Software of the Mind

Now working within the framework of the International Institute - Histadrut, Ehrlich, known to all as "Ben," is a veteran instructor and consultant, with expertise in organizational behaviour and intercultural communication who has led many workshops in Israel and abroad. He is convinced that cultural aspects of training in international cooperation courses should receive greater emphasis.

"Culture," he explains, "can be defined as an accumulative collection of values, ideas, beliefs, behaviour patterns and customs which define the society and guide it in its activities." He agrees with the post-modern definition given by the Dutch social scientist G. Hofstede who regards culture as the software of the mind, i.e., the program guiding us on how to react.

"Those of us from the so-called more developed countries," asserts Ehrlich, "are not always aware that the knowledge and imagery we bring in our instruction process is based on deeply-rooted Western concepts which are not part and parcel of the participants' intellectual inventory. And here lies a problem that needs to be addressed. We, with our Western concepts, assume that the non-Western cultures have the same software, the same ideas and value systems which we have. And this simply isn't so."

Ehrlich sees the problem as existing on two levels: one, the personal, emotional and attitudinal level, and two, the cognitive and conceptual level, the area that relates to such mental processes as perception, reasoning and judgment.

"By now, with many years of experience behind them, most of our resource people, both those who go out into the field, as well as those who lead courses in Israel, are aware of the need to understand and respect cultural differences in behaviour and speech. On the cognitive level, however, in the way we think and reason, there is still much that needs to be done. Just as people in non-Western cultures behave and speak differently than those from Western cultures, so they also think differently. In the West, people think in more abstract, more formal and more analytical terms, while those in many non-Western cultures think less abstractly and in more concrete, descriptive and practical terms."

Ehrlich also sees a vast difference in the way Western and non-Western cultures view society and the individual. In Western cultures, society is defined by the individual who defines and decides what should be done. Ehrlich elaborates: "This is in line with our Western assumptions that you can change the nature of a person who - in turn - can change the society in which s/he lives. Other cultures feel that you have to accept the way the society is structured and accommodate yourself to both your physical environment, as well as to its political and social institutions. In other words, in the Western cultures, we believe that people have a great amount of control over their environment; furthermore, we not only believe that people can change but we are also convinced that they are entitled to and able to. In non-Western societies, people may believe that they are controlled by the society and must accommodate, not change. It can create an entirely different mind set."

Ehrlich is very careful to point out the need not to denigrate non-Western cultural values and behaviour patterns. "They are neither better nor worse than ours, just different. When, however, we, the instructors, recognize the differences, then we can help our students restructure their perceptions, granted they wish to. And this is a 'must' before the methods and techniques we present in our courses can be properly utilized. This," he stresses, "applies to every course, no matter its subject or content. Our students have to be convinced, for example, of the possibility of change - for themselves as individuals and for their society as a whole."

What does this mean to instructors in an international course? "First of all," answers Ehrlich, "we have to understand that the methods, technologies, styles of work, etc., which we use are tuned and calibrated to reflect and fit our Western values with little consideration and not enough respect for the different sociocultural circumstances and settings into which the tools and techniques are being introduced. This somewhat ethnocentric approach can lead to misunderstandings and contribute to cultural 'short-circuiting,' to the failure of even the best intended project."

In practice - in The Gambia
Ehrlich does not speak in purely theoretical terms. He has been deeply involved in developing, testing and conducting training programs geared to sensitizing both trainers and trainees to the critical role and effect of culture, notably in the sharing of knowledge and information in intercultural situations. These programs/workshops focus on the effects and manifestations of culture in the fields of training and education, trade unions, labour organization and industrial relations systems, organization and management, decision-making and project planning, democracy and the civil society and cooperatives and their activity.

Representative of his efforts were two courses on Human Resources Development which he and David Mitchnik gave in The Gambia in July of 1997 for The Gambia Cooperative Union. Both on-the-spot courses were under the aegis of MASHAV (the Centre for International Cooperation of the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs) and the International Institute - Histadrut (Israel's General Federation of Labour). One, given to 45 middle level managers, was a two-week course, while the other, of one-week duration, was given to 20 senior staff members. Both were held at The Gambia Girl Guides Skills Centre in Kanifing.

Topics covered at the courses included methods and tools for social assessment and participation, operational guidelines for credit projects, the organizational and managerial process of cooperatives, communication and decision-making, cooperative principles and practices and human resource development for cooperative management. "And, at every session," stresses Ehrlich, "we introduced the issue of cultural context, of seeing the subject and the material presented within the context of the culture of the country."

As one example of the effect of cultural differences on the perception of social tasks within the organization and the society, Ehrlich refers to the workshop on decision-making and communication given to middle level managers. "For us, basing our work on Western concepts that assume that decisions are made with the consent of every individual involved in the process, it is obvious why there is a need to present this material - from noting the different phases of the decision-making process to discussing ways and means for improving channels of communication. But in many non-Western cultures, decisions are 'naturally' made by those at the top - directors, executives, etc. The result: Those on the lower echelons of management have difficulty in understanding why these topics should be included in their curricula since they, themselves, believe they are not "involved" in any decision-making process whatsoever. The topics do not appear to be relevant to their work or to the way they view themselves and their role in the organization. In a situation of this sort, it becomes obvious that an understanding on the part of the instructors as to why their material is failing to convince the unconvinced will reshape the way they present it.

"In The Gambia, as at other courses on organizational management and human resources development," notes Ehrlich, "our task was to help the participants become better managers, better able to tackle problems and improve performance. But to do this we have to initiate a change in the way problems are dealt with: We need to help participants understand that the new technologies and techniques introduced are based on concepts that may be new and alien. We, on our part, must be sensitive to local value systems which motivate them and to the sociocultural settings in which they live and work."

In practice - in Israel
Bakari Camara, Commercial Officer at The Gambia Cooperative Union, had the opportunity to participate in a course on Integrating Entrepreneurship Skills in Cooperative Human Resource Development this March at the International Institute - Histadrut near Kfar Saba. In his evaluation report on the human resource development training for the staff of the GCU he stated, "Before the on-the-spot course at the GCU many of the irregularities in the attitudes of the staff could not be seen by many as the drawbacks of cultural perception - problems such as delay in the work process or lackadaisical attitude to working hours. The course was timely for the middle and senior management cadres. Culture as a subject compared and contrasted 'internally directed' or future directed behavior with 'externally directed' or past directed behaviour, the synchronic (doing many things at once) to the linear sequential approach. This is manifested in the behaviour of the staff at work and in society. The Institute and the two lecturers provided us with a meaningful and instrumental tool for positive change."

Ehrlich adds that in this recent course at the International Institute, during a discussion of "leadership skills development," the group divided into several smaller groups to answer questions about skills and behaviour required from leaders, about actual leadership in their movements, possible reasons for that, and what should be done about it. This was intended to sensitize the participants to the topic and to provide background for a meaningful learning process.

The answers were quite revealing, showing glaring discrepancies between awareness of "universal," Western, textbook leadership skills, on the one hand, and a resigned acceptance that in participants' cooperative movements such leaders are rare, on the other. Suggested, customary remedies: more education, more training, more funding.

"Being struck by the state of mind shown," says Ehrlich, "We discarded the planned curriculum for this session and concentrated instead on introducing participants to the possible connection between culture and the described leadership situation. This was done because it came out, very clearly, from the discussion that the issue is not knowledge and information about leadership skills per se. The participants are leaders and officers in their respective organizations, intensively aware and trained in these subjects. The problem lies somewhere else, in places and domains we are very reluctant to touch and only discussion about culture expose.

"The problem lies in the inherent contradictions and tensions between the indigenous, non-Western cultures, conditioning and dictating social institutions and behaviours, and the need to function according to Western cultural values and norms when using and operating the various organizations and technologies imported from the West. It lies with 1) unawareness about the phenomena; 2) lack of understanding of different cultural values and norms underlying the imported and transferred technologies and know-how; 3) the ambiguous and sometimes hostile resentment toward this Western culture; and 4) the micro- and macro-structural barriers put in the way of a real absorption and assimilation of what is learned and known superficially, but not accepted and practiced mentally.

"The workshop took a new turn. Initially it seemed that we were discussing things that were farfetched and unrelated. Slowly but surely one could observe and feel the growing understanding, the insights gained, insights which hopefully will lead to better understanding of the process and to a conscious ability to choose and develop valid leadership behaviour in the participants' real working environments."

Ehrlich has led training and consulting missions in Asia, Africa, the Caribbean and in Eastern and Central Europe. In his opinion, "Our programs will be more successful," he reiterates, "when we introduce the idea of cultural context into every course. In addition," he repeats, "we must always be aware that, as a rule, the rationale which impels our approach is rooted in a Western value system. Concurrently, we must also get across to our students that, in order to effectively utilize the training, they should understand our value system. By so doing, they can create and utilize their own indigenous structures and patterns of activity which, in turn, will replace imported, non-indigenous methods. An understanding of our value system can also lead to the development of a learning process that integrates the positive elements of relevant, imported methods with the participants' own culture and traditions."

How much can be accomplished in on-the-spot courses one or two weeks long? While conceding that there are time constraints which, on the surface, might seem difficult to overcome, Ehrlich is convinced that much can and is being done. "We do stimulate the minds of the participants. We do expose them to new concepts. Most important, we strive to ignite self-confidence and awareness that change can be accomplished, again, however, only if and when they wish it."