Assess the Benefits and Challenges of Leading a Diverse Team
For this week’s assignment, you have been assigned the job of leading a very diverse team. After earning your MBA, you have been hired by the VP of Marketing of the North American firm XYZ Beverage Company, a major producer of healthy and natural fruit and vegetables drinks that are sold in grocery stores and other food and beverages retailers in U.S., Europe, and other parts of Asia.
However, the organization’s line of beverages is becoming dated, facing changing consumer tastes and stiff competition from both bigger (those firms with the red and blue labels, respectively) and many smaller rivals. You have been assigned to lead a diverse project team of 20 employees to review the product line to find flavors, ingredients, product names, and packaging that best suits the current and even future needs of your firm’s very diverse customer base. Your team has been purposely composed of members from different levels of the organization from management to production-line workers. An effort was also made to make sure the project team is diverse in terms of race, age, gender, and region, including several members from Europe and Asia who will participate virtually using email, phone, and video conference.
No one beverage suits everybody, so the firm’s management wants a line that mixes beverages that have mass appeal that cross diverse markets while having other beverages that best suit certain market segments. To accomplish these goals, your team members must strongly bring in their viewpoints while working synergistically with the rest of your team to propose the most effective line of products possible.
As a new hire, the Marketing VP wants a preliminary report from you about
particular aspects of the program plan. In that report, the VP wants you to address the following:
- Provide an initial statement you will make to your team members that emphasizes the goals of the project and how you plan to both respect the diversity of your team members while harnessing that diversity to produce the best results.
- Explain four (4) possible challenges you foresee arising from the diverse nature of your team in the implementation of this project. Recommend specific strategies to address each of the difficulties. One of the important aspects of this report is creating a list of difficulties and solutions that logically and effectively present your ideas to leadership. You want to show your VP that you clearly know the issues and have the know-how it takes to effectively lead this project. When you develop your argument for each challenge and strategy, be sure to consider the context of the company.
Support your assignment with the items in the Books and Resources for this Week. In addition to these specified resources, other appropriate scholarly resources, including seminal articles, should be included.
Length: 5-7 pages, not including title and reference pages
https://ncuone.ncu.edu/d2l/le/content/121129/viewContent/1243518/View
https://ncuone.ncu.edu/d2l/le/content/121129/viewContent/1243519/View
https://ncuone.ncu.edu/d2l/le/content/121129/viewContent/1243520/View
ARTWORK Shannon Rankin, Basin (detail)
Uncharted series, 2009, cut map on paper, full size 20″ x 20″SPOTLIGHT
SPOTLIGHT ON THE NEW GLOBAL LEADER
Tsedal Neeley (@tsedal)
is an associate professor at
Harvard Business School
and the founder of the
consulting firm Global
Matters.
Global Teams
That Work
A framework for bridging social distance
by Tsedal Neeley
HBR.ORG
October 2015 Harvard Business Review 75
TTO SUCCEED IN the global economy today, more and more companies are relying on a geographically dis-persed workforce. They build teams that offer the best functional expertise from around the world, combined with deep, local knowledge of the most promising markets. They draw on the benefits of in-ternational diversity, bringing together people from many cultures with varied work experiences and dif-ferent perspectives on strategic and organizational challenges. All this helps multinational companies
compete in the current business environment.
But managers who actually lead global teams
are up against stiff challenges. Creating successful
work groups is hard enough when everyone is local
and people share the same office space. But when
team members come from different countries and
functional backgrounds and are working in different
locations, communication can rapidly deteriorate,
misunderstanding can ensue, and cooperation can
degenerate into distrust.
Preventing this vicious dynamic from taking
place has been a focus of my research, teaching,
and consulting for more than 15 years. I have con-
ducted dozens of studies and heard from countless
executives and managers about misunderstand-
ings within the global teams they have joined or led,
sometimes with costly consequences. But I have also
encountered teams that have produced remarkable
innovations, creating millions of dollars in value for
their customers and shareholders.
One basic difference between global teams that
work and those that don’t lies in the level of social dis-
tance—the degree of emotional connection among
team members. When people on a team all work in
the same place, the level of social distance is usually
low. Even if they come from different backgrounds,
people can interact formally and informally, align,
and build trust. They arrive at a common under-
standing of what certain behaviors mean, and they
feel close and congenial, which fosters good team-
work. Coworkers who are geographically separated,
however, can’t easily connect and align, so they ex-
perience high levels of social distance and struggle to
develop effective interactions. Mitigating social dis-
tance therefore becomes the primary management
challenge for the global team leader.
To help in this task, I have developed and tested a
framework for identifying and successfully manag-
ing social distance. It is called the SPLIT framework,
reflecting its five components: structure, process,
language, identity, and technology—each of which
can be a source of social distance. In the following
pages I explain how each can lead to team dysfunc-
tion and describe how smart leaders can fix prob-
lems that occur—or prevent them from happening
in the first place.
BOSTON 8 PEOPLE
“We do the important
work and have easy
access to the boss.”
LONDON 5 PEOPLE
“We represent the most
challenging regions in terms
of diversity and institutional
hurdles. The Boston team
really doesn’t understand
our markets.”
SINGAPORE/TOKYO 3 PEOPLE
“Our opinions are often ignored.
It’s so difficult to find a good time to
exchange ideas, and even if we do
manage to connect, we can’t get a
word in edgewise.”
MOSCOW 1 PERSON
“I am all on my own here
and at the mercy of the
Boston group. I need to
make sure that the boss
has my back.”
Views from a Dispersed Team
The marketing team of a multinational pharmaceutical company had 17
members in different locations. Each group, depending on size and proximity
to the leader in Boston, saw the power structure differently.
SPOTLIGHT ON THE NEW GLOBAL LEADER
Structure and the Perception of Power
In the context of global teams, the structural fac-
tors determining social distance are the location and
number of sites where team members are based and
the number of employees who work at each site.
The fundamental issue here is the perception
of power. If most team members are located in
Germany, for instance, with two or three in the
United States and in South Africa, there may be a
sense that the German members have more power.
This imbalance sets up a negative dynamic. People
in the larger (majority) group may feel resentment
toward the minority group, believing that the latter
will try to get away with contributing less than its
fair share. Meanwhile, those in the minority group
may believe that the majority is usurping what little
power and voice they have.
The situation is exacerbated when the leader is at
the site with the most people or the one closest to
company headquarters: Team members at that site
tend to ignore the needs and contributions of their
colleagues at other locations. This dynamic can
occur even when everyone is in the same country:
The five people working in, say, Beijing may have
a strong allegiance to one another and a habit of
shutting out their two colleagues in Shanghai.
When geographically dispersed team members
perceive a power imbalance, they often come to feel
that there are in-groups and out-groups. Consider
the case of a global marketing team for a U.S.-based
multinational pharmaceutical company. The leader
and the core strategy group for the Americas worked
in the company’s Boston-area headquarters. A
smaller group in London and a single individual in
Moscow focused on the markets in Europe. Three
other team members, who split their time be-
tween Singapore and Tokyo, were responsible for
strategy in Asia. The way that each group perceived
its situation is illustrated in the exhibit “Views from
a Dispersed Team.”
To correct perceived power imbalances between
different groups, a leader needs to get three key
messages across:
Who we are. The team is a single entity, even
though individual members may be very different
from one another. The leader should encourage
sensitivity to differences but look for ways to bridge
them and build unity. Tariq, a 33-year-old rising star
in a global firm, was assigned to lead a 68-person
division whose members hailed from 27 countries,
spoke 18 languages, and ranged in age from 22 to
61. During the two years before he took charge, the
group’s performance had been in a precipitous de-
cline and employee satisfaction had plunged. Tariq
saw that the team had fractured into subgroups ac-
cording to location and language. To bring people
back together, he introduced a team motto (“We are
different yet one”), created opportunities for employ-
ees to talk about their cultures, and instituted a zero-
tolerance policy for displays of cultural insensitivity.
What we do. It’s important to remind team
members that they share a common purpose and to
direct their energy toward business-unit or corpo-
rate goals. The leader should periodically highlight
how everyone’s work fits into the company’s overall
strategy and advances its position in the market. For
instance, during a weekly conference call, a global
team leader might review the group’s performance
relative to company objectives. She might also dis-
cuss the level of collective focus and sharpness the
team needs in order to fend off competitors.
I am there for you. Team members located far
from the leader require frequent contact with him or
her. A brief phone call or e-mail can make all the dif-
ference in conveying that their contributions matter.
For instance, one manager in Dallas, Texas, inherited
Idea in Brief
THE PROBLEM
When teams consist of
people from different cultures
working apart from one
another in different locations,
social distance—or a lack of
emotional connection—can
cause miscommunication,
misunderstanding, and distrust.
THE SOLUTION
The leaders of global teams can
improve the workings of their
groups by using the author’s
SPLIT framework to identify
and address five sources of
social distance: structure,
process, language, identity,
and technology.
HBR.ORG
October 2015 Harvard Business Review 77
GLOBAL TEAMS THAT WORK
people are spread all over the world, small talk is still
a powerful way to promote trust. So when planning
your team’s call-in meetings, factor in five minutes
for light conversation before business gets under
way. Especially during the first meetings, take the
lead in initiating informal discussions about work
and nonwork matters that allow team members to
get to know their distant counterparts. In particular,
encourage people to be open about constraints they
face outside the project, even if those aren’t directly
linked to the matter at hand.
Time to disagree. Leaders should encourage
disagreement both about the team’s tasks and about
the process by which the tasks get done. The chal-
lenge, of course, is to take the heat out of the debate.
Framing meetings as brainstorming opportunities
lowers the risk that people will feel pressed to choose
between sides. Instead, they will see an invitation to
evaluate agenda items and contribute their ideas. As
the leader, model the act of questioning to get to the
heart of things. Solicit each team member’s views
on each topic you discuss, starting with those who
have the least status or experience with the group
so that they don’t feel intimidated by others’ com-
ments. This may initially seem like a waste of time,
but if you seek opinions up front, you may make
better decisions and get buy-in from more people.
A software developer in Istanbul kept silent in a
team meeting in order to avoid conflict, even though
he questioned his colleagues’ design of a particular
feature. He had good reasons to oppose their deci-
sion, but his team leader did not brook disagreement,
and the developer did not want to damage his own
position. However, four weeks into the project, the
team ran into the very problems that the developer
had seen coming.
Language and the Fluency Gap
Good communication among coworkers drives ef-
fective knowledge sharing, decision making, coor-
dination, and, ultimately, performance results (see
also “What’s Your Language Strategy?” by Tsedal
Neeley and Robert Steven Kaplan, HBR, September
2014). But in global teams, varying levels of fluency
with the chosen common language are inevitable—
and likely to heighten social distance. The team
members who can communicate best in the organi-
zation’s lingua franca (usually English) often exert
the most influence, while those who are less fluent
often become inhibited and withdraw. Mitigating
a large group in India as part of an acquisition. He
made it a point to involve those employees in impor-
tant decisions, contact them frequently to discuss
ongoing projects, and thank them for good work.
He even called team members personally to give
them their birthdays off. His team appreciated his
attention and became more cohesive as a result.
Process and the
Importance of Empathy
It almost goes without saying that empathy helps
reduce social distance. If colleagues can talk infor-
mally around a watercooler—whether about work or
about personal matters—they are more likely to de-
velop an empathy that helps them interact produc-
tively in more-formal contexts. Because geographi-
cally dispersed team members lack regular face time,
they are less likely to have a sense of mutual under-
standing. To foster this, global team leaders need
to make sure they build the following “deliberate
moments” into the process for meeting virtually:
Feedback on routine interactions. Members
of global teams may unwittingly send the wrong sig-
nals with their everyday behavior. Julie, a French
chemical engineer, and her teammates in Marseille
checked and responded to e-mails only first thing in
the morning, to ensure an uninterrupted workday.
They had no idea that this practice was routinely
adding an overnight delay to correspondence with
their American colleagues and contributing to mis-
trust. It was not until Julie visited the team’s offices
in California that the French group realized there
was a problem. Of course, face-to-face visits are not
the only way to acquire such learning. Remote team
members can also use the phone, e-mail, or even
videoconferencing to check in with one another
and ask how the collaboration is going. The point
is that leaders and members of global teams must
actively elicit this kind of “reflected knowledge,” or
awareness of how others see them.
Unstructured time. Think back to your last
face-to-face meeting. During the first few minutes
before the official discussion began, what was the
atmosphere like? Were people comparing notes on
the weather, their kids, that new restaurant in town?
Unstructured communication like this is positive,
because it allows for the organic unfolding of pro-
cesses that must occur in all business dealings—
sharing knowledge, coordinating and monitoring
interactions, and building relationships. Even when
78 Harvard Business Review October 2015
SPOTLIGHT ON THE NEW GLOBAL LEADER
must always confirm that they have been understood.
Encourage them to routinely ask if others are fol-
lowing them. Similarly, when listening, they should
be empowered to say they have not understood
something. It can be tough for nonnative speakers
to make this leap, yet doing so keeps them from
being marginalized.
Balance participation to ensure inclusion.
Getting commitments to good speaking behavior is
the easy part; making the behavior happen will re-
quire active management. Global team leaders must
keep track of who is and isn’t contributing and delib-
erately solicit participation from less fluent speakers.
Sometimes it may also be necessary to get dominant-
language speakers to dial down to ensure that the
proposals and perspectives of less fluent speakers
are heard.
The leader of a global team based in Dubai re-
quired all his reports to post the three communica-
tion rules in their cubicles. Soon he noted that one
heavily accented European team member began con-
tributing to discussions for the first time since joining
the group 17 months earlier. The rules had given this
person the license, opportunity, and responsibility
to speak up. As a leader, you could try the same tac-
tics with your own team, distributing copies of the
exhibit “Rules of Engagement for Team Meetings.”
Identity and the
Mismatch of Perceptions
Global teams work most smoothly when mem-
bers “get” where their colleagues are coming from.
However, deciphering someone’s identity and find-
ing ways to relate is far from simple. People define
themselves in terms of a multitude of variables—age,
gender, nationality, ethnicity, religion, occupation,
political ties, and so forth. And although behavior
can be revealing, particular behaviors may signify
different things depending on the individual’s iden-
tity. For example, someone in North America who
looks you squarely in the eye may project confidence
and honesty, but in other parts of the world, direct
eye contact might be perceived as rude or threat-
ening. Misunderstandings such as this are a major
source of social distance and distrust, and global
team leaders have to raise everyone’s awareness of
them. This involves mutual learning and teaching.
Learning from one another. When adapting
to a new cultural environment, a savvy leader will
avoid making assumptions about what behaviors
these effects typically involves insisting that all team
members respect three rules for communicating in
meetings:
Dial down dominance. Strong speakers must
agree to slow down their speaking pace and use
fewer idioms, slang terms, and esoteric cultural ref-
erences when addressing the group. They should
limit the number of comments they make within a
set time frame, depending on the pace of the meet-
ing and the subject matter. They should actively seek
confirmation that they’ve been understood, and
they should practice active listening by rephrasing
others’ statements for clarification or emphasis.
Dial up engagement. Less fluent speakers
should monitor the frequency of their responses in
meetings to ensure that they are contributing. In
some cases, it’s even worth asking them to set goals
for the number of comments they make within
a given period. Don’t let them use their own lan-
guage and have a teammate translate, because that
can alienate others. As with fluent speakers, team
members who are less proficient in the language
All team members should be guided by these three rules to
ensure that influence on decisions is not dictated by fluency
in the company’s lingua franca.
Rules of Engagement for Team Meetings
DIAL UP
ENGAGEMENT
DIAL DOWN
DOMINANCE
Resist withdrawal or other
avoidance behaviors.
Refrain from reverting to your
native language.
Ask: “Do you understand what I am saying?”
If you don’t understand others,
ask them to repeat or explain.
Slow down the pace and use familiar
language (e.g., fewer idioms).
Refrain from dominating the conversation.
Ask: “Do you understand what I am saying?”
Listen actively.
LESS FLUENT
SPEAKERS
BALANCE FOR
INCLUSION
Monitor participants and strive to
balance their speaking and listening.
Actively draw contributions from
all team members.
Solicit participation from less fluent
speakers in particular.
Be prepared to define and interpret content.
TEAM LEADERS
FLUENT SPEAKERS
HBR.ORG
October 2015 Harvard Business Review 79
GLOBAL TEAMS THAT WORK
A case in point. Consider the experience of
Daniel, the leader of a recently formed multinational
team spread over four continents. During a confer‑
ence call, he asked people to discuss a particular
strategy for reaching a new market in a challenging
location. This was the first time he had raised a topic
on which there was a range of opinion.
Daniel observed that Theo, a member of the
Israeli team, regularly interrupted Angela, a mem‑
ber of the Buenos Aires team, and their ideas were
at odds. Although tempted to jump in and play ref‑
eree, Daniel held back. To his surprise, neither Theo
nor Angela got frustrated. They went back and forth,
bolstering their positions by referencing typical
business practices and outcomes in their respective
countries, but they stayed committed to reaching a
group consensus.
At the meeting’s end, Daniel shared his observa‑
tions with the team, addressing not only the content
of the discussion, but also the manner in which it
took place. “Theo and Angela,” he said, “when you
began to hash out your ideas, I was concerned that
both of you might have felt you weren’t being heard
or weren’t getting a chance to fully express your
thoughts. But now you both seem satisfied that you
were able to make your arguments, articulate cul‑
tural perspectives, and help us decide on our next
steps. Is that true?”
Theo and Angela affirmed Daniel’s observations
and provided an additional contextual detail: Six
months earlier they had worked together on another
project—an experience that allowed them to estab‑
lish their own style of relating to each other. Their
ability to acknowledge and navigate their cultural
differences was beneficial to everyone on the team.
Not only did it help move their work forward, but it
showed that conflict does not have to create social
distance. And Daniel gained more information about
Theo and Angela, which would help him manage the
team more effectively in the future.
Technology and the
Connection Challenge
The modes of communication used by global teams
must be carefully considered, because the technolo‑
gies can both reduce and increase social distance.
Videoconferencing, for instance, allows rich commu‑
nication in which both context and emotion can be
perceived. E‑mail offers greater ease and efficiency
but lacks contextual cues. In making decisions
mean. Take a step back, watch, and listen. In America,
someone who says, “Yes, I can do this” likely means
she is willing and able to do what you asked. In India,
however, the same statement may simply signal that
she wants to try—not that she’s confident of success.
Before drawing conclusions, therefore, ask a lot of
questions. In the example just described, you might
probe to see if the team member anticipates any
challenges or needs additional resources. Asking for
this information may yield greater insight into how
the person truly feels about accomplishing the task.
Team members quickly pick
up on the leader’s preferences
regarding communication
technology, so set the example
you want others to follow.
The give‑and‑take of asking questions and pro‑
viding answers establishes two‑way communica‑
tion between the leader and team members. And if
a leader regularly solicits input, acting as a student
rather than an expert with hidden knowledge, he
empowers others on the team, leading them to
participate more willingly and effectively. A non‑
Mandarin‑speaking manager in China relied heavily
on his local staff during meetings with clients in or‑
der to better understand clients’ perceptions of the
interactions and to gauge the appropriateness of
his own behavior. His team members began to see
themselves as essential to the development of client
relationships and felt valued, which motivated them
to perform at even higher levels.
In this model, everyone is a teacher and a learner,
which enables people to step out of their traditional
roles. Team members take on more responsibility
for the development of the team as a whole. Leaders
learn to see themselves as unfinished and are thus
more likely to adjust their style to reflect the team’s
needs. They instruct but they also facilitate, help‑
ing team members to parse their observations and
understand one another’s true identities.
80 Harvard Business Review October 2015
SPOTLIGHT ON THE NEW GLOBAL LEADER
that their message is important. Greg, for instance, a
project manager in a medical devices organization,
found that his team was falling behind on the devel-
opment of a product. He called an emergency meet-
ing to discuss the issues and explain new corporate
protocols for releasing new products, which he felt
would bring the project back on track.
During this initial meeting, he listened to people’s
concerns and addressed their questions in real time.
Although he felt he had communicated his position
clearly and obtained the necessary verbal buy-in,
he followed up the meeting by sending a carefully
drafted e-mail to all the attendees, reiterating the
agreed-upon changes and asking for everyone’s
electronic sign-off. This redundant communica-
tion helped reinforce acceptance of his ideas and
increased the likelihood that his colleagues would
actually implement the new protocols.
Am I leading by example? Team members very
quickly pick up on the leader’s personal preferences
regarding communication technology. A leader
who wants to encourage people to videoconference
should communicate this way herself. If she wants
employees to pick up the phone and speak to one an-
other, she had better be a frequent user of the phone.
And if she wants team members to respond quickly
to e-mails, she needs to set the example.
FLEXIBILITY AND APPRECIATION for diversity are at the
heart of managing a global team. Leaders must ex-
pect problems and patterns to change or repeat them-
selves as teams shift, disband, and regroup. But there
is at least one constant: To manage social distance ef-
fectively and maximize the talents and engagement
of team members, leaders must stay attentive to all
five of the SPLIT dimensions. Decisions about struc-
ture create opportunities for good process, which can
mitigate difficulties caused by language differences
and identity issues. If leaders act on these fronts,
while marshaling technology to improve communi-
cation among geographically dispersed colleagues,
social distance is sure to shrink, not expand. When
that happens, teams can become truly representative
of the “global village”—not just because of their in-
ternational makeup, but also because their members
feel mutual trust and a sense of kinship. They can
then embrace and practice the kind of innovative, re-
spectful, and groundbreaking interactions that drive
the best ideas forward.
HBR Reprint R1510D
about which technology to use, a leader must ask
the following:
Should communication be instant?
Teleconferencing and videoconferencing enable
real-time (instant) conversations. E-mail and cer-
tain social media formats require users to wait for
the other party to respond. Choosing between in-
stant and delayed forms of communication can be
especially challenging for global teams. For exam-
ple, when a team spans multiple time zones, a tele-
phone call may not be convenient for everyone. The
Japanese team leader of a U.S.-based multinational
put it this way: “I have three or four days per week
when I have a conference call with global executives.
In most cases, it starts at 9:00 or 10:00 in the night. If
we can take the conference call in the daytime, it’s
much easier for me. But we are in the Far East, and
headquarters is in the United States, so we have to
make the best of it.”
Instant technologies are valuable when leaders
need to persuade others to adopt their viewpoint.
But if they simply want to share information, then
delayed methods such as e-mail are simpler, more ef-
ficient, and less disruptive to people’s lives. Leaders
must also consider the team’s interpersonal dynam-
ics. If the team has a history of conflict, technology
choices that limit the opportunities for real-time
emotional exchanges may yield the best results.
In general, the evidence suggests that most com-
panies overrely on delayed communication. A recent
Forrester survey of nearly 10,000 information work-
ers in 17 countries showed that 94% of employees
report using e-mail, but only 33% ever participate in
desktop videoconferencing (with apps such as Skype
and Viber), and a mere 25% use room-based video-
conferencing. These numbers will surely change
over time, as the tools evolve and users become
more comfortable with them, but leaders need to
choose their format carefully: instant or delayed.
Do I need to reinforce the message? Savvy
leaders will communicate through multiple plat-
forms to ensure that messages are understood and
remembered. For example, if a manager electroni-
cally assigns one of her team members a task by en-
tering notes into a daily work log, she may then fol-
low up with a text or a face-to-face chat to ensure that
the team member saw the request and recognized
its urgency.
Redundant communication is also effective for
leaders who are concerned about convincing others
HBR.ORG
October 2015 Harvard Business Review 81
GLOBAL TEAMS THAT WORK
Copyright 2015 Harvard Business Publishing. All Rights Reserved. Additional restrictions
may apply including the use of this content as assigned course material. Please consult your
institution’s librarian about any restrictions that might apply under the license with your
institution. For more information and teaching resources from Harvard Business Publishing
including Harvard Business School Cases, eLearning products, and business simulations
please visit hbsp.harvard.edu.
4 American Management Association MWORLD FALL 2013
BY HOWARD M. GUTTMAN
Peel away all the difficulties of running global teams,
and one stands out above the others: Most global
teams adhere; they don’t cohere.
Think about the typical global team, with its far-flung operations; patchwork quilt of cultures;
different time zones, country, or region-specific challenges; unique processes; and market
demands. It’s fertile ground for silos, misunderstandings, and conflict. It’s not the stuff of
e pluribus unum camaraderie.
It takes leadership to build a high-performing, mission-focused global team. It may sound
forehead-slappingly obvious, but many leaders either underestimate or just don’t get the
unique challenges in dealing with all the centrifugal forces at play on a global team.
Take the CEO and senior team of a $25 billion consumer products company with operations
on five continents. The leader was a command-and-control executive whose senior team was
siloed and riven with underground conflict. Different regions were treated like walled city
states, accessible only to the country director. The compensation system reinforced the
go-it-alone mentality, with zero incentive to think enterprisewide. There were no ground rules
for decision making on or below the top team and no process for escalating unresolved issues
up to the next tier.
When you’re dealing globally, challenges come quickly and evolve over many time zones in the
blink of an email. The consumer products company’s senior team just wasn’t up to meeting the
challenges. Not surprisingly, business spiraled downward as more nimble competitors, with a
unified management team, began eating away at the company’s market share. To date, nothing
has been done to address the situation.
Ultimately, it starts with the leader and, in the case of this leader, he didn’t have what it
takes to shift his team and organization to a more horizontal approach, with everyone playing
for the enterprise.
HIGH-PERFORMANCE LEADERSHIP IN ACTION
There are leaders who get it. Consider the case of Mars Incorporated’s pet care business, its
largest unit, which, according to analysts, is a $14 billion business, with 35 brands, 34,000
COVER STORY
Building Horizontal, High-Performance
Global Teams
Howard Guttman
5MWORLD FALL 2013 American Management Association
associates in 50 countries, and a range of different
businesses. When Todd Lachman assumed as
president global responsibility for the unit, he faced
the usual global challenges, with a few add-ons to
test his mettle.
Lachman’s leadership team is scattered throughout
the world. Corporate headquarters are located in
Brussels, and Lachman himself is based in New
Jersey. Adding to the complexity, Lachman’s team
meets formally only four times a year.
The team he inherited performed well but he
wanted performance taken to the next level.
Leading 16 high-powered, successful senior
executives, both line and staff, who run operations
in the U.S., Russia, Latin America, Asia Pacific, and
elsewhere, and who in some cases run very
different businesses, is no cakewalk. Lachman’s
challenge was to build a cohesive, high-performing
team that scored big wins and worked for the enterprise, not just for functional interest.
Whether a team is global or in a single country, changing team dynamics begins with the leader
and his or her willingness to articulate a vision of how the team should operate. In Lachman’s
case, he put forth a compelling picture of a global team that was aligned around a common
high-performing team vision; worked together horizontally rather than hierarchically;
operated interdependently rather than independently; was focused enterprisewide, not
functionally; was willing to assume accountability for the team’s results and those of the entire
organization; and openly discussed conflict in a nonpersonalized manner.
Moving his team forward was a tall order and Lachman knew that neither “rah rah” nor a big
stick would work to engage his team. Instead, he created a burning platform to drive home the
importance and urgency for the change: Given savage competitive pressures in the worldwide
pet care segment, he wanted to go beyond business as usual and move quickly from good to
great. Nothing less than a steep change was required in how the team showed up and performed.
Next, Lachman engaged his team to create “our” vision and shift the culture and team
behaviors to the high-performance, horizontal model he had articulated. To do so, Lachman
took his team through a series of three alignment sessions, which my colleagues and I were
called upon to facilitate. Data collected from team members revealed the gaps that existed
between the high-performance vision and reality. For example, roles and responsibilities were
fuzzy, especially the points of intersection between global and regional responsibilities; basic
decision-making ground rules needed to be put in place to move more quickly and with less
“noise”; and dealing openly with conflict had to be addressed.
Todd Lachman, president of Mars Petcare, at home
in New Jersey with his dog, Francis.
PH
O
TO
S:
C
O
U
R
TE
SY
O
F
M
A
R
S
PE
TC
A
R
E
6 American Management Association MWORLD FALL 2013
The alignment sessions raised questions that went
right to the heart of the matter: What’s not working,
why, and how can we fix it? How do we align around a
common strategy, vision, and way of working? How
do we operate more as a board of directors and take
an enterprise view of the business? How do we move
from a siloed mentality to one of greater
interdependency? How do we confront issues head-on
and resolve them quickly and effectively? How do we
clarify the roles and responsibilities not only of the
team but of the subteams throughout the regions?
How do we engage in conflict in a way that’s
depersonalized? And one of the toughest questions:
How do we have the right authentic conversations in
real time during—and between—meetings? It was an
ambitious agenda.
THE RESULTS
As the process unfolded, the team gained clarity and commitment to the high-performance,
horizontal vision that Lachman had initially laid out and to the strategy and specific business
deliverables that flowed from them. Roles and accountabilities were agreed upon, along with
protocols for making decisions and how team members would engage one another. The team
became less wary and worked to achieve greater transparency and a positive approach to
resolving the inevitable conflicts that emerge on a global team.
Playing horizontally rather than top-down and functionally is something of an unnatural act,
especially on global teams. Beyond the alignment sessions, team members, including Lachman,
received coaching and were skilled up in a variety of areas, such as conflict management and
shifting to new ways of leading a global enterprise. But, as Lachman points out, more
important than these “structural interventions” is the more dynamic learning that comes
“when we work together as a team, coach one another, and provide feedback to each other in
the moment.” Performance reviews with team members became learning and reinforcement
opportunities. During such sessions, says Lachman, “we talk about how they operate as a high-
performance leader just as much as we talk about the actual performance of the function
or business.” The next tiers down were engaged in a similar process. Observes Lachman,
“High-performing, horizontal behaviors must be thought about 24/7. This way, it becomes
baked into the muscle memory of the organization.”
Results speak for themselves. The pet care team transformed the way it operates. Performance
accelerated and bottom-line results exceeded expectations, as the team more effectively
leveraged its resources across the global platform. There’s greater interdependence and
collaboration, a decrease in decision hang time, and less unconstructive conflict.
BUILDING HIGH-PERFORMANCE GLOBAL TEAMS: WHAT’S INVOLVED?
Building cohesive, high-performing teams that work horizontally does not come about by
chance. The centrifugal forces are too many and too intense. In our research and work with
many global teams, here are what we have found to be the key factors enabling them to make
the transition:
Mars Petcare products on display in a Russian grocery store.
7MWORLD FALL 2013 American Management Association
Assertive leadership. Leaders who fail on the
global stage tend to be nonassertive. Better to lead
with your chin by articulating a high-performance,
horizontal vision. To function successfully, global
teams require a picture of what the end game is, of
what they are aspiring to achieve. And the team
must be tested for buy-in. For leaders on global
teams, this involves something of a balancing act.
Neither wimpy nor heavy-handed approaches to
imposing vision work. Assertive leadership, as
Lachman points out, “requires a leader to be
vulnerable. He must articulate a high-performance
vision and as the process unfolds concede
leadership to the team, rather than being the all-
powerful decision maker.”
The burning platform. Wrap the transition
around a significant business issue. It becomes an
energizing principle for enrolling others and in so
doing coaxes team members to address the deeper
issues related to how they and their colleagues
view themselves, their roles and relationships, how
work gets done, and what it means to be a
contributor. A burning platform converts the
challenge into a business case for radically and
permanently changing the organization and those
who work for it.
The right players. You need to assemble a team
of the best and brightest, with both strategic and
operational savvy, high emotional intelligence,
and willingness to function in a horizontal,
demanding environment.
Team alignment. Engage the team in coming to grips with the tough performance questions,
similar to the ones Lachman raised, and go where the team previously feared to tread. At the
end of the process there should be tight alignment in eight areas:
� Vision/strategy. Is there deep understanding of and commitment to how the team will
perform and act? Is there clarity and commitment to the future direction of the business:
the competitive advantage; key product/market choices; the capabilities needed; and the
longer-term growth and financial expectations?
� Business deliverables. How can the team ensure that the day-to-day work of the team is
supportive of the strategy and goals? One incoming president of a major division of a global
enterprise called together his senior team for the first time and asked them how many
projects they had: 475 projects were under way. His response: “Here are seven goals that will
be driving the company and ensuring our alignment with corporate goals. How many of the
475 have anything to do with these seven goals?” Turned out, only 33 of the 475 projects were
in alignment with the goals. The CEO responded, “Reassess the 442 nonstrategic projects!”
HIGH-PERFORMANCE TEAMS
Eight Key Attributes
1. The mission, goals, and business priorities of the
team are clear to all team members.
2. The team is comprised of the “right” players.
This implies that they are technically/functionally
competent, with the ability and willingness to
influence across functional lines.
3. The roles, points of intersection, and “turf” are
clear to all team members regarding every player
on the team.
4. Team members are committed to the team
“winning”—achieving business goals—over their
own parochial/functional self-interest.
5. The decision-making process that the team
employs is understood and accepted by all team
members.
6. Every team member feels a sense of ownership
and accountability for the business results that
the team creates. Consequently, team members
feel that they have a license to speak on any
matter concerning how the group functions. The
team operates as a managing board of directors.
7. All team members are comfortable dealing with
conflict in the team. Consequently, they are
willing to be candid, able to depersonalize, and
attempt to reach resolution on outstanding team
issues.
8. The team has a willingness to periodically self-
assess its progress as a group, focusing on how
the team functions as a total group. This includes
assessing the business deliverables, individual
commitments, and relevant protocols.
8 American Management Association MWORLD FALL 2013
� Roles and responsibilities. The dreaded question “Whose job is it, anyhow?” tends to get
raised on global teams with disturbing frequency because there is often overlap and lack of
role clarity. Unless you are crystal clear on the answer, count on turf battles and your
organization becoming a house divided.
� Protocols. There is often major confusion, especially on global teams, as to who will make
decisions and how they will make them. One way to avoid this is to develop and agree upon
protocols for decision making. For example, how will important decisions be made:
unilaterally, collaboratively, or by consensus? Who will be consulted for information? For
opinions? Who will make the final decision? And who will execute the decision? Protocols
for resolving conflicts, such as those dealing with triangulation, must also be agreed upon.
� Business Relationships. Global teams are at a disadvantage when it comes to aligning
interpersonal relationships. Face time is a scarce commodity. One initial approach we find
useful in aligning business relationships is to ask teams to take these steps:
� Ask team members to assess one another’s behavior style
� Ask them to think about ways in which they can moderate their own behavior—moving
from nonassertive or aggressive to assertive
� Have each person “contract” with fellow team members to acquire the skills and make
the behavior changes that will facilitate conflict resolution
Warning: Don’t try this exercise without an experienced facilitator!
� Coaching and skills. Team and individual coaching are essential, as are skill mastery in
leadership, conflict management, influencing, and active listening.
� Playing for real. This translates into making high-performance, horizontal behavior a
“must,” not just a want; making such behavior part of the performance review, advancement
and reward process; having the leader and team role-model expected behavior, and holding
everyone, including the leader, accountable.
� Dealing with deadwood. Coach team members that need support, skill them, and if all else
fails, bid them farewell.
Building cohesive and effective global teams with the muscle to perform is one of the great, if
not the greatest challenge facing today’s executives. The executives we know who are winning
on the global stage are doing so by using the high-performing, horizontal model and then
aligning their team around it to counteract the centrifugal forces that, left unchecked, sap
global teams of their vitality and ability to compete now and well into the future. MW
Howard M. Guttman is principal of Guttman Development Strategies (www.guttmandev.com), a Mt. Arlington,
NJ, organizational development consulting firm that builds horizontal, high-performance organizations and teams
through leadership team alignments, leadership coaching, and leadership capabilities development.
Adapt your leadership style to work well across boundaries and cultures. Attend AMA’s seminar Leading in a
Global Environment (www.amanet.org/2011).
Copyright of MWorld is the property of American Management Association International and
its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder’s express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.
114 | JA N UA RY/ F E B RUA RY 2 0 17 training
www.trainingmag.com
G
lobal teams are at the center of an organi-
zation’s need for innovation, expansion,
and productivity. In spite of the impor-
tance of global teams, few organizations know
how to embed the awareness and skills needed
to succeed. For global teams to succeed, funda-
mental tensions must be addressed. Can training
increase the likelihood of success? Absolutely!
Research at French business school INSEAD has
identified some of the core issues (visit: http://
knowledge.insead.edu/blog/insead-blog/authentic-
liaisons-creating-bridges-across-cultures-4848).
Here is a roadmap to success based on hundreds
of teambuilding programs around the globe and
follow-up research conducted by Global Dynam-
ics, Inc., over 30 years.
1. Do a quick organizational scan to identify the
needs in your company.
project teams?
the globe?
policies, standards, and practices?
issues of trust, respect, and competency?
different countries and cultures?
2. Do a cross-cultural scan and provide the
necessary awareness building.
Global team members don’t necessarily rec-
ognize the impact their different attitudes,
perceptions, and assumptions may have on their
teamwork. Invisible cultural forces profound-
ly affect the team’s goals, as well as day-to-day
functioning. Each team member’s style of think-
ing and communicating is significantly affected
by his or her cultural upbringing. Issues of lead-
ership, power and control, decision-making,
trust, and respect take on different meanings
and significance in international teams. Here are
some key cultural factors:
A. Communication style: At a global team meet-
ing of a major Dutch organization, which was to
focus on expansion into China, there was little
initial discussion by the Chinese. After a small
amount of cross-cultural coaching, the team
facilitators started calling on the Chinese, and
the Dutch were amazed to learn how much in-
sight the Chinese had.
B. Openness to risk taking: A team of sales ex-
ecutives from four airlines were in a strategic
alliance meeting in Paris to discuss the cultural
alignment of their organizations. The U.S. team
came prepared to recommend a new fee for
luggage for those traveling in Coach on trans-
Atlantic flights. The French airline executive
immediately demanded the research that proves
this would be profitable and not cost the airlines
in lost revenue due to passengers selecting other
airlines. The Americans were frustrated by the
French refusal to “pilot” the idea and said if it
did not “fly,” they would rescind the new fee.
The French executive said if they lost even one
Euro on the new fee, he would lose his job, so he
could not approve the fee without concrete evi-
dence. The plan was vetoed.
C. Know what is important to each country:
An American medical device company seek-
ing to build a new facility in Hungary used a
U.S.-centric assessment process to select the
plant manager. The Hungarian team mem-
bers immediately vetoed the choice since the
person selected was over 50 years old, which
in Hungarian culture was viewed as someone
who might be tainted by a Communist man-
agement style.
3. Leverage these training factors for success.
A. Keep the virtual aspect in mind: An excellent-
ly designed and delivered global teambuilding
program can have extraordinary results if done
right. The key is not to do the “typical” team-
building program, which fails to address the
unique factors facing a global team. In ad-
dition to the cultural factors mentioned
above, there is a need to focus on the virtual
nature of the teams’ interactions and commu-
nication. These specific issues were covered
in an earlier column (http://pubs.royle.com/
publication/?i=224976&p=66).
B. Realize that building trust is not easy: Glob-
al teams need more time to get acquainted to
develop trust. Before any teambuilding pro-
gram, create a team Facebook page or LinkedIn
Neal Goodman, Ph.D.,
is president of Global
Dynamics, Inc., a
training and development
firm specializing in
globalization, cultural
intelligence, effective
virtual workplaces, and
diversity and inclusion.
He can be reached at
305.682.7883 and at
ngoodman@global-
dynamics.com. For more
information, visit http://
www.global-dynamics.
com.
best practices
How to ensure global team success. BY NEAL GOODMAN, PH.D.
Win Together, Lose Apart
group that contains the professional and so-
cial profile of each team member. This should
include photos, titles, and personal informa-
tion such as favorite hobbies. Global team
members should always meet in person at the
beginning of the team’s formation. This ini-
tial time should be spent getting to know
each other on a personal level. It should not
be an itinerary of business plans. One of
the biggest causes of global team failure is not
bringing the team together right from the start.
C. Create a global team communication plan:
Create a team communication plan that includes
a global calendar. Once we created a global cal-
endar for a team, the number of people not
attending the team’s virtual meetings dropped
significantly since everyone was now aware of
each team member’s holidays.
D. Be pro-actively inclusive: Neuroscience
has made us aware of the reasons for our
unconscious biases. These biases are particu-
larly significant in global teams. For example,
individuals are less trusting of a message
delivered by a person with an accent than if
the same message is delivered by a person with-
out an accent. Unless we make a conscious
effort to mitigate our unconscious biases, we
will not be able to benefit from each team mem-
ber’s potential.
Perhaps you are on a global team or have been
asked to train such a team. Share your experi-
ences, case studies, questions, best practices, and
critical issues for inclusion in a future column
via e-mail: ngoodman@global-dynamics.com.
In spite of the importance
of global teams, few
organizations know how to
embed the awareness and
skills needed to succeed.
Your Source for Professional Development
Published six times a year, Training magazine is the #1 source
of information for professional development for corporate training,
learning and performance professionals. It’s the go-to resource
for innovative global learning and development news; trends;
research and statistics; best practices; new products, services,
and technologies.
Your subscription includes the January/February Top 125 issue
and the November/December Salary Survey and Industry Report.
Keep your issues coming! www.TrainingMag.com/subscribe
Don’t miss Training’s FREE e-newsletter!
Click on the e-newsletter tab at
www.TrainingMag.com to subscribe.
PLUS:
Results-Oriented
Critical Thinking
The Evolution
of Teamwork
2016 OLC Wrap-Up
Meeting next-generation workforce, learner, and L&D delivery system needs
www.trainingmag.com
THE SOURCE FOR PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 2016 INDUSTRY REPORT & $ALARY $URVEY RESULTS
$35
NOVEMBER/
DECEMBER
2016
FUTURE
FOCUS
Visit www.TrainingMag.com for more information
w.trainningmag.com
ELOPMPMMENTNTENTENT 22016 INDUSTRY REPORTY &$ALARALARY $URVEY RESULTS
Renew
Online!
best practices
116 | JA N UA RY/ F E B RUA RY 2 0 17 training www.trainingmag.com
Copyright of Training is the property of Lakewood Media Group LLC and its content may not
be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder’s
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.