Working with Americans in Global Teams: The Challenge for Europeans

Back to categories

Back to articles

We look at some of the challenges faced by Europeans in working with Americans in international teams, and what form a productive European response to each might take

Working with Americans in "global" or international teams ought to be fairly straightforward for Europeans. After all, both are comfortable in the "culture" of international business; English furnishes a common business language; there is little instinctive distrust between the two; and both share certain assumptions about teamwork & co-operation.

There are many examples of successful Euro-American teamwork in scores of organisations. Nevertheless, the international business environment of the 21st century, with its increased competition and globalisation, the increasing importance of internet-based communication, rapid creation of new types of businesses, and cross-border mergers of existing businesses means both a greater requirement for and greater stress upon teamwork and co-operation between Europeans and Americans.

On an organisational level, for European companies, the size and distance of its American operations can be daunting, and Europe often does not appear to loom large in the thinking of their American counterparts. European subsidiaries or branches of American companies may fear that they will be dominated by American assumptions, needs, policies and business practices. For their part, Americans may be concerned by what they see as European fragmentation and preoccupation with being different.

On an interpersonal level, Europeans and Americans working together often struggle to find compatible ways of communicating, the common tool of business English notwithstanding. Frequent reliance on e-mail communication creates high mutual expectations of immediate and full responsiveness, which for a variety of reasons may not be forthcoming. Europeans especially may feel that where there is organisational dominance by the USA, there is also numerical or political dominance by Americans in teams to the extent that Europeans may have difficulty making themselves heard and understood.

Yet these difficulties can be surmounted with both good will all round and a willingness to understand and address within the team the differences which may exist between American and European attitudes, expectations, and styles of teamwork. Let us look briefly at some of the specific challenges faced by Europeans in working with Americans in international teams, and what form a productive European response to each might take.

American approaches to teamwork and the role of the team leader

There is much that Europeans and Americans share in their requirements for effective teamwork, notably the need for a clear goal, and clear roles and responsibilities for each contributor. Your American colleague, however, may have different ideas of what constitutes 'team spirit.' Americans are accustomed to demonstrating their commitment to the team publicly. In the case of a formally constituted team, such as a company, a project, or a department/function, this can take the form of the wearing of baseball caps and t-shirts with team name and/or logo inscribed. More important than this to your American counterpart, however, is behaviour within the team. In group meetings or briefing sessions, public expressions of doubt, scepticism - or worse, pessimism - are often considered bad form, and regarded as at best unnecessary, and at worst harmful. Team commitment is also shown in one's work habits - frequent meetings, long hours. These may not always be productive, as Europeans (and Americans themselves) are quick to point out, but your American colleague may not understand what he sees as a 9-to-5-and-no-more mentality of some Europeans.

As for the role of the team leader, Americans often expect that the leader will show his/her enthusiasm, will be actively and visibly involved, will inform and expect to be kept informed, and will often use procedures and systems (meeting agendas, project management tools, etc). To many Europeans - who may differ amongst themselves in this area - this enthusiasm may be na?ve, the involvement overbearing and unnecessary, and the unrelenting pressure on objectives unrealistic.

How can Europeans cope, when they think there may be different expectations in this area?

Whether in the role of team leaders or members, Europeans should actively work to ensure that team members get to know each other directly and closely. Americans of course want and expect that team members get on well with each other. But they may attach relatively less importance to this, and spend less time promoting it, than may Europeans.

Differences, which may exist in this area, need to be recognised openly, and put on the table as issues for the team and the leader to discuss together. Expectations must be clarified, and negotiated.

A perceived lack of international awareness on the part of the Americans

From a European perspective, Americans often appear to be lacking in understanding of national and organisational differences worldwide, even though they may have "global" responsibilities or objectives.

What to a European appears to be the American desire that everything be done "the American way," to your American colleague is simply a focus on universally valid sensible business practices required for the good of the company or the team. Believe it or not, he or she does not actively seek to "dominate" culturally, and might be surprised that his or her well motivated actions are perceived this way.

So how might Europeans respond to this?

Educate your American colleagues. Complaining is only going to confirm some Americans' views of Europeans in business as negative, conservative dissenters. Spend time face-to-face or on the phone to explain the situation and circumstances in Europe. If done constructively, with an emphasis on why an understanding of these differences will help the team, your American colleague will normally be very receptive.

Where possible, negotiate schedules of tele- and video-conferences, phone calls, and so on. Insist that sufficient notice be given, and that you are given the opportunity to prepare yourself for these.

Discussion, consultation, and handling conflict within the team

Europeans and Americans may have different expectations of these critical aspects of teamwork. Your American team member or leader comes from a business culture where there is much talk of 'consensus', but little tradition of collective decision-making and none of collective responsibility. Moreover, there is little expectation in American business culture of consultation per se. It's not that American colleagues and managers will not consult others; it is rather that they will not do this as a matter of course, but only when necessary and then only with those directly involved. Individuals are expected to fully "own" their objectives and tasks, and to obtain the support of others through persuasion more than through consultation.

While many Europeans are comfortable with this, others may be less so. Some have a cultural background, which attaches relatively more importance to group decisions, responsibility, and credit, and to the need for consultation with the team to validate individual decisions. To them, Americans appear too individualistic.

Your American counterpart, on the other hand, may instinctively distrust collective decision-making, whatever American organisation development specialists may preach. He or she may also find the European group discussions and consultations as slow, time- wasting, bureaucratic, and political.

Given the vital importance of this aspect of teamwork, how should Europeans deal with this?

The whole issue of how the group consults, takes decisions, and handles conflict must be addressed by the team, and a negotiated agreement reached. Members and leaders alike should be clear about their expectations, so that a balanced way of working together can be agreed.

Europeans should not assume that American team meetings will be particularly consultative in character, or that an American member of a multi-national team will necessarily want to use a meeting for purposes of debate or discussion. Americans will generally expect that decisions and conflicts be handled by the individuals directly involved. Europeans need to be clear as to their expectations in this area. If you want to consult your American colleagues, it may help to start one-to-one, then follow this with general discussions to promote an exchange of views.

Effective use of e-mail

The advantages as well as the pitfalls of e-mail are well known. Yet teams may still encounter difficulties in establishing effective two-way communication with this important tool. Americans, of course, particularly love it for its speed, reach (to everyone, supposedly) and efficiency. With relatively less importance attached to personal relationships and to consultation/discussion, your American colleague sees no reason not to use e-mail for almost all team communication purposes.

Europeans sometimes find that while Americans may expect their international colleagues to respond quickly to e-mails, they do not always reciprocate. They also can be annoyed by an apparent American tendency to send far more e-mail cc's than necessary. A couple points of explanation may help here. First, your American colleague has the same perception concerning European responsiveness. Secondly, Americans generally believe that it is important to be "in the loop" of information, and to keep others "in the loop". Americans may feel little need to consult you, but they will inform you, and expect that in return. Hence the cc's. Finally, with English as the frequent shared language of the group, they may not realise that it is sometimes difficult and time-consuming for non-native English speakers to prepare a long response to an e-mail question or request.

So how can Europeans ensure that e-mail is used to greatest advantage in working with Americans in global teams?

First, both European and American team members alike need to agree together basic principles and practices for e-mail "etiquette" and use: What it will be used for; How often; Who is to be copied on what; Etiquette for acknowledging receipt of an e-mail which requires a reply; What consideration they will show each other in order to ensure prompt and full responsiveness.

Europeans who are concerned that Americans are not responding to their e-mails

a) should make sure that they have established a direct relation with the person involved, by phone or in person, as far as possible.

b) They should make sure that when making requests for information, input, and so on, they specify exactly what they need and by when and why it is important, and if necessary why it is in the interest of the other person to respond as requested. This is common courtesy, and you probably expect the same from your American colleagues.

But if, as we have implied earlier, you are trying to raise the profile of your European point of view, then you will need to be direct and persuasive with your American colleagues.

Conclusion

We have focused here on possible differences in American and European approaches to international teamwork, with some advice on how Europeans can deal with these differences. The keys are:

• a willingness to recognise these possible differences

• negotiating these differences within the team, group, or organisation

• ensuring that team members get to know each other directly and well

• educating your American colleagues on the European perspective.

With these, the good will with which people from both regions approach their colleagues and their organisations can be directed toward strong and productive teamwork, while the distrust and misunderstanding which corrodes teamwork can be prevented.

Robert Day is a management development and training consultant, specialising in effective communication/negotiation, team development, and cross-cultural issues in international business.