1-They blend discussion, arguing and negotiation at the same time. Americans appear to resent the constant negotiation and the elephant (intuition as per Haidt) leading the driver (ratio).
2-Israeli organizations often tell clients what they really need which upsets their ‘satisfying clients’ American counterparts.
3-They misinterpret American unwillingness to be blunt as a weakness. They do not often understand cultural clues, forcing the Americans to be “overly” direct.
4-They reopen oral decisions, not understanding that this is a trust buster for Americans, although not for Israelis.
5-Israelis are far less politically correct that their American counterparts. And even when the Israelis adopt the PC lingo, it’s more fake than real. The Americans smell it from a mile.
At the ODN conference in London, I have just presented a comprehensive outline of what are the limitations of traditional OD, what is the essence of Global OD and what are the differences between them.
I have been inundated with feedback about my presentation; most of the feedback has been very good; some folks have naturally been resistant.
Here are the top 3 “push-backs” I am getting and my reply:
1-Truth cannot be subjugated to harmonious relationships. If a person lies, he lies.
Harmonious relationships are MORE “true” than factual accuracy in some cultures. Factual accuracies are meaningless and “false” if the relationship does not remain harmonious at the face level.
2-Global OD is another profession-it betrays OD’s values, which cannot be compromised.
Many cruel things have done to thrust one’s values on another population. I suggest we don’t go there.
3-This all goes against what we were taught.
Not really. OD was born to promote tolerance. This is the next logical step as organizations have globalized.