Western OD ideas may not work in the East!

Western OD ideas may not work in the East!

Well, I agree the statement is a little dramatic, but let’s understand the essence of the idea and how this statement may make sense.

A while ago two groups of engineers were given a task of designing a vehicle to carry water from a nearby river to a village. However, both the teams had different villages to cater to; one on a mountain, and other in a forest. Teams began scouting for resources available, and accordingly began designing the vehicle. After a while, both teams successfully made a vehicle each to help those villages get water. The interesting part is, both the designs were completely different. The distinction was majorly caused due to different terrain. Each terrain has its own ‘rules’ of facilitating or objecting, propelling and maneuvering of vehicle. Although the desired end-result was the same, none of the two vehicles would function very productively in reverse terrain.

Understanding the analogy in terms of OD Frameworks, they are designs to help achieve the desired end-result by maneuvering people systems. The terrain here is the existing social construct, and similarly each social construct (people system) has its own ‘rules’ of facilitating or objecting, propelling and maneuvering Change. People systems are largely defined and impacted by the language they speak. ‘Rules’ of language have embedded rules of ‘accepted’ behaviour in any group of people. Various psychological contracts (unsaid norms) of society and people systems are largely defined, subconsciously, by the way of interaction. ‘Linguistic Relativity’ is an area of study that describes how people and societies perceive the world around as ‘Reality’ is immensely driven by the words and rules of grammar used in the language of communication. The cultural and societal norms are weaved in people system defining the social construction, the terrain. Few notable examples are of study by A H Bloom which noticed Chinese had difficulties in answering counterfactual questions because of the way counter factuality is marked in grammar in Chinese, another study by Frode J Stromnes stated that Finnish factories had more accidents than Swedish factories of similar nature due to cognitive differences between grammatical usage, it would’ve caused Swedish factories to focus more on work processes and Finnish factories to focus more on individual workers.

To elaborate on the point, in Hindi language we have three different words to address someone; ‘Tu’, ‘Tum’, and ‘Aap’ as against only ‘You’ in English. These three different words describe different levels of respect, openness, and comfort. Culturally, elder people in the society are often addressed with respect and usage of other words to address is often considered unacceptable. This small effect goes a long way in driving Organisational Change for group of people who speak only Hindi or a language with similar rules of address. If we take any organizational restructuring exercise, we are often inclined to meritocracy as sole criteria. However, when it comes to assigning bosses and supervisors, the act of deploying younger people above elder ones is often faced with non-acceptance in groups of people defined above. Although, it may not sound ‘logical’ to not promote someone with adequate skill sets, just because the person is younger. However, the ‘logical’ rules here are defined by OD Frameworks designed by those who consider ‘age is just a number’. The ‘logical’ rules, or say ‘common sense’ is largely defined by people perception, and acceptable behaviour. In the case of group mentioned here, age acts as a huge impacting factor for sharing respect and obedience. It inevitably describes more experience and know-how, at least perceived so. Hence, acceptance of an elderly person as hierarchical senior is easier than otherwise. On the contrary, meritocracy driven culture considers all age as equal showering more importance to academics, certification, and psychological assessment tests. As long we continue using OD frameworks (vehicles) designed in a different linguistic driven culture (terrain), we will not have optimal performance and outcome. These frame works need to be conceptualized, customized and designed in the language of people to be impacted.

Driving change management is about navigating through people behaviour and culture (people systems) to have everyone aligned towards a common goal, so all resources in terms of STEM – Space of Mind, Time, Energy, and Money are devoted in coherence. Exactly as no vehicle can be designed without considering the terrain, in Change Management, terrain is the existing ‘rules’ of acceptable behaviour. Designing OD Frameworks which leverage the strengths of existing social construct often are easy to implement as the ‘logical’ rules are in sync with perceived common sense of people in question.

Building on, while we often refer to Assessment Center evaluations to determine Leadership skill-set, we also need to be mindful of the list of skills defined as ‘desired’. The checklist, against which we map behaviour and potential of individuals, is usually defined by experiments in a particular language grammar rule. The list of skill-sets defining a successful leader may not be relevant to a different social construct, or say Western author OD ideas may not work in the East!

Wishing you a Peaceful Life!

Deep Mody

A Change Leader

Helping Humans do what they do the best – Be Human