In the previous article (Cross-Cultural Management #1), I wrote about how cross-cultural management isn’t just for overseas assignments — it’s about the invisible walls between people with different backgrounds, even in the same office.
This time, I’ll explore what happens inside us when we hit those cultural walls — through the concept of “cultural cruise control.”
Cruise control — the danger of autopilot
In a car, cruise control lets you maintain speed without pressing the accelerator. Convenient on a highway — but dangerous when road conditions change and your reactions are delayed.
Cultural cruise control works the same way. It’s the state of unconsciously applying what worked in one environment to a completely different one.
And here’s the catch: the more successful and experienced you are, the harder it is to disengage this autopilot.
Why? Because success builds conviction. The more you’ve succeeded with a particular approach, the less you feel the need to consider alternatives. You unconsciously believe “my way is the right way.” When I heard this in class, it hit close to home. After 28 years in IT infrastructure, I’ve built up a strong sense of “this is how things should be done.” That sense is my greatest asset — and potentially my biggest blind spot.
The headquarters that couldn’t understand “guanxi”
A case study in class presented this scenario:
A global company was rolling out an integration project to unify fragmented regional operations into “one company.” The CEO’s logic was sound: standardize processes, increase transparency and efficiency.
But a factory leader in China, who had run the operation successfully for 15 years, operated on a different logic. What mattered to him was “guanxi” (relationships) — the trust-based connections with local authorities and business partners. In China’s business environment, these personal relationships, not formal systems, determine outcomes.
For this leader, guanxi wasn’t just “networking.” Over 15 years, he had shared countless meals with local officials, learned about their families, helped each other through difficulties. This accumulated trust was the foundation that kept factory permits flowing and regulatory issues manageable. Headquarters might see it as “inefficient and personality-dependent,” but on the ground, “without it, business doesn’t move.”
The CEO proposed transferring this leader back to his home country, saying, “You’ll be happy to return home.” But for the leader, this wasn’t a promotion — it was exile. It meant being ripped away from 15 years of carefully built relationships.
Class discussion on this scene split sharply. Some argued, “From the CEO’s perspective, integration is inevitable — you can’t let one person’s emotions distort overall strategy.” Others countered, “Did headquarters properly assess the business impact of severing 15 years of relationships?” I could see both points, but what struck me most was that the CEO genuinely believed he was doing the leader a favor.
The CEO wasn’t acting with malice. He was simply applying an assumption natural in his own culture — “returning to your home country is a reward” — to someone for whom it meant the opposite. This is cultural cruise control in action.
Good intentions, rationality, experience — none of these are immunity against cultural cruise control. In fact, it’s precisely because you’re well-intentioned, rational, and experienced that you can’t see you’re on autopilot. This paradox is what makes the concept so dangerous.
Cultural differences have multiple layers
To understand cultural differences systematically, the course introduced Hofstede’s “Six Dimensions of National Culture” model:
- Power Distance: How much hierarchy is accepted
- Individualism vs. Collectivism: “I” versus “we”
- Achievement vs. Nurturing Orientation: Competition versus cooperation
- Uncertainty Avoidance: Tolerance for the unknown
- Short-term vs. Long-term Orientation: Pragmatism versus principles
- Indulgence vs. Restraint: Attitude toward enjoying life
What makes this model fascinating is that even within the same country, corporate culture and generational differences shift the positioning.
Take “Power Distance.” Japan is generally considered a high power-distance culture. But someone who grew up in a flat startup environment and someone who spent 30 years in a traditional corporation have completely different sensitivities. Even among Japanese people, “cross-cultural” gaps emerge here.
“Individualism vs. Collectivism” is also revealing. Japan is typically seen as collectivist, but my sense is that this is shifting rapidly. Having watched a client organization absorb a surge of mid-career hires over three years, I’ve seen quiet friction between long-tenured members who assume “we work as a team” and newcomers who expect “I’ll be evaluated on my individual output.” This isn’t international cross-cultural tension — it’s intra-organizational culture clash within the same Japanese company.
“Uncertainty Avoidance” resonates especially in IT. Japanese clients demand thorough root-cause analysis and comprehensive recurrence-prevention measures when incidents occur — a drive to eliminate uncertainty as much as possible. Meanwhile, engineers at our Indian headquarters prefer a “ship it, then fix it” approach. Neither is wrong — it’s a difference in tolerance for uncertainty. Judging the other side’s “quality standards are low” is exactly the trap of cruise control, as I realized through this course.
How to notice your own cruise control
So how do you catch yourself on autopilot? Three principles emerged from the course:
1. Don’t turn “discomfort” into “wrong”
When someone’s behavior feels off, we instinctively label it as “incorrect.” But discomfort ≠ error. Discomfort is a signal that a different cultural premise is at work.
For example, a culture that takes decisions home to deliberate versus one that decides on the spot. If you’re used to the latter, the former might look like “lack of decisiveness.” But it’s not wrong — it’s a different consensus-building process. Converting discomfort directly into judgment is proof that cruise control is engaged.
2. Articulate your own assumptions
Ask yourself: “Why do I believe this is the right way?” Once you recognize the cultural background behind your own sense of “right,” understanding someone else’s becomes easier.
When we did this exercise in class, I was surprised at how hard it was. “Fast response time equals trustworthiness.” “Incident response should always be top priority.” These were so “obvious” to me that I never considered them cultural assumptions. But for my Indian colleagues, “consulting your manager before acting” might be what signals trustworthiness, and acting immediately could be seen as “reckless.” The same word — “trust” — carries entirely different definitions across cultures.
3. Think as a participant, not a critic
The instructor repeated: “Don’t critique the case. Put yourself in their shoes.” Judging from the outside is easy. But asking “What would I do in that situation?” is when the other person’s emotions and context finally come into view.
My own cruise control — 28 years in IT
Listening to all of this, I couldn’t stop thinking about myself.
After 28 years in IT, “this is how things work” is deeply embedded. Infrastructure design, project management, incident prioritization — the “right answers” built through experience are my strength, but also my unconscious cruise control.
When a new team member suggests a different approach, do I instantly dismiss it as “inefficient”? When a client’s new point of contact proposes an unfamiliar way of working, do I mentally label them as “not getting it”?
What especially resonated was the realization that my 20 years in the same project room — same client, same team, same space — had amplified this autopilot. That stable environment continuously validated my “right answers,” making the cruise control stronger than ever. Cruise control is most powerful in stable environments, because those environments constantly prove that you’re “right.”
Maybe it’s not the other person who’s wrong. Maybe it’s just my cruise control kicking in.
Simply realizing this changed how I interact with people. At first, I listened to the concept as an interesting idea about other people. But through discussion, as I examined my own specific behaviors, it hit me: “This is entirely about me.” There’s a vast gap between understanding something intellectually and understanding it as your own pain. This course bridged that gap.
Recommended reading
To understand cultural dimensions with data
Geert Hofstede, Gert Jan Hofstede, and Michael Minkov, Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, 3rd Edition (McGraw-Hill)
The definitive work on the six-dimension model of national culture introduced in this article. With data from over 70 countries, it provides a rigorous yet practical framework for understanding why people from different cultures think and act differently. Essential reading for anyone working across cultures.
→ Next: [Cross-Cultural Management #3] asks why the most capable people often fail in cross-cultural settings — introducing Cultural Intelligence (CQ).