Learning objectives :

• Understanding the personal and cultural preferences of those you're speaking with without resorting to clichés
• Adapt your communication style and the way you present your ideas to suit the cultural context
• Adapting your delegation and feedback to ensure they are understood and effective, regardless of the culture
  ‍

Course :

Session 1: Understanding One Another
We can only adapt to others if we first understand ourselves. Participants explore Hofstede’s onion model (Symbols, Heroes, Rituals, Values, Practices: the deeper we go into the layers, the more profound and often unconscious the differences become) to understand that everyone is culturally multi-layered. They then discover the spectrum of relationship-based trust (we trust each other because we know each other personally) vs. work-based trust (we trust each other because we have collaborated effectively together), before writing their Guide to Me: My personal organization / My communication style / Things to know if we work together / What annoys me / How to win me over.

Case Study : Write your "Guide to Me" in groups of 3–4 and present it to your peers, identifying your true personal preferences regardless of your cultural background.

Session 2: Adapting Your Communication and Presentations
The same idea can be received very well or very poorly depending on who you’re speaking to—not because it’s a bad idea, but because it isn’t phrased in the right register. This session is structured around two key themes. Low-context vs. high-context: in low-context cultures, communication is explicit and precise, and repetition is appreciated; in high-context cultures, messages are conveyed between the lines and rely on implicit cues and nonverbal signals. Principles-first vs. applications-first: some cultures build a theoretical argument before reaching a conclusion (thesis, antithesis, synthesis), while others start with facts and applications.

Case Study : Prepare the same market research presentation for two different cultural audiences (European vs. North American), and observe how the same content requires radically different approaches.

Session 3: Adapting Your Delegation and Feedback
Delegating tasks and giving feedback while assuming that everyone works the same way you do is the surest way to be misunderstood. Participants focus on three areas. Why vs. How: Some cultures need to start with the issue and the meaning (Why), while others want precise and concrete instructions (How). Direct vs. indirect feedback: Some cultures give feedback without sugarcoating it, while others systematically soften the negative. Confrontation vs. avoidance: expressing disagreement is healthy in some cultures, threatening in others. The COIN framework (Context: at such-and-such a time / Observations: I observed that / Impacts: this is important because / Next Steps: what do you think?) allows for clear and respectful feedback regardless of cultural background.

Case Study : Decoding ambiguous feedback given in an indirect style, distinguishing between what was said and what was understood, and then rephrasing the message using the COIN method so that it is effective regardless of the recipient’s cultural background.