1.
WEST meets EAST
A story of
American & Korean Engineers
By Wiggly Ears

2.
Who form
Wiggly Ears?

3.
Overview
• The Case
• Analysis
• Task-oriented vs. Relationship-oriented
• Monochronic vs Polychronic
• 6D model
• Politeness
• Lingua Franca
• Team Formation & Commitment
• Conclusions

4.
The Case

5.
The Case
Who?
Two American/Indian Engineers:
• Senior Staff Engineer
• Senior Engineer: Linux Kernel
Korean clients and Engineers
When and Where?
December 2014 in Seoul, Korea

6.
The Case
What?
• Solving issues related to kernel code (central part a
system) for a chipset.
• Working styles were very different and this created
conflicts and weakened relationships.
How?
• American/Indian engineers felt undermined and
unacknowledged.
• Korean clients & engineers were only focused on prompt
results.
Animosity Indifference
Bursts of
anger

7.
Analysis

8.
Polychronic vs
Monochronic
Relationship-Oriented vs
Task-Oriented

9.
Relationship-Oriented vs Task-Oriented
Relationship-Oriented Task-Oriented
Emphasis on interaction facilitation Emphasis on work facilitation
Focus on relationships, well-being and
motivation
Focus on structure, roles and tasks
Foster positive relationships is a priority Produce desired results is a priority
Emphasis on team members and communication
within
Emphasis on goal setting and a clear plan to
achieve goals
Communication facilitation, casual interactions
and frequent team meetings
Strict use of schedules and step-by-step plans,
and a punishment/incentive system

10.
Polychronic time vs Monochronic time
P- time M-time
Concentrate on an event happening around
them
Concentrate on a task set before them
Are committed to people and relationships Are committed to the job and end results
Change plans often and easily Dedicate themselves to plans
Are more concerned with community and
shared connections
Are more concerned with privacy and individual
ownership
Have strong tendency to build lifetime, familial
relationships
Have strong tendency to build temporary,
practical relationships

11.
Hofstede’s 6D Model

12.
Hofstede’s 6D model
Power
distance
Individualis
m
Masculinity
Uncertainty
avoidance
Long Term
orientation
Indulgence
US 40 91 62 46 26 68
Korea 60 18 39 85 100 29
40
91
62
46
26
68
60
18
39
85
100
29
US Korea

13.
Trust
• Working effectively as a team requires trust
• Trust in a collectivist culture
• Individualistic culture has looser relationships
“When the Koreans, visited India for
a few weeks, they never even tried
Indian food there. They found a
Korean delivery and just ordered
that.”
“Not recognizing that
they have a team of
specialists here to
help them and
complete disregard
to include us in the
discussion”

14.
Korea
Obey rules
No small talk
Stick to time
Important power distance
Humble
Please crowd
Politeness
Forgetting
being polite
easily affects
the whole
group
“The American traveling with me would always try to make conversation with
them during lunch and he was ignored after a few questions and they would
continue talking in Korean amongst themselves”
US
Will bend rules if necessary
Express themselves freely
Tolerate

15.
Lingua Franca

16.
Lingua Franca
• Lingua franca of the work group is English
• Koreans start English in age 10, but start speaking it later
• In Korea, university courses are in Korean, not in English (workplaces in Korean
also)
• In India, most of the courses in the universities are in English. And the Indian had
been living in the US for six years
• American person might have used expressions that are not familiar to the Koreans
“How do you expect us to solve your
problems when you're talking in a
language we don’t understand...?”

17.
Team formation & Commitment
Work
team
Work
group

18.
Team Formation & Commitment
Facts:
• No previous communication
• No team bonding activities.
• Teams worked independently
Disadvantages of multicultural teams [Adler (2002)]
• Miscommunication
• Less interaction
• Language Problems
• Stress
Forming
Storming
Norming
Performing
• Meetings
• Staff manager
(Leader)
• Clear goals
• Disagreements
but no solutions

19.
Team Formation & Commitment
• Recognize themselves as a distinct unit or
department
• Actually work INDEPENDENTLY OF EACH
OTHER to achieve their organizational goals
Work
team
Work
group
• May come from DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS
within a business
• COLLABORATE TOGETHER to achieve some set
purpose, goal or project.

20.
• Attitudinal Commitment
• Attitude towards the organization
• Identify with the goals and values of the organization
• Maintain their membership to the organization
• Continuance Commitment
• Calculative attitude towards the organization
• Membership based on economic reasons, prior
investments or lack of alternatives available
Team Formation & Commitment
“We were there to help the
customers from our company, so
we couldn't just get up and walk
out saying ’I’m done’, specially
when the customer VP asks you to
stay a little longer...”

21.
Conclusions

22.
Conclusions
• There needs to be trust between team members
• Rules of engagement are desired to avoid conflicts
• Knowing about the culture before going to a place is desired (smaller
cultural shock)
• Go through all the stages of the team formation process
• Communicating and interacting more (before, during and after)

23.
Thank you!

24.
References
1. Anzalone, Chris. "Differences between Task-Oriented Leaders & Relational-Oriented Leaders". Demand Media.
Retrieved 3 November 2012.
2. Manktelow, James. "Leadership Style". Mind Tools. Retrieved 2 November 2012.
3. Differences Between Group Work & Team Work http://smallbusiness.chron.com/differences-between-group-work-team-
work-11004.html
4. Work team trust and effectiveness http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/00483480310488360
5. Affective, Calculative and Normative Commitment: An Assessment of Relationship
http://www.wrbrpapers.com/static/documents/September/2012/7.%20Tommy.pdf
6. The Hofstede Centre http://www.geert-hofstede.com
7. Trust and Reputation for Collectivist Cultures http://www.bic-trust.eu/files/2012/10/BIC-trust-and-
culture-SA.pdf