I recently went camping and canoeing with my children. Like every year, we meet up with other friendly families and spend 3 enjoyable days eating, drinking and doing sports. Of course, barbecues and “hot discussions” around the campfire are part of it. A great opportunity to “solve the world’s problems”, as is usually the case in these groups. It should be added that, apart from me, the male adult members of the “camping expedition” are all scientists with high positions at institutions and universities, i.e. highly educated people. However, as I discovered, they have one thing in common with other scientists: they think digitally, i.e. in terms of 1=yes and 0=no. This is no wonder, as this is how most natural sciences work. Logical conclusions based on the if-then principle lead to findings. We owe our technical progress to this way of thinking.
Applied way of thinking – no answers
It becomes confusing for these people when you enter the wide field of “maybes” and “a little bit”. At that campfire, for example, there was talk of cooperation with Indians in India. There were loud complaints that these people were not doing what was expected of them, which led to delays and frustration. Clearly, the way our Indian colleagues worked was obviously different from that in Germany. And equally clear – the Indians were judged to be inefficient as they did not function like in highly efficient Germany. Of course, I couldn’t solve this problem and the associated attitude within 15 minutes of late-night discussion. However, it highlights a problem that many people who deal with foreign countries still have.
My opinion is my castle
It is both human and natural for us to judge all behavior from our own perspective. However, it is not uncommon to get the impression that the other person is “funny” or “incompetent”. This is also human. After all, we cannot know all other cultures and assess them accordingly. However, there is one thing we can all do: first take a step back and question why the behavior is so different. And if we can’t find the answers ourselves, we are at least in a position to make enquiries. However, this is precisely the step that many people fail to take and therefore come to the wrong conclusions. In our example, the Indians naturally behave differently. But that doesn’t make Indians incapable or illogical. In fact, this behavior is efficient in India. Of course, they act from their own cultural perspective and probably don’t know the “rules of the game” in Germany either. A classic case of a “clash of cultures”.
Similar is not the same
Another factor is the assumed similarities. In the natural sciences, technicians and scientists speak a common language, namely their technical language. This naturally simplifies communication. However, when it comes to interpreting things or organizing collaboration, it is of little help if everyone knows that “water boils at 100 °C”. Assuming the same understanding, on the other hand, leads to everyone assuming that they have understood the same thing. Confusion is the result on both sides.
Knowledge is necessary
How do you get out of this situation? It’s easier than you think. Everyone has good intentions, and with the necessary knowledge you can put them into practice. Intercultural training in India is an effective measure here. However, we are leaving the digital world here and entering a terrain that holds many unknowns and requires interpretations beyond yes and no. Many behaviors have also been shaped by cultural developments. Many behaviors have also been shaped by cultural developments that have nothing to do with sober science, such as religion. In my experience, scientists in particular sometimes find this difficult. They often demand simple solutions, the infamous “dos and don’ts”. A roadmap of “if-then’s”, so to speak, with which you can ensure that everything works out if you just stick to it. Unfortunately, it’s not that simple, because there are always people involved. And every person is different. It is therefore essential not only to complete your knowledge, but also to develop suitable strategies for yourself and for the relevant situations.
State institutions are struggling
Companies think economically and invest. These are terms that are rarely used by state institutions. Taxpayers’ money is supposed to be spent on projects; expenditure on “soft skills” is usually not included. But this is precisely where the fallacy lies. Companies do not waste money on sending employees to seminars to get them out of the office. The aim of investing in intercultural training is to increase work efficiency and thus save money. This also applies to taxpayers’ money when state institutions enter into cooperation agreements with foreign countries. We also pay taxes. Therefore, it would certainly be a good idea to invest in quality and efficiency rather than favoring trial-and-error methods. Admittedly, many scientific experiments proceed in the same way, but people are not materials and are much more complex than computers. So take heart – the money invested will be recouped a thousandfold if the desired results are available more quickly and are not delayed by frictional losses.
