Eleven countries, one problem

Spain, Andorra, Portugal, Germany, Italy, France, the United States, Mexico, Brazil, Singapore and Malaysia. Eleven countries running companies and business units. If you ask me what I’ve learnt, I’d tell you two things. First: every culture leads in its own way, and none is better than another. Second: beneath those differences, the problem holding companies back is almost always the same.

Let’s start with the differences.

Asia: authority with warmth

In Singapore and Malaysia I saw at close quarters what academics call paternalistic leadership: a boss with clear authority, who decides and gives instructions, but who at the same time looks after their people and cares about them. Firm and kind at once.

To a European it may seem old-fashioned. It isn’t. It’s a cultural matter: it has to do with how people are brought up from childhood and with respect for hierarchy. Many teams are comfortable following clear instructions and expect the boss to be the one who decides. If you arrive with a very participative style and ask their opinion on everything, you may create more insecurity than motivation.

The lesson: before applying your style, understand what the team in front of you expects from you.

The United States: lots of drive, but with a green light

In the United States I found people who seem far more go-getting than in Europe: proactive, energetic, keen to get things done. But with a nuance that surprised me: they almost always want a green light from their supervisor before they move.

There I learnt to be very explicit about the outcome I want. It isn’t enough to say “improve sales for this line”. You have to say how much, by when and how we’re going to measure it. The clearer the objective, the more autonomy you can give along the way.

Northern Europe: the rigour of small steps

What impressed me most about northern Europe was the rigour. They work in small steps, agree every action and nobody oversteps. It can seem slow at first. But once the plan is agreed, it’s delivered to perfection, with its priorities and on its deadlines.

It’s a great example. And it brings me to the habit I’d most like to see in Spanish companies: the rigour and method I’ve seen in German and Japanese companies. Less improvisation, more system.

Spain and Italy: the bad news problem

And where have I found it hardest to get someone to say “no” or give me bad news? Without a doubt, in Spain and Italy.

Our Mediterranean character means we love giving good news. In part that’s positive: we’re warm, optimistic and good at creating a nice atmosphere. But it has a cost. We sugar-coat reality. The project is “going well” until suddenly it’s going very badly. The customer is “happy” until they leave.

Cultural issues aren’t solved with a memo. What I did was explain it assertively, again and again: we managers have a right to know the truth. Bad news included. What isn’t working included. Bad news in time is an opportunity; bad news too late is a problem.

And for that to work, the leader has to do their part: don’t shoot the messenger. If you react badly every time someone brings you a problem, next time they won’t bring it to you.

The common pattern: people

After so many countries, what’s the problem that keeps coming up? Managing people.

With one important difference. Except in Asia, the staff turnover I’ve seen in Europe and the United States is, in my view, too high. Retaining talent is very hard. And that’s the great challenge for any company today.

Every good person who leaves takes knowledge, customer relationships and months of training with them. And leaves behind a team that has to fill the gap while carrying on with its own work. Few companies calculate what it costs them, and that’s why few treat it as what it is: a P&L problem.

Companies don’t stall for lack of ideas or markets. They stall because they don’t know how to attract, develop and retain the people who make them work. And that, whether in Kuala Lumpur, Mexico City or Barcelona, depends on the leader.

What I take away from eleven countries

1. Adapt the style, not the principles. The way you communicate changes with the culture; high standards and respect don’t.
2. Be explicit about the outcome. The clearer the what, the more freedom in the how.
3. Ask for the truth and protect it. A team that hides bad news is a team that doesn’t trust its leader.
4. Treat staff turnover as a management indicator. If your good people are leaving, the problem is rarely pay.

A note on paternalistic leadership: the concept has been studied mainly in Asian cultures (for example, Farh and Cheng, 2000) and combines authority, benevolence and moral example.