Skip to main content

Adrian’s Indian team expected him to make most decisions as their leader. He should have communicated his plan and decisions in the initial meeting with the team. He could have consulted with key persons to get their input before the meeting. After the decisions have been made, planning can be taken care of by the subordinates.

Background: India is a hierarchical society, which is also reflected in the corporate world. In India, most of the decisions are made by the power holders. Decisions are made by a few, and meetings are used to communicate the decisions and plans to the rest and get further buy-in.

Adrian expects ideas and initiatives from his Indian team during their first meeting, as this has always been the case when he worked with his Swedish team. The Indian team, in this case, was expecting Adrian to communicate his plans and tell them exactly what he wants them to do and how. They are not used to giving a lot of input to the leader during a meeting.

Background: Hierarchy in India impacts how communication flows between leaders and subordinates. Communication is driven by the leader during a group meeting. If the leader wants input from the team, he or she will give a cue to the team members by asking them to share their ideas and input. Most of the communication is top-down.

Adrian failed to get the team to investigate more into issues during team meetings, especially when he focused on selected individuals. In all cases, avoid giving negative or constructive feedback to your team in front of the other teammates. If necessary, plan a one-on-one meeting to discuss the issues and suggest changes.

Background: In addition to being hierarchical, India is also a collectivist culture. This means people belong to in-groups, and being accepted and respected by your group is of utmost priority. Getting negative feedback or being told off in front of your peers and group can be very tough emotionally.

Adrian should actively plan regular check-ups with his team members. It is expected that a manager does a regular check-up and follows up with the whole team. If you send an email, it is normal to follow that up with a call to ensure it has been taken care of.

Background: Indian teams usually juggle a lot of things at the same time and the priority of these things needs to be set and reminded regularly. Good managers will set up the priority list regularly, even daily, to assign the tasks and flag critical items for the day.

Adrian should have planned more time and informal meetings with the team to connect and build a relationship with his team members. This would have allowed the team members to open up more and communication would have improved a lot.

Background: In collectivist cultures, business and personal lives overlap. A good manager builds a group of people into a family, and the family looks after each other. In India, your teammates are by default your friends, and the team will discuss personal issues with each other and look for support. A good leader invests time in the personal wellbeing of the team members.

If in some cases Adrian did feel frustrated with the team, he should try to stay calm and not react with anger. Showing too much emotion in front of your team should be the last resort.

Background: A good leader in India is like a benevolent “godfather” or “godmother”. You stay calm during tough times and motivate your team to take the right actions. You shield the team from “others” and for this safety, the team is loyal to you.

Adrian did not feel the need to delegate his authority for routine tasks and discussions. He expected that the team would automatically handle and take the decisions as needed. He should have explicitly delegated the decision-making and action taking to one of the senior engineers. This needs to be clearly communicated along with the scope of the delegation, both with the delegate as well as the rest of the team.

Background: India being a hierarchical, collectivist and relaxed culture means decisions are expected to be made by the leaders and managers, and if they are absent it does not mean anyone from the team can make the decision. If the delegation is not in place, it is normal in India to wait for the decision until the power holder is back in the office.

Adrian will need to spend a lot more time directing and managing his team than he did in Sweden, although this may feel like micromanagement from his perspective. He needs to check up with each team member on a regular basis.

Background: A good leader in India is responsible for managing and allocating tasks for each team member. He or she will follow up with the team on a daily basis, asking and checking if they need any help. What gets inspected gets done.

Adrian, being Swedish, believes that a good leader does not assert himself on his team. In Sweden, a good leader is expected to seek consensus among the team by acting as a facilitator. But in India, a more assertive, direct and confident communication style is expected from a leader. Adrian needs to be more direct and assertive in his communication and management towards his team.

Background: India is a hierarchical and masculine society, meaning it is important to show your power and status. A leader stands out in the masses. Your title, clothing, office, car and other status symbols show the power and status you hold. Leaders are physically present around their teams to help and guide them.

Although Adrian liked the positive attitude of the team towards his requests, he was caught by surprise a few times when the request was not delivered, and he did not find out about the delay until the last minute. He needed to learn the high context communication style of India, where a lot is said in between the lines. Reading the body language and the tone of the message is important. He could have asked more open questions to his team to get the “how” and “what” of the plans. Regular follow-ups are also needed to ensure the plan is being followed and that the team understands the priorities.

Background: Collectivist and hierarchical cultures like India tend to follow indirect and high context communication styles. Saying a direct “no” to leaders is seen as disrespectful and usually avoided. Requests are accepted without question, and “no” is expressed in a very indirect way. To someone from a low context culture, the real message may be hidden inside what is said. A good leader creates a safe atmosphere and space to challenge ideas and discuss ongoing issues.

A Swedish carmaker opened an assembly plant in Pune, India. Adrian, who has been a highly successful manager in Sweden, was sent to India to set up and lead a team of engineers. He planned to recreate the team culture and working practices that had yielded brilliant results and motivated the whole team in Sweden. He believed in creating and enabling an atmosphere for his team where everyone puts forward their ideas and issues, and together they agree on a way forward for the whole team. He would consult with all layers of his team, above and below, to make sure everyone had their say before decisions concerning them were made. He never felt the need to follow up or chase his team, as once the decision was made, everyone went on with their tasks until they needed some help, or it was completed. If there was an issue, he expected the team members to show up at his door and ask for his help. This way of working was both accepted and expected by Adrian and his team in Sweden without the need to ever talk about it.

Before Adrian travelled to Pune, India, he used the help of his Indian colleagues to select his team members. He would be directly leading a team of 12 engineers. On his first day in the plant, Adrian set up a team meeting with his new team. He had years of experience setting up and managing new teams. After the initial introductions around the table and sharing some of his experiences from Sweden, Adrian went straight to business, asking the team to share their ideas on how they would like him to run the team and share their best practices. The team was quiet and looked at each other. Thinking maybe they did not understand the question, he repeated himself but with the same result. He tried to probe further by asking individuals, but most of the responses he received were more questions than suggestions. He was taken back by this, feeling that maybe they were not as competent as he had expected.

Over the coming weeks, Adrian was getting surprised every day; some surprises he liked, others he did not. He understood that team meetings were very quiet, and he had to do most of the talking. This improved after a few weeks, but still, the communication wasn’t fluid enough for him. He did not like that every time he tried to ask for feedback and analyse further into ongoing issues during team meetings, the concerned individuals were quiet and even uncomfortable. He was happy that all his team members were always positive about taking over a new task, and everyone helped each other during projects. But he had some experiences where the assigned task was not completed on time, and he was not told about the potential delay until the deadline was around the corner. His team worked hard, and it was common for them to spend time at work beyond the usual working hours.

During one project, his team was working with the Swedish design team to produce and test a new car part. This project was of a high strategic value to the company. Adrian was on two days' holiday. During his absence, the Swedish team asked the team in Pune to make minor adjustments to the design and re-create the product. When he came back, he found his inbox full of escalation emails from the Swedish team. They were not happy that the Indian team did not deliver any work, even though they acknowledged the need for it during their meeting. Adrian set up an emergency team meeting and condemned his whole team for being unprofessional and letting everyone down. The whole team felt disappointed as they did not understand what the issue was. They had merely waited for Adrian to take the important decision. The senior management were also not happy with the outcome of the project and started doubting Adrian’s value in leading the team in India.   

After 6 months into his role, Adrian decided to move back to Sweden. He was left questioning his leadership and management style that had worked so well for years, but he just could not replicate the results in India.

Rate this content: 
Average: 5 (3 votes)
Last updated: 01.04.2022 - 14:17
Back to top