How Leaders Around the World Build Trust Across Cultures

Summary: In our focus group interviews where American, Asian, Latin American, and Arab executives were recruited, we have identified three elements that senior executives use in building relationships based on trust:

• They work with the right attitude.
• They work with the right attitude.
• They concentrate on the outcomes and the trust and credibility that need to be earned in the process.

Expanding the business network requires intense trust-building activities directed at outside stakeholders. Tableau reports that managing cross-border relationships might be draining for some individuals, especially when different patterns of trust are present. Nevertheless, it is crucial for effective relations and work performance among participants of various cultural backgrounds.

But how do you build this cross-cultural trust? With this attitude, even a tiny interpersonal touch can inspire confidence even without the foundation of a shared social background and nationality. It is also challenging as even expanding the business in the international sense requires the development of relationships based on mutual trust. As a major force of this conduct, organizations invariably face focus group interviews with American, Asian, Latin American, and Middle Eastern managers and executives, which require thoughtful consideration and communication.

It is necessary to begin with the right attitude. Executives realised from the interviews that building trust could take many ways, different times and different factors in any society and with people from other cultures. What is critical is the time and care one takes. They had a culture of trust, whether they belonged to the United States, a high-trust culture, or came from Argentina, Brazil, and other low-trust countries. This is important because someone from a high-trust culture and working with a low-trust culture will get quickly frustrated attempting to build relations with the employees and be shocked that it is a little more complex than expected. For those who are less naturally trusting or come from more wary cultures, such a systematic approach to dealing with others would be familiar to co-workers with cultures of a similar degree to his. However, they risk alienating their more trusting co-workers, who may see that reflexive distrust as exasperating and bewildering.

We also noted that those working closely with foreign colleagues invested a lot in understanding their employees' cultures. One of the factors underlying this was that they tried to get a little information about the culture, including how trusting it is, how performance-based it is, and how hierarchical and autocratic it is. More importantly, they also inquired how people in that culture earn others' trust. In certain countries, managers successfully hold these direct discussions with employees, while this is not appropriate in others. In hierarchical cultures, for example, subordinate employees may find it challenging to share their opinions with their supervisors since they are not used to such communication, which is mainly one-way. In other cultures, such discussions can take place only in private and one-on-one. It is vital to understand when and against whom such discussions regarding trust should be held.

Finally, managers who successfully developed trustworthy relationships in an intercultural environment realized the value of both the result and personal character in trust formation. The study's findings suggest that at any level of society, people tend to focus on either trust in personal character or trust in results. For example, in the U.S., workplace trust is generally based on results; if Sam turns in the report on time, I know I can trust her to get the next one in on time, too.

In other cultures, it is the person's character who lends trust. It is common in Middle Eastern regions for automatic hot trust to be made when one has a family member or close associate who can recommend the person's honesty regardless of expertise. Most of the big businesses in Arab countries also tend to be family and recruit people who are relatives of the family because family relations and known people are the best ways to judge trust. During our investigations, we observed business executives overcoming the issue of incorporating trust into management by adopting certain behaviors in each setting.

In a performance-based environment, managers worked on the concept of interdependence and clearly articulated, in actions and speech, the likelihood of the team achieving the group's objectives when the members strode towards a common goal. It further enhanced the positive orientation by demonstrating to others how all the parties would benefit from trust and cooperation. Last but not least, they kept the big picture in mind and appreciated the outlook of their employees. For instance, let us suppose that any of them faced some expenses in the short run, such as giving up their holidays to participate in a training program. In this case, a time would be necessary to redeem the cost, perhaps due to a promotion.

In those organisations underpinned by character, bosses built trust by evidencing their concern for the group's health and willingness to invest time, money, and emotions. Such obligations change with culture; to some American teams, a dedicated leader gives the necessary tools and framework to work on a project; in many Asian and Latin American countries, it may be the case that it is essential to know and help employees and their families. Within cultures such as China, workers desire leaders who would take on a parental role, while in Brazil, employees want their leaders to engage more socially with them.

Managers who work in character-driven workplaces earn their trust and loyalty by making little commitments and sticking to them, preferably immediately after it has been made, especially regarding an employee's personal issues. This also helped provide goodwill and showed that the manager was worried about the workers' health. Once more, while to an American work group, the term 'credibility' is applied when the individuals are 'in the zone' and working, the majority of the rest of the world places as much, and on occasions even more, worth on the time spent away from work.

Two other behaviours were present: bonding over commonalities and demonstrating trust. It's common—at least mostly expected—that colleagues would search for something in common during their first meeting, but in character-driven cultures, these commonalities gain additional importance. When people meet in the U.S. for the first time, it is common for them to share baseball or Hollywood movies as their common ground, in contrast with Asia, where people seek to know their colleagues more so than discuss surface-level issues, which transcends even the simplest conversations. Moreover, once such commonalities are drawn up, they can also give rise to undertakings that benefit both parties. An American executive suggested that a Middle Eastern executive do some business. After he arrived, he realised they had been in the same program at the same university. His attitude changed drastically. He began treating the American executive as his long-absent brother, and they developed a powerful bond. 

Last but not least, managers built trust by being the first to change the dynamics: They undertook the risk and demonstrated their faith in their employees. There are risks associated with all trust, but they believed trust could be expected to develop and deepen in positive relationship-building situations, creating a virtuous cycle of the spiral of more belief in each other, resulting in more acts of trust.

Such colleagues displayed trustworthiness progressively and could be trusted by the manager.

Recognition and comprehension of how trust-building within various cultures varies in different countries can help alleviate work relations. On the other hand, with this knowledge and understanding, it may be manageable and manageable. In our research, which allowed us to parallel perspectives, we discussed with a Danish executive in charge of Latin America who spent twelve hard months trying to develop relations with her subordinates, only to realize that trust in the region is far below Danish levels. This changed the course of things for her as once she appreciated the dynamics of trust between her and the team, she adjusted her leadership and managed to achieve her goals.

By Mansour Javidan and Aks Zaheer