
But in order to do that, youneed to typically have a deeper
understanding of yourself and ofothers, so that you know who is
my colleague actually.
What are they bringing to workand what are they uncomfortable
with that?
They feel they are actuallymore or less forced to leave at
the door.
(36:44):
So we use tools for that,assessment tools either.
On the cultural side, We'vedeveloped the Three Colors of
Worldview and the culturalmapping inventory with 12
dimensions, and that's reallyanswering the question who am I
as a cultural human being, whichis really important if you want
to create culture together andthe other side is more the
(37:06):
psychometric side.
So who am I as a psychologicalhuman being and what am I
psychologically bringing to thisteam?
What are you bringing to thisteam and how do we go about
bringing that together in thatthird cultural space.
So we always like to startthere and then at team level or
(37:29):
at department level or businessunit level, and from there work
our way up.
Basically and yes, there'salways meeting Most
organizations nowadays havevalues, have definitions of
those values, some behavioraldescriptors, but we always like
to start in the smaller units ofthe organization and use those.
(37:54):
We call it the two spotlightsapproach.
So really answer those twoquestions who am I?
Who are you as a cultural humanbeing?
How does that influence yourthinking, speaking and acting?
Who are you as a psychologicalhuman being?
How does that influence yourthinking, speaking and acting?
Who are you as a psychologicalhuman being?
How does that influence yourthinking, speaking and acting?
And how can we use that tocraft culture together?
I?
Shelley Reinheart (38:15):
love that.
It's beautiful.
Yes, that sounds like aworthwhile goal, and so when
we're trying to create culturethat is not interculturally
agile, it does seem like thingscan be difficult.
So what do you say?
(38:38):
What do you think we shouldavoid in the future?
Marco Blankenburgh (38:44):
Yeah.
Shelley Reinheart (38:45):
And why do we struggle, just as organizations
, to create cultures like this?
What holds us back?
Marco Blankenburgh (38:53):
Yeah, it's fascinating that we
theoretically we know what itmight look like and a lot of
organizations talk about thatagile culture only really can be
created at the we level.
So when we create a collectivewe, then we can ebb and flow, we
(39:14):
can give and take, we can sowand reap much more easily in a
team.
So the we is always part ofagile in a team, so that the we
is always part of agile.
But statistically uh and I'mtalking about a friend of mine
who, john king, who wrote thebook tribal leadership they
(39:34):
discovered five possible waysthat cultures manifest in
organizations and the firstthree layers.
The first two are typicallyvery toxic, very aggressive.
People are literally stealingtime, stealing resources from
the company.
They are typically quiteaggressive with each other, etc.
(39:56):
The third layer is a supercompetitive layer where
colleagues are pitched againsteach other in sales and in KPIs
and key performance indicators.
And John King in his book,those first three layers of
organizational culture represent75% of all companies they've
researched.
(40:16):
So only 25% reaches the fourthlevel, the we level, and then
the fifth level.
There's very few up there.
They are more serving community, they're serving society and
they're profitable at the sametime.
But they have that much bigger,almost altruistic vision of why
(40:37):
their company exists.
So we're talking 25% is in theplace where agile culture more
naturally shows up.
And then people say, well, weneed to get there.
And then they don't realizewhere they are today and they
don't want to do the hard workto get out of that super
(40:59):
competitive mode.
Or sometimes they say no, weneed that competition, otherwise
our salespeople don't score,say no, we need that competition
, otherwise our sales peopledon't score.
Or we need that competition,otherwise people don't give
their best.
And there's a huge debate aboutthat where I won't mention
names, but there's a famoustheory of every year, 10% of the
workforce needs to go.
(41:20):
Because they are and throughthis aggressive way of pursuing
the business, you 10 always endsup at the bottom.
And then they have to go andand then they wonder why they
never reach that we stage?
Because everybody's alwayscompeting against everybody.
So, recognizing where you arein an organization and just be
(41:45):
ruthlessly honest, because thereality is, if you have a super
competitive organization, you'renot likely to become agile
anytime soon, because people arenot collaborating, the
organization is not set up forcollaboration and therefore the
we stage will not be achieved.
And that's where agility reallyshows up.
And I've seen that on sportsteams.
(42:08):
I've seen it in the militarywith special forces, where
everybody knew how to jump inwhen something went wrong.
Everybody could rely on oneanother to have each other's
back, to have the skills and thecompetencies to take over if
necessary, have the skills andthe competencies to to take over
(42:29):
if necessary, and that we stage.
You see it in sports teams thatfail, where that falls apart.
And you see in sports teamsthat succeed that we just shines
and comes alive.
And you see that people arefilling gaps.
Even if people make mistakes,they are quick to to to come
alongside and that's where it'sso hard.
So, for instance, a lot ofarticles right now are talking
(42:52):
about toxic work culture.
So they are all saying this isgoing wrong at work and this is
going wrong at work and peopleare leaving and sick leave, you
know, know, burnout and whoknows what.
And it's really, you know,disheartening to read some of
those articles and I really hopethat people who are in those
(43:18):
situations can get out of it.
But at the same time, they'renot digging into the why and the
articles almost create the ideathat quick fixes are possible,
but you need to then dig belowthe surface and really do the
hard work to reset some of thosecultural drivers at the bottom
(43:39):
end, and that's where, again,those two spotlights are really
important.
Who am I, who are you as acultural human being, as a
psychological human being?
And that's where, again, thosetwo spotlights are really
important.
Who am I, who are you as acultural human being, as a
psychological human being?
What is the organizationdriving us to do?
How is that potentially settingus up against each other, and
(44:02):
is that really the organizationwe want to have?
So, yeah, there's a lot ofthose forces at play where
creating agile culture actuallyit starts with you and me, goes
to the team, goes to thedepartment, goes to the
organization, and I prefer tocreate pockets of success than
create.
You know, try to create a largeorganizational shift and and
(44:30):
those pockets of success alwaysI call it the jealousy factor.
You create the jealousy factorwith a team that's successful or
a department that's successfuland that starts to attract
others who say I wish I couldwork, or can we have what you
have?
And then to get the leaders totalk to each other and say here
(44:50):
is what we did in order to getthere, and you could potentially
reach that as well, but youhave to be willing to roll up
your sleeves.
Shelley Reinheart (44:59):
That's excellent To get to the we to
get to that place.
Wow, that's brilliant.
Thank you so much, marco.
Marco Blankenburgh (45:10):
Thank you, this has been a great
conversation.
And it's such a needed topicand something that we, as
humanity, need to figure out,because we're talking about
organizational level now,because we're talking about
organizational level now, butit's the same between nations
and between tribes andgeographies, and we're not doing
(45:33):
a great job right now.
So I hope we'll learn better andI have high hopes for the young
generation, who naturally wantsto collaborate, wants to build
bridges, wants to do good in theworld more frequently.
So, yeah, I'm hoping we'll seesome fresh blood come into that?
Shelley Reinheart (45:52):
Yes, that's good.
Thank you so much.
We'll see you next time.
And to learn more aboutKnowledgeWorks, some of the
tools that Marco mentioned, andalso about getting certified as
an intercultural intelligencepractitioner, check out the
website in the notes below andlearn more.
Marco Blankenburgh (46:12):
Thank you, thank you everyone and thank you
, shadi again for a greatconversation.
Shelley Reinheart (46:16):
Absolutely.
See you next time.
Marco Blankenburgh (46:19):
Thank you so much for joining us for this
episode of the Cultural AgilityPodcast.
If you enjoyed today's episode,share it with someone.
The best way to help us out isby leaving a review on your
favorite podcast app or channel,or forward and recommend this
podcast to people around you.
As always, if any of the topicswe discussed today intrigue you
(46:41):
, you will find links toarticles discussing them in
greater depth in the podcastnotes.
If you would like to learn moreabout intercultural
intelligence and how you canbecome more culturally agile,
you can find more informationand hundreds of articles at
knowledgeworkscom.
Oh and, by the way, specialthanks to Jason Carter for
(47:04):
composing the music on thispodcast and to the whole
KnowledgeWorks team for makingthis podcast a success.
Thank you.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Intentionally Disturbing
Join me on this podcast as I navigate the murky waters of human behavior, current events, and personal anecdotes through in-depth interviews with incredible people—all served with a generous helping of sarcasm and satire. After years as a forensic and clinical psychologist, I offer a unique interview style and a low tolerance for bullshit, quickly steering conversations toward depth and darkness. I honor the seriousness while also appreciating wit. I’m your guide through the twisted labyrinth of the human psyche, armed with dark humor and biting wit.