Finally! When I landed on cultural calibration as a post-worthy topic, I googled it to see how many articles and books had already been written on the subject. None!
Frankly, I was a bit shocked because, to me, it may be one of the most important constructs in organizational change. If you don’t understand the culture in which a change is being implemented, the chances for success are very low. Think Vietnam. Think Iraq. Think Afghanistan. Think the democratic loss in this election. Think of any project you have tried to implement that didn’t achieve the desired results because of cultural resistance and/or undermining.
In fairness, the literature is filled with articles on cultural competence, cultural sensitivity and being more culturally responsive. And, many authors have written books on organizational readiness for change (myself included). I see cultural calibration, however, as a sub-set of cultural competence or organizational readiness, and as a more precise and analytical approach to culture than sensitivity or responsiveness implies.
Cultural calibration is the process of understanding a new culture, navigating cultural differences, and adapting behaviors and expectations to fit within that new context. It’s discerning and adapting to the norms and values of a culture as they are in their current state – not in a preconceived notion of how things ought to be. Accurate calibration is crucial for communications, relationships, and positioning. It means understanding the emotions and challenges of the people living, loving, learning and working in that culture. For example, in this last election, democrats underestimated the power of influencers on social media and focused on messages that too many voters didn’t really care about.
Successfully navigating a culture at a particular point in time requires an openness and willingness to learn, an ability to identify and relate to different experiences and points of view, and a commitment to engage with communities that have perspectives and priorities that are different than the social bubbles in which you may find yourself and who may hold different beliefs about the possibilities available to them. It means being willing to engage in conversation instead of accusation.
Full disclosure, I was never particularly good at cultural calibration. When I led organizations, I often assumed that my ideas would be widely embraced. Not surprisingly, that resulted in me being wildly wrong. I would get so excited about a new idea and so convinced of its value that I would rush implementation and then get impatient with the progress and frustrated by the resistance. I found that I was more successful as an outside consultant than as an inside leader. I learned that I was better at exploring ideas than implementing actions. It took me many years to learn that soft and slow got better results than hard and fast. Lao Tzu knew that 2,500 years ago.
A major source of learning for me has been the Grand Traverse Regional Land Conservancy where I discovered that you can’t force a seed to germinate and flower prematurely. Lo and behold, seeds have internal mechanisms and environmental cues that govern when they germinate and develop into flowering plants. Ahh, if only I had had that insight when I began my career. The biological truth about germination can be applied to any idea that an organization hopes will someday flower and produce fruit.
Just like planting the seeds incubated in a green house, “seeds of ideas” have a “clock” that regulate their dormancy and readiness to germinate. Just like plant seeds, human ideas require specific environmental conditions to trigger germination and growth. While it is possible to create conditions that promote germination, you can’t bypass the seed’s internal readiness. Old or damaged seeds might not germinate even under optimal conditions. And overwatering can be detrimental. Some seeds require light, while others need darkness. Some seeds have a hard shell that needs to be softened. Others require cold temperatures to break them out of their dormancy. You get the point. In short, you can’t force seeds (or humans and organizations), to flower prematurely without risking the probability that they would rather die than bloom and produce, especially if conditions are imposed upon them.
With those simple biological truths in mind, let’s zoom way out to calibrate where global culture appears to be now and suggest what would need to happen to facilitate the evolution to a more productive and peaceful state. Then we can zoom back in and calibrate where we are in the current U.S. culture.
The question I have struggled with for many decades is “how do we create an environment that promotes human generativity and generosity?” Here’s a scale that has helped me to calibrate where the overall culture is and where it needs to go (according to my worldview).
5.0: Environmental Restoration
4.0: Organizational Interdependence
3.0: Human Generativity and Generosity
2.0: Information Intelligence
1.0: Mechanical Industry
Simplistically, the industrial age was accelerated by mechanical engineers who produced tools and machines to advance and/or replace labor productivity. Through mechanical industrialization, we brilliantly created tools to improve agricultural production and manufacturing, as well as machines to build plants, cars, boats, appliances, computers etc. As a result, we experienced huge improvements in the quality and quantity of human life. China has now taken those industrial innovations to a whole new level with their manufacturing prowess. AND, we also used our industrial genius to build bombs, planes, guns, artillery, etc. that have killed millions of people and have wreaked enormous destruction to the environment. In addition, this age accelerated inequality by making the rich even richer and the poor more oppressed.
The information age was accelerated by computer engineers who produced software to advance data science and analytical processing. Through information intelligence, we brilliantly created software to improve data processing, knowledge management, communication, navigation etc. AND, we used that genius to develop surveillance systems, drones, robots, false propaganda, disinformation, misinformation, and fake news all of which have created confusion and have contributed to catastrophic decisions. The truth is that data, information, and knowledge don’t necessarily translate to wisdom and creativity – especially when the information is based on faulty facts. This age furthered inequalities by dramatically increasing tech-bro wealth.
Just as we were starting to evolve to an age of ideation in which humans generated new ideas (and hopefully, more generous dispositions), we began witnessing some reversals of whatever momentum we had. For a time, through human generativity and generosity, we were able to expand civil rights, social security, regulations and infrastructure to improve the quality of life and opportunities for all people. AND, when we applied that genius to improving organizational interdependence and restoring the environment, we were beginning to make life more sustainable and fulfilling for people across the globe. Sadly, recent events around the world have deflated that momentum.
There were many factors, including the shift to right wing ideologies and the autocratic alliances, but artificial general intelligence also played a role. To be clear, I’m not blaming AGI for the reversal of all progress. In fact, AGI, if used well, could accelerate our movement up the scale. Unfortunately, AGI, when used destructively, combined with a set of values driven by self-interest and hierarchical dominance, lead not only to stagnation, but also to a reversal of any progress we were starting to make as a human civilization.
Here is my point. The majority of the culture believes that the purpose of industry and intelligence is to accumulate more power, profits, and pretense; thus, human and organizational flourishing are diminished. On the other hand, if the majority of the culture were to believe that the purpose of industry and intelligence are to enable human generativity and generosity, to build more organizational/national interdependence, and to restore the environment that humans have systematically damaged over its short 300,000 year history, then life on the planet may become sustainable and meaningful. My current calibration tells me it’s the former not the latter.
Now, let’s zoom back in to our current situation in the United (Divided) States. The simple truth is that Trump calibrated the culture better than the democrats did. Trump was right to claim that government is inefficient, that forever wars drain us, that immigration needs to be controlled, that inflation hurts people at the lower ends of the economic spectrum, that China engages in unfair labor and trade practices, that Europe relies too heavily on the U.S. for defense, that fetanyl causes deaths, that the language police tried to impose their language on everyone, and that left-leaning elitists exercise a lot of power in government, media, education, and business. He also accurately calibrated the amount of anger and fear people were feeling as a result of all those truths. What Trump doesn’t seem to understand are the complexities of the problems or the substantive solutions required to address them. I’m not sure if he is more driven by performance or by plunder, or if he is a sick narcissist or an evil nihilist. I am sure that he has a pathological need for attention and has a diabolical intention to destroy what he calls the “deep state.” It will take a long time to build back what he and Musk are rushing to dismantle.
Ironically, while a good share of Trump’s win can be attributed to his DEI bashing, anti-woke rants, anti-Trans ads, and immigrant demonization (which, to me, indicates the level of resentment his base has for elite language policing), his administration is now the worst offender of eliminating “offensive” language to his MAGA cult. For example, Team Trump has created a list of words to scrub from all government websites. Now banned are words like accessible, belong, barriers, diversity, historical, equality, female, and clean energy. Talk about language policing, cancel culture, and imposing your worldview on others! But, no surprise, Trump is the perfect example of pathological projection – blaming others for his worst offenses and assigning his faults to others. Now he is erasing the contributions of Native Americans, Blacks, Hispanics and women from government websites. I’m beginning to wonder where the bottom could possibly be.
At this point, I’m not sure what or how long it will take to create an environment that promotes human generativity and generosity, organizational interdependence, and environmental restoration. My calibration of the culture does not leave me feeling optimistic. I guess that leaves all of us with the challenge of finding meaning in our own lives and making a difference in the communities in which we live, love, learn, and work.
One thing that helped me recently was a letter I received from a lovely couple in our book group on my 80th birthday. Not only did they extend warm wishes and kind words, they also sent a poem by Joseph von Eichendorf and put to song by Robert Schumann that helped me recalibrate my own attitude and intentions.
It was as though Heaven
Had softly kissed the Earth,
That she in shimmering blossoms
Might only dream of him.
Soft winds passed through the fields,
The high grain gently weaving,
The forest murmured softly,
So clear the stars that night.
And my soul spread
Her wings out wide,
Flew through the still lands,
As though flying home.
I especially loved the last stanza. So let me close this rather dense and doomy post, with my hopes for all of us. I’m hoping we can improve our ability to calibrate and communicate so that we can regain leadership and restore our world. And, I’m hoping we can all spread our souls, and widen our wings, and fly freely through a stillness that leads us home. May it be so.
P.S. After I wrote this post, I asked Google Gemini to write an essay on cultural calibration with documentation from the literature and research showing how sustainable change requires cultural calibration. For those of you who are interested in the response I received in two seconds, you can find it below. Two things struck me: 1) It is really well written and provides documentation for the points I was trying to make in this post; and 2) it demonstrates both the potential pitfalls and possibilities of artificial intelligence. The technology provides valuable assistance with extreme efficiency, but it can also be an excuse not to do the hard work of digging for the truth. Also, while the essay is well-written, it lacks heart and soul and experience-based wisdom. If you decide to read it, let me know if you think AGI will help us break through to more human generativity and generosity, organizational interdependence, and environmental restoration, OR make it even harder to develop a more accurate existential compass.
The Essential Compass: Cultural Calibration for Effective and Sustainable Change
Change, whether organizational, societal, or personal, is a constant. However, the success and longevity of any transformation are not solely dependent on the strength of the proposed change itself, but rather on its alignment with the existing cultural landscape. This alignment, achieved through a process known as cultural calibration, is the crucial compass that guides change towards effective and sustainable outcomes. Without accurate cultural calibration, even the most well-intentioned initiatives risk misinterpretation, resistance, and ultimately, failure.
Cultural calibration, at its core, involves a deep understanding and assessment of the prevailing values, beliefs, norms, and practices within a given group. It recognizes that culture is not a monolithic entity but rather a complex, dynamic system that shapes individual and collective behavior. This concept finds resonance in various disciplines, from anthropology to organizational psychology.
Anthropologically, the concept of cultural relativism, as articulated by Franz Boas, highlights the importance of understanding cultural practices within their own context. Boas argued against ethnocentrism, emphasizing that judging other cultures based on one’s own standards leads to misinterpretations and hinders effective intercultural interaction. This principle directly relates to cultural calibration, as it underscores the necessity of suspending pre-conceived notions and engaging in objective observation and analysis. As Clifford Geertz, another prominent anthropologist, argued in his work on “thick description,” understanding culture requires meticulous attention to the nuanced meanings embedded in social actions and symbols. This deep understanding is the bedrock of effective calibration.
In organizational psychology, the importance of cultural fit has been widely recognized. Edgar Schein, in his seminal work “Organizational Culture and Leadership,” emphasizes that organizational culture is a powerful force that shapes employee behavior and performance. He argues that effective leaders must understand and manage the culture to achieve organizational goals. Cultural calibration in this context involves assessing the gap between the desired culture and the existing one, and then developing strategies to bridge that gap. This might involve adjusting communication styles, incentivizing desired behaviors, or restructuring organizational processes to align with the new cultural direction.
The scientific basis for the necessity of cultural calibration also lies in the field of behavioral economics and social psychology. Daniel Kahneman, in “Thinking, Fast and Slow,” demonstrates that human decision-making is often influenced by cognitive biases and emotional factors. These factors are deeply rooted in cultural context. For example, risk aversion, a common cognitive bias, can manifest differently across cultures, influencing the acceptance or rejection of change initiatives. Understanding these cultural variations is crucial for designing interventions that resonate with the target audience.
Furthermore, the concept of “sensemaking,” as described by Karl Weick, highlights the active process by which individuals interpret and respond to their environment. Cultural context plays a crucial role in shaping sensemaking. If a change initiative is perceived as incongruent with the existing cultural narrative, it will likely be met with resistance or misinterpretation. Effective cultural calibration involves framing the change in a way that aligns with the prevailing sensemaking processes, ensuring that it is understood and accepted.
Without accurate cultural calibration, change initiatives face significant challenges. For instance, a top-down mandate for increased innovation in a risk-averse culture is likely to fail. Employees may perceive the change as threatening or unrealistic, leading to resistance and stagnation. Similarly, implementing a new technology in a culture that values traditional practices may result in low adoption rates and wasted resources.
Conversely, when cultural calibration is effectively employed, change becomes more sustainable. By understanding the existing cultural landscape, leaders can identify potential barriers and develop strategies to address them proactively. They can tailor communication messages to resonate with the target audience, build support among key influencers, and create a sense of shared ownership in the change process. For instance, a company seeking to promote diversity and inclusion might start by conducting a cultural audit to identify existing biases and then develop targeted training programs and initiatives to address them.
In conclusion, cultural calibration is not merely a desirable add-on to change management; it is an essential prerequisite for effective and sustainable transformation. By acknowledging the power of culture and engaging in a rigorous process of assessment and alignment, individuals and organizations can navigate change with greater confidence and achieve lasting positive outcomes. The insights from anthropology, organizational psychology, behavioral economics, and social psychology all converge on the same fundamental truth: understanding and calibrating to the cultural context is the key to unlocking the potential for meaningful and enduring change.
Note from Rick: Yup! If you made it this far, you may also be interested in two books I recently read. The first, New Cold Wars by David Sanger, discusses China’s rise, Russia’s invasion, and America’s struggle to defend the West. In the book he emphasizes the enduring need for cultural calibration and the emerging importance of artificial intelligence in geopolitical conflicts. The second, Being Jewish After the Destruction of Gaza by Peter Beinart, addresses what happens when cultural differences are ignored or dismissed. Beinart is the editor of Jewish Currents and a contributing opinion writer at the New York Times. As a Jewish scholar, he courageously challenges the Israeli government to not only own their historical victimhood and persecution, but also their supremacist behaviors and oppression.
Also published on Medium.
