For Josephine it was an eye-opener.
Obviously, I know the Japanese are less direct than Americans and giving feedback to a superior might have added complications, but I wasn’t prepared for that response. After some practice, Miho began giving me clear and actionable feedback in our one-on-ones, so that was a clear success.
But getting the Japanese employees to give one another ad hoc feedback in a meeting or during a presentation was proving more challenging. After trial and error, Netflix leaders learned a few key lessons for how to successfully implement a culture of candor, not just in Japan, but in many other less direct cultures around the world. The first lesson was to increase formal feedback moments when dealing with less direct cultures.
WITH LESS DIRECT CULTURES, INCREASE FORMAL FEEDBACK MOMENTS
Given the feedback challenge in the Tokyo office, a group of US-based managers tried an experiment in their attempts to get their Japanese employees to give 4A-type feedback. They travelled from California to Japan to run a feedback clinic. Japanese content manager Yuka, who attended the clinic, remembers it like this:
Four American Netflix leaders came to Tokyo to lead a session on how to give and receive feedback. They stood on stage and gave corrective feedback to one another and responded to the feedback they were receiving. They told stories about times they had received tough feedback from other American colleagues, how it had felt, and the positive impact it had made.
Afterward we all clapped politely. But we agreed that this helped us not at all. One American giving feedback to another American in English isn’t the challenge. This we’ve seen dozens of times. What we needed to see was one Japanese giving feedback to another Japanese (ideally in Japanese) in a way that is appropriate, respectful, and doesn’t harm the relationship. That’s the link we were missing.
It was chief product officer Greg Peters who identified a better approach. Greg is married to a Japanese woman and is a fluent Japanese speaker, which is part of the reason I asked him to move to Tokyo and open the regional office in 2015. He recalls:
I’d been in Japan for about six months and despite a lot of encouragement, there was very little impromptu feedback in the office. When the 360 process came around, I had low expectations.
We did the written 360s. Then we did a live 360 session, which is one of the most un-Japanese activities imaginable: giving frank feedback to a colleague and superior in front of a group. But I knew there were parts of the culture that might make this group feedback possible. Most Japanese are meticulous and dedicated preparers. If you set clear expectations, they will do everything they can to meet them. If you say, “Please prepare for this and these are the instructions we are going to follow,” they almost always excel.
The results were remarkable. During the 360 process the Japanese on my team provided higher-quality feedback than my teams in the US had in previous years. The comments were frank and well-constructed. Their recommendations were actionable, and they didn’t pull punches. They received the feedback with grace and appreciation.
Afterward, when I debriefed with several of them, they said, “You told us it was part of our job. You told us what to do and how to do it. We prepared and some of us even rehearsed. We wanted to make sure we met your and Netflix’s expectations.”
What we learned from this experience, and later found to be true not just in Japan but in most cultures where direct negative feedback is less comfortable and less common, was that asking employees to give ad hoc feedback to peers and superiors at informal moments doesn’t usually work well. But if you run more formal events, putting feedback on the agenda, providing preparation instructions, and giving a clear structure to follow, you can get all the useful feedback out there just as effectively.
Josephine took this away from both her Netflix experience in Japan and later leading teams in Brazil and Singapore:
Now I tell my Netflix colleagues who are managing employees in any office where the culture is less direct than in the US: “Practice feedback early and often. Put feedback on the agenda in as many meetings as possible to take the stigma out of it. The first few times you provide feedback, gently mention small things that are easily actionable. Instead of decreasing the amount of formal feedback moments, increase them while also investing time in relationship-building. Informal spontaneous feedback is unlikely to happen much, but you can get many benefits from selfless candor by putting feedback on the agenda and allowing people the space to prepare for it.”
Creating copious formal feedback moments is the first lesson Netflix managers learned for implementing a culture of candor around the world. The second lesson is . . .
LEARN TO ADJUST YOUR STYLE AND TALK, TALK, TALK
When Netflix moved to Japan, Josephine, Greg, and the rest of the management team were on high alert for the cultural differences that might impact their effectiveness; they knew going in that the Japanese culture would be different. But when Netflix moved to Singapore, the cultural differences were less apparent and therefore the leaders were less careful. Many found their Singaporean colleagues, with their perfect English and experience of working with Westerners, so familiar in their approach that they didn’t give culture much thought at all. But then the differences started creeping in.
Marketing coordinator Karlyne Wang, who joined Netflix from HBO Asia in October 2017, provided a specific example:
Our administrative assistant left, and I am temporarily filling in. Last week there was a call with an external partner scheduled on two of my senior American colleagues’ calendars. The call was scheduled by my predecessor, not me. The Americans got up early, but the partner never dialed in.
The two Americans then pinged me separately. Their text messages made me so angry that I ghosted them. I didn’t respond. I had to take a walk, during which I told myself: try to be as open as possible. Calm down, that’s just how they write. Maybe they don’t realize that their messages feel rude. Maybe they don’t know how their words impact people. These are good people. I know they are good people.
As Karlyne told this story I became increasingly curious to see just how obnoxious these Americans had been. Perhaps this wasn’t a cultural misunderstanding but simply bad behavior. Karlyne dug up one of the offensive text messages:
To my American eyes, this text message struck me as neither rude nor inappropriate. Seeking to assist the business, the sender laid out a problem and an actionable solution. She didn’t berate Karlyne. She explained what behavior change she was hoping for, and said “please.” I wondered if Karlyne’s reaction was cultural or simply oversensitivity on her part.
So I showed a screenshot of the text to several other Netflix Singaporean employees to get their input. Seven out of eight echoed Karlyne’s reaction: the message is rude. One of them was Programmatic Manager Christopher Low.
CHRISTOPHER: To a Singaporean person this text message is aggressive. It’s very directive. Here’s the situation. Do A. Do B. If I received this message I would feel this person was shouting at me. The worst part is where she writes, “We could have used the slot for another call.” There is no need for that sentence. The first sentence already implies this to be true. Stating it openly feels unnecessarily harsh. I would think, “What could I have done to trigger such a nasty reaction?”
ERIN: Do you feel the sender is being selflessly candid?
CHRISTOPHER: I think the Westerner feels like, “I just need to do this quickly and make sure I am clear. I don’t want to waste unnecessary minutes.” But to a Singaporean it feels like a kick. It doesn’t feel selfless. It’s shocking.
ERIN: What could the sender have done to communicate the same message without coming off as rude or insulting?
CHRISTOPHER: She could have been more personal, maybe saying, “Hey, I know this was the middle of the night Singaporean time. Sorry to start your day with bad news.” Or she could have removed the
blame saying, “It’s not your fault. You weren’t the one to schedule the meeting.” She could have framed it less like an order. “I know you’re super busy. I wonder if you’d be able to help us out with this in the future?” It would have helped to add a relationship-oriented touch—like maybe a friendly emoji.
Christopher emphasized that it’s not just the Americans who need to adapt:
Don’t get me wrong! As employees who work for a company headquartered in the US, we also need to make an effort to adapt ourselves. The Singaporean’s immediate reaction might be to feel paralyzed or angry. But to succeed at Netflix we need to adjust our reaction. We need to remind ourselves that in some other countries this behavior is appropriate and then start a dialogue. Karlyne should pick up the phone and talk openly with the woman who sent the message. She should say, “I get that this happened, and it was frustrating for you. But your message upset me.” She could also explain the cultural differences: “Maybe this is cultural. I know in Singapore we are often less direct when giving feedback and more sensitive when receiving it.” With open dialogue and transparent discussions, we can live the Netflix culture while becoming increasingly competent at giving and receiving feedback to our colleagues around the world.
Chris’s instructions encapsulate the second lesson we learned. Given the importance of candor for Netflix, employees in indirect cultures need to get used to both giving and receiving feedback with a frankness they may not be accustomed to. This requires emphasizing and re-emphasizing the 4A feedback model outlined in chapter 2. It requires talking openly about the cultural differences and coaching and supporting our global teams to take direct feedback not as a slap, but as a way to get better. For example, in our São Paulo office, there is a weekly meeting to discuss the corporate culture for all employees who’d like to attend. Giving and receiving feedback is one of the most frequent topics on the agenda.
But learning to foster candor around the world is not a one-way street. When collaborating with less direct cultures, we’ve learned at headquarters to be more vigilant and to try to calibrate our communication so that it feels helpful to the receiver and is not rejected simply because of form. Chris’s advice was simple and anyone who needs to give feedback to a colleague in a less direct culture should take heed. Be friendlier. Work harder to remove the blame. Be careful to frame the feedback as a suggestion, not an order. Add a relationship-based touch like a smiling emoji. These are all things we can do to make our messages feel more appropriate in the context within which we are working.
The overarching lesson we’ve learned is that—no matter where you come from—when it comes to working across cultural differences, talk, talk, talk. One of the best ways to get better at providing feedback to an international counterpart is to ask questions and show curiosity about the other person’s culture. If you need to give feedback to a counterpart in another country, ask another trusted colleague from that country first, “Does my message sound aggressive?” “What’s the best approach in your culture?” The more questions we ask and the more curiosity we show, the better we all become at giving and receiving feedback around the world.
In order to ask the right questions and understand the answers we get from around the world, it’s important to remember a final cross-cultural lesson. . . .
EVERYTHING IS RELATIVE
As with all the dimensions of culture, when it comes to giving feedback internationally everything is relative. The Japanese find the Singaporeans unnecessarily direct. The Americans find the Singaporeans opaque and lacking transparency. The Singaporeans who join Netflix are shocked at their American colleagues’ bluntness. To many a Dutch person, the Americans at Netflix don’t feel particularly direct at all.
Netflix, despite its multinational desires, continues to have a largely American-centric culture. And when it comes to giving negative feedback, Americans are more direct than many cultures but considerably less direct than the Dutch culture. Dutch director of public policy Ise, who joined Netflix Amsterdam in 2014, explains the difference like this:
The Netflix culture has succeeded in creating an environment where feedback is frequent and actionable. Yet when an American gives feedback, even at Netflix, they almost always start by telling you what’s good about your work before telling you what they really want to say. Americans learn things like, “Always give three positives with every negative” and “Catch employees doing things right.” This is confusing for a Dutch person, who will give you positive feedback or negative feedback but is unlikely to do both in the same conversation.
At Netflix, Ise quickly learned that the manner of giving feedback that would be natural and comfortable in her own Dutch culture was too blunt for her American collaborators:
Donald, my American colleague who had recently moved to the Netherlands, was hosting a meeting in Amsterdam. Seven non-Netflix partners had taken planes and trains from around Europe for the discussions. The meeting went very well. Donald was articulate, detailed, and persuasive. His preparation was evident. But several times I could tell other participants wanted to share their own perspective but didn’t have the opportunity, because Donald talked so much.
After the meeting Donald said to me, “I thought that went great. What did you think?” This seemed to me like a perfect time to give that candid feedback Netflix leaders are always preaching about so I jumped in: “Stinne came all the way from Norway to attend the meeting but you spoke so much she couldn’t get a word in edgewise. We asked these people to take planes and trains, and then they didn’t get time to speak. We didn’t hear all of the opinions that could have helped us. You talked for 80 percent of the meeting, making it difficult for anyone else to say anything at all.”
She was about to move on to the part of the feedback where she gives actionable suggestions for future improvement when Donald did something that Ise feels is typical of Americans:
Before I’d even finished, he groaned and looked crestfallen. He took my feedback way too harshly, as Americans often do. He said, “Oh my gosh, I’m so sorry for having messed this all up.” But he hadn’t “messed it all up.” That’s not what I said. The meeting was a success and he showed he knew that by saying, “That went great.” There was just this one aspect that was not good, and I felt understanding that could help him improve.
That’s what frustrates me about my American colleagues. As often as they give feedback and as eager as they are to hear it, if you don’t start by saying something positive they think the entire thing was a disaster. As soon as a Dutch person jumps in with the negative first, the American kills the critique by thinking the whole thing has gone to hell.
In her past five years at Netflix, Ise has learned a lot about giving feedback to international colleagues, especially Americans:
Now that I better understand these cultural tendencies, I give the feedback just as frequently, but I think carefully about the person receiving the message and how to adapt to get the results I’m hoping for. With more indirect cultures I start by sprinkling the ground with a few light positive comments and words of appreciation. If the work has been overall good I state that enthusiastically up front. Then I ease into the feedback with “a few suggestions.” Then I wrap up by stating, “This is just my opinion, for whatever it is worth,” and “You can take it or leave it.” The elaborate dance is quite humorous from a Dutch person’s point of view . . . but it certainly gets the desired results!
Ise’s words sum up the strategies Netflix learned for promoting candor as they opened offices around the world. When you are leading a global team, as you Skype with your employees in different cultures, your words will be magnified or minimized based on your listener’s cultural context. So you have to be aware. You have to be strategic. You have to be flexible. With a little information and a little finesse, you can modify the feedback to the person your speaking with in order to get the results that you need.
* * *
• • •
Personally, I loved the frank approach Ise used when delivering her feedback to Donald. She aimed to help. She was clear about what behavior diminished the success of the meeting. The feedback was actionable.
What her approach was lacking was global sensitivity. Despite her candor, her feedback technique led to misunderstanding. Her intended message was that the meeting was great and Donald should shut up more to make the next meeting even better. The way she delivered the message led Donald to think the meeting had been a disaster. And if Donald had been Brazilian or Singaporean, he’d probably have left the meeting expecting to lose his job the next week.
This brings us to . . .
THE LAST DOT . . . FOR NOW
When giving feedback with those from your own culture, use the 4A approach outlined in chapter 2. But when giving feedback around the world, add a 5th A:
The 4As are as follows:
Aim to assist
Actionable
Appreciate
Accept or decline
Plus one makes 5:
Adapt—your delivery and your reaction to the culture you’re working with to get the results that you need.
We still have a lot to learn about integrating our corporate culture into our growing number of offices around the world. At most QBRs, we have at least one discussion about corporate culture. As the majority of our future growth is outside the US, we increasingly focus these discussions on how to make our values work in a global context. What we’ve learned is that in order to integrate your corporate culture around the world, above all you have to be humble, you have to be curious, and you have to remember to listen before you speak and to learn before you teach. With this approach, you can’t help but become more effective every day in this ever-fascinating multicultural world.
No Rules Rules Page 26