 | |  | |  |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
Cross-Cultural Crisis Management: An
emergency situation complicated by incompatible
equipment and procedures employed among
strategic partners is solved by the development
and employment of a conceptual framework that
can both stand alone and bridge the cultures of
the two partners.
emergency situation complicated by incompatible
equipment and procedures employed among
strategic partners is solved by the development
and employment of a conceptual framework that
can both stand alone and bridge the cultures of
the two partners.
| In the middle of the stream |
Problem: An important international entity was faced with a sudden and imminent
threat against its organizational integrity. A competitor was martialling its forces with the
intent to punish and absorb the client organization. The client's own operating units
were both small in number and size, and possessed widely varying equipment in terms
of capability and interoperability. Complicating its response was the need to coordinate
its actions with those of a major international allied organization employing essentially
incompatible equipment, procedures, and communications facilities. Further, since the
ally was not immediately capable of providing full support, the response system needed
to have the flexibility to be able to address any one of the possible levels of support,
from minimal to comprehensive, as the ally continued to deploy assets to the aid of the
client organization.
Approach: Develop a framework for viewing, interpreting and dealing with developing
events that bridged the cultural, material and procedural infrastructures of the two allied
organizations while both achieving independent validity as a stand-alone system, and
not compromising either of the bridged structures. Develop a means of communication
independent of, yet comprehensible by, both organizations.
Action: A practical, efficient, and easily applicable conceptual framework was
developed for interpreting events on the ground, coordinating actions both within the
client organization and between it and its ally, and facilitating communications between
both groups. This framework further allowed the client organization to develop
proactive control over the situation.
Result: The resulting resolve and disciplined deployment displayed even prior to the
arrival of the allied organization's supporing assets are assessed to have contributed to
the fact that the threat of organizational aggression not only did not materialize during
the period of greatest vulnerability, but that it also ultimately withdrew and did not
meaningfully repeat.
threat against its organizational integrity. A competitor was martialling its forces with the
intent to punish and absorb the client organization. The client's own operating units
were both small in number and size, and possessed widely varying equipment in terms
of capability and interoperability. Complicating its response was the need to coordinate
its actions with those of a major international allied organization employing essentially
incompatible equipment, procedures, and communications facilities. Further, since the
ally was not immediately capable of providing full support, the response system needed
to have the flexibility to be able to address any one of the possible levels of support,
from minimal to comprehensive, as the ally continued to deploy assets to the aid of the
client organization.
Approach: Develop a framework for viewing, interpreting and dealing with developing
events that bridged the cultural, material and procedural infrastructures of the two allied
organizations while both achieving independent validity as a stand-alone system, and
not compromising either of the bridged structures. Develop a means of communication
independent of, yet comprehensible by, both organizations.
Action: A practical, efficient, and easily applicable conceptual framework was
developed for interpreting events on the ground, coordinating actions both within the
client organization and between it and its ally, and facilitating communications between
both groups. This framework further allowed the client organization to develop
proactive control over the situation.
Result: The resulting resolve and disciplined deployment displayed even prior to the
arrival of the allied organization's supporing assets are assessed to have contributed to
the fact that the threat of organizational aggression not only did not materialize during
the period of greatest vulnerability, but that it also ultimately withdrew and did not
meaningfully repeat.
To learn more about these case studies and others, or to talk over your own unique
situation, please contact Jim today for a confidential discussion.
situation, please contact Jim today for a confidential discussion.
| Managing Leadership Consulting Organizational leadership where strategy and execution meet |
© 2009 by Managing Leadership Consulting. All rights reserved.
®
®