When I began working for a global company and collaborating with colleagues from 25 countries, I quickly realized just how different we were when it came to giving critical feedback. Communicating across cultures can range from politically correct to outright shocking, but it’s never dull. This article highlights some fascinating cultural differences in how feedback is delivered.

While my colleagues’ intentions are always positive, the way their messages are “wrapped” varies widely. This wrapping comes in many colors and textures, reflecting the diverse communication styles shaped by cultural norms. For instance, my Dutch and German colleagues are comfortable being direct, while my Asian colleagues lean toward relationship-oriented communication that preserves the other person’s reputation, even if it means the message is less clear.

As an American, I find it ironic that while we are often stereotyped for our directness, when it comes to feedback, we prefer the “sandwich approach.” This technique begins with positive feedback, introduces the suggested improvement, and ends with another positive note to soften the impact. If you tried this approach with my Dutch colleagues, they’d skip the carbs and serve just the meat. My Asian colleagues, on the other hand, might choose the vegetarian option altogether.

Most of my European colleagues value directness, often finding the American feedback style confusing or even inauthentic. To them, sugar-coating feels unnecessary and counterproductive.

How Different Cultures Deliver Feedback

Let’s consider a common scenario: a colleague asks you to review their report. While the management summary is excellent, the analysis in the second chapter lacks structure and depth. Here’s how different cultural tendencies might shape the feedback:

• Dutch: Direct and transparent, they might say: “The analysis completely lacks structure and body.”
  
  
• German: Connecting feedback to expertise, they’d say: “What are your findings from the analysis? Which approach did you use? It doesn’t come across due to a lack of structure.”
  
  
• English: Politeness and indirectness prevail: “I would consider taking a look at the structure of the analysis. But that’s just my opinion.”
  
  
• American: Focused on the positive, they’d highlight strengths: “You did a particularly great job with the management summary.”
  
  
• French: Framing feedback through rules or standards, they’d say: “According to book X, the structure of an analysis should be Y.”
  
  
• Asian (Chinese): To help the recipient save face, feedback might be avoided or delivered indirectly: “As a team, we might benefit from learning the best way to structure an analysis report.”
  

Feedback in a Global World

As globalization brings us into closer collaboration with culturally diverse teams, it’s important to understand that feedback extends beyond words. It’s about how the message is conveyed, reflecting deeply ingrained cultural values.

Effective feedback starts with understanding your purpose. At its core, feedback should aim to help someone grow and improve, not assign blame. By respecting cultural nuances and tailoring your approach, you can turn feedback into a powerful tool for development and connection.