A universal problem

One way to think of universalism is that it's just another cultural characteristic; that, just as "specific" is different from "diffuse," "universalist" is different from "particularist." That's all well and good. The problem is that universalism has some mischief hidden inside that can cause serious trouble if we're not aware of it.

Here's what I mean: if I have a universalist orientation, that fact alone can make me insensitive to cultural difference. If I'm universalist, I will tend to believe there's one set of principles to live by — everywhere in the world. That is a stance that undermines what intercultural sensitivity is all about.

This shows up all over the world when universalists are present. Think of imperialism and colonialism: it's no accident that the main perpetrators have been nations with largely universalist orientations.

Universalists can be slow to see a need for intercultural consulting, coaching and training. What value could these services possibly add, if things are the same the world over? Or, in a weaker version: if everyone in the world wants the same things?

In his insightful book Business Leadership in China, Frank Gallo offers the following from Yi Min, Director of Global Leadership and Organization Development, Lenovo Group:

[For] foreigners to be successful here, they must understand Chinese culture and learn to incorporate the wisdom from this ancient culture into their business practices. Foreign leaders who just try to impose their Western practices here will be seen as arrogant and foolish and they will not succeed. Quoted in Frank Gallo, Business Leadership in China: How to Blend Best Western Practices with Chinese Wisdom, Singapore: Wiley, 2008, p. 24.

Unfortunately many Westerners do simply assume that there is just one way to manage, and it can be hard to convince them otherwise. Even the top management experts of the West are far from immune, according to Fons Trompenaars and Charles Hampden-Turner:

Management gurus like Frederick Taylor, Henri Fayol, Peter Drucker, Mike Hammer, James Champy and Tom Peters have one thing in common: they all gave the impression, consciously or unconsciously, that there was one best way to manage and to organize. (Fons Trompenaars and Charles Hampden-Turner, Riding the Waves of Culture: Understanding Diversity in Global Business, Second Edition, New York: McGraw Hill, 1998, pp. 13-14.)

Therefore, if there is one "dimension of culture" for Westerners to identify and work on first, it might be on loosening our default universalist standards in favor of a more particularist perspective, which will open up the possibility for genuine intercultural understanding.