I came back from a short trip to India about two weeks ago. I made some observations during this trip which might be relevant to leaders of virtual teams. Many virtual team leaders are leading work that is accomplished partly or fully in India due to outsourcing or offshoring arrangements. I have heard from such leaders about the challenges that they have faced in leading their virtual team, including communication problems and getting the work accomplished.

Both this trip and the previous one (about 2 years ago) have helped me see the Indian culture in an interesting way. I was born and raised in India but have lived in the US since 1984. Though I am now in many ways typically American, I have also retained many of the typical characteristics of an Indian. Having some elements of the Indian culture in me and being different at the same time has made the Indian culture more salient to me. Indian culture stands out very clearly for me because it is different from what I see in the American context, but I am able to recognize elements of that culture because it is familiar to me.

My few days in India reminded me of “implicit communication,” which occurs much more frequently in India than in the US. During one incident, someone sent a special breakfast for me with his assistant. The assistant and I were to meet at a location where I had an important meeting. Unfortunately, due to traffic problems, the assistant did not arrive until 10.30 am. Instead of offering me the breakfast, he kept the breakfast in his vehicle because he assumed that since it was past the normal breakfast time, I must have already eaten my breakfast. He did not even talk about it during the day. Only later during the evening when the person who had sent the breakfast asked me how it was, did we realize what had happened. The timing of the assistant’s arrival communicated to him that I must have eaten my breakfast. I was expected to understand from his impending late arrival that I had to make alternate arrangements for my breakfast. In other words, the context (i.e., arrival time) itself carried different messages for the assistant and me.

Implicit communication occurs more often in what the anthropologist Edward Hall referred to as high-context cultures. In such cultures, people leave many things unsaid. The context, made up of the environment, the situation, and the parties involved, itself carries messages that complement the spoken word and make up for the things that are left unsaid. Indian culture is a high-context culture, as are the cultures of many Asian and Arab nations. In low-context cultures, such as the US and much of Europe, communication is more explicit. Expectations, relationships, and knowledge are typically made more explicit in such cultures. There is less that is assumed to have been communicated in low-context cultures. Thus, an inverse relationship exists between the level of context and the level of verbalized communication.

How does implicit communication affect multi-cultural virtual teams consisting of members from both high-context and low-context cultures? Often virtual teams have less direct communication than face to face teams. And, using electronic communication, virtual teams also lose some cues available to face-to-face teams, such as body language. This means members of a team from cultures that are high and low context may experience particular kinds of misunderstandings or differences in how they approach issues arising withing the team. Here are some examples:

• Saying “yes” to a request might have vastly differing meanings from one type of culture to another. To a member of a low-context, explicit communication culture, the expectation may be that the request will be carried out no matter what. To a member of a high-context, implicit communication culture, the expectation may be that all parties understand that “yes” is qualified by the context in which that member is situated (the article “Culture Notes: Never Say No” provides very good examples of what “yes” or expressions of agreement may actually mean).
• The communication styles of one type of culture might also translate poorly into the other. Members of low-context cultures often try to reach explicit agreements about how team members will perform their work. To members of high-context cultures, this often comes across not only as unnecessary and puzzling, but even as rude. Neither group is inherently right or wrong; the judgment is based on underlying assumptions about how people work together. This point is illustrated in the article “India-US Nuclear deal – The diplomacy-cultural context,” which discusses the bafflement among the Indians as the US kept adding conditions to the India-US nuclear agreement reached by the Indian Prime Minister and the US President against a high-context backdrop.
• In their book, “Cultural Intelligence: Individual Interactions Across Cultures,” Christopher Earley and Soon Ang indicate that high- and low-context cultures influence how conflict is resolved. While individuals from low-context cultures are more able to separate the conflict issue from the persons involved, individuals from high-context cultures often are not. The latter generally think that the individuals involved with the conflict issue should show sensitivity towards one another and not try to confront each other; confronting someone is seen as an insult. On the other hand, individuals from low-context cultures think that conflict should be handled through an open discussion of the issues involved. This is a direct result of how individuals from different cultures see communication. Members of high-context cultures see communication more holistically. Communication is seen as being inextricably tied to the context, which includes the issue being discussed as well as the individuals involved and their feelings.

How do we avoid situations, such as those illustrated above, that arise in teams consisting of members from both high-context and low-context cultures? Here are some ideas for a virtual team leader to consider:

• Make all members of your team aware of this cultural difference. Indicate to your team that research for virtual teams shows that, because of the challenges inherent in virtual work, being a little more explicit in communication is probably necessary. This may mean more of a challenge to high-context team members who are used to implicit communication. To help them feel more comfortable with being explicit, frame virtual work as a totally new way of doing things with a lot of learning to be done along the way. This will make them less hesitant to step out of their normal way of communicating. If possible, work one-on-one with high-context teams members and help them practice being more explicit by asking them to speak up. Talk to low-context team members to make sure that they don’t bowl implicit members over and to help them learn how to listen for subtle cues.
• As team leader, make sure to communicate often with both sides, particularly less explicit members. Learn to ask the right questions in the right way so members are not put off by this somewhat explicit approach. Also, use the richest medium possible – perhaps you will want to schedule more face-to-face time than in a homogeneous group.
• Build some objective measures or indicators into the collaboration system so that updates and results are not always dependent upon a human report. This should help alleviate uncomfortable situations, conflict, and uncertainty. For instance, a shared document that includes a report being worked on by a virtual team’s members can indicate status of the work accomplished by the different members. Note that the constant availability of information about what others in the team have contributed (or, more importantly, not contributed) can lead to a breakdown of trust if not managed properly. This may be alleviated to some extent through a shared calendar in which members provide information about when they plan to make their contributions. After Action Reviews are likely to be particularly useful in preventing a breakdown of trust when done properly (i.e., by keeping their focus on learning what happened and why it happened while minimizing the focus on individual members).
• Help the team make a team compact. As part of this process, team members will create rules of engagement which make explicit the what, when, who, and how of decision-making and communication within the team. Among the things covered by the rules of engagement are the nature and frequency of communication, communication media to be used, the values that the team will live by, the response times for messages, how conflict will be resolved, and how the decisions will be made, including who makes what decisions. This may be somewhat uncomfortable for team members who are unaccustomed to explicit communication, so give plenty of time to the process, make sure all members’ voices are heard, and focus on positive, encouraging verbage from all members. The goal is to work out some explicit guidelines for the team’s work while making sure no one is put off, intimidated, or uncertain about the process. Make use of After Action Reviews to reinforce the team compact.

Don’t wait for problems to arise due to cultural differences in your virtual team. If you are proactive, you are likely to produce a team that is able to take advantage of the diversity of perspectives within itself rather than being bogged down by misunderstandings and conflict, which unfortunately are a common occurrence in multi-cultural teams.