I looked across the assembly room as a New York autumn played out through the floor to ceiling windows. The diversity sprinkled throughout the room was impressive. Of the 30 people in my Columbia University Executive and Organizational Development Cohort, 15 were from outside the U.S.

We were gathered for our first attempt at putting into practice what we learned in the lecture series.

All the theories around developmental frames, entry and contracting and appreciative inquiry buzzed through my head as I mentally rehearsed how I would create a meaningful dialogue with my first practice client. Sergey, a brash businessman from Russia, sat across from me at one of the 15 folded tables strewn throughout the cavernous room. A Radio Shack grade camera stared at us to record the event.

I played the role of the client first as Sergey lobbed in the opening question. “So, vat brings you to coaching?”. I talked about the fear I had around this new chapter of my life, the comfort and security I left behind. I might have exaggerated my feelings a bit to help the process, but I was largely open and authentic.

When we shifted roles, Sergey started by saying in his thick accent, “O.K., you cannot ask me anything that’s personal!”. Yikes. This is how we are going to create meaning in our coaching relationship?

Then I looked up and saw the multiple cultural differences firsthand. The Brazilians gesticulated and dramatically spoke to every intimate detail of their emotions. Yamato-san looked politely yet stoically at his practice partner.

Ahhh. This isn’t a one size fits all approach.

No alt text provided for this image Cross cultural intelligence becomes a critical tool when we’re dealing with employees or coaching clients. Geert Hofstede, a Dutch social psychologist, pioneered meaningful research that showed how your cultural background influences your expectations in the workplace. For instance, employees in Latin American and Asian countries expect and accept that power is distributed unequally. Germanic countries challenge authority. The U.S. is midway between the two extremes. Whereas a person in Japan tends to look to management for all the answers, those countries with a lower hierarchical preference have a greater tolerance for ambiguity.

This showed up for me as global leader at Sony Pictures. My managing director in Tokyo escorted me around like a revered dignitary and bestowed upon me gifts and fine dining experiences. While my head of the division in Munich, looked at me more like an esteemed consultant who you could and should have a beer with.

Great Britain maintains a high degree of individual orientation. In other words, on average they pursue their employer’s interests to the degree that these coincide with their own. Brazilians on the other hand crave a team orientation and are willing to subjugate their personal goals for the greater good.

Open confrontation is viewed as an essential part of everyday conversation in France. While it is frowned upon in Asian countries like Indonesia.

As a leader or a coach, you should do your homework. Understand how decisions are made when dealing with individual countries. Does the culture support consensus building like Sweden or the Netherlands or is it hierarchical like China or Nigeria?

No alt text provided for this image Even if your employee is a permanent resident in your native country, that doesn’t mean she sees the world the same as you or that you can group every race into one category. In the U.S. for instance, a Hispanic/Latino heritage could mean their roots are Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Dominican, Central or South American to name a few. Similarly, you cannot paint all Black Americans with the same cultural brush. People are nuanced. They deserve to be treated as such.

Take a beat to consider what perspective the person on the other side of the table is coming from. Ask empathetic questions. Listen more than you speak. The results will be more impactful, and you’ll have greater loyalty within your employees and clients.