Sure. So -my name is, Osnat Lautman and I am the owner of OLM Consulting. I am an organizational consultant, intercultural expert, and author, of two books: the Amazon bestselling book Israeli Business Culture (1st ed. 2015; 2nd ed. 2018), and my new book, Global Cultural Interplay (release date: 28 January 2025).

I began my career as an organizational consultant in 2007, but it was during my time living in New Jersey (2009–2012) that my keen interest in cultural differences fully emerged. This led me to specialize in intercultural communication, conducting workshops, delivering lectures, and advising multinational organizations at all levels—from the C-suite to front-line employees.

My latest research culminated in the development of the TCAP™ model (Trust, Communication, Authority, Process), which provides a practical framework for building a global mindset. I also created several cultural assessment tools: the PCAT™ (Personal Cultural Assessment Tool), the TC-CAT™ (Team & Company Cultural Assessment Tool), and the C-CCT™ (Country Cultural Comparison Tool). These tools aim to help individuals and organizations assess and improve their cultural awareness and interactions, making it a key figure in advancing global business leadership and intercultural understanding.

These days I am also working on creating a new bot agent that will help employees and managers in global companies to find a quick solution and practical tips for any real-time cross-cultural situation.

The main dimension with the greatest challenge in my daily leadership practice among the four TCAP spectrums (Trust, Communication, Authority, and Process), is the Communication spectrum. As an Israeli, I come from a culture that uses straightforward language. I often feel the constant need to tone down and soften my words when interacting with people from other, more indirect cultures. This cultural gap in communication style requires continuously adapt to ensure effective cross-cultural dialogue. This challenge is magnified by the fact that many countries fall on the indirect side of the communication spectrum, making it necessary for direct communicators like me to adjust frequently when working in the global arena.

I would like to add that the language barrier is an inherent challenge within the Communication spectrum, often leading to misunderstandings and misinterpretations in intercultural interactions. Often, global teams work in a “common” language (usually English), but not everyone has the same fluency, tone, humor, literal translation of words, and more. Therefore leaders should create space for all voices.

Here is a great example shared also in my book Global Cultural Interplay about how a cultural misunderstanding directly impacted business results:

During a Canadian-Israeli conference call, the Israeli general manager (GM) casually said that the Israeli R&D staff “don’t care” about some of the changes being discussed. The Canadian CEO, usually polite, became visibly upset and demanded, “What’s that supposed to mean, they DON’T CARE??”

Here, the Israeli GM’s intent was misunderstood due to language and cultural nuances. In Hebrew, the equivalent phrase means “it doesn’t matter to them” or “they don’t mind”—it’s neutral. But in English, “they don’t care” sounds dismissive or even disrespectful. This small language slip caused tension, offense, and a breakdown in the communication flow, disrupting productivity and mutual trust in the project.

This story illustrate how critical it is in intercultural business not only to translate words but also to understand the cultural assumptions behind them. It’s a clear reminder that even when speaking a shared language (like English), people from different cultures can unintentionally misfire, with real business consequences.

To successfully adjust your communication style when leading teams from both direct and indirect communication cultures, I recommend several key strategies:

For leaders from direct cultures (like the Netherlands, or Germany):

• Learn to soften your messages when necessary by focusing on the situation rather than the person.
• Use diplomatic language, modal verbs (like “would,” “should,” “could”), and open-ended questions.
• Listen carefully for what’s said between the lines, as indirect speakers may use subtle hints or nonverbal cues to communicate sensitive messages.
• If unclear, ask politely for clarification—remember that indirect communication is usually meant to be respectful, not evasive.

For leaders from indirect cultures (like Japan, China, or India):

• Understand that direct communicators value efficiency and may get frustrated trying to decode hints.
• Help the process by expressing your main points clearly and confidently, even if that feels unusually blunt.
• Try not to take straightforward or blunt feedback personally; it’s often a sign of focus and precision, not rudeness.

I would like to emphasize the importance of expanding your own cultural “comfort zone” For example, a naturally blunt communicator can still deliver honest messages but should phrase them more tactfully, while an indirect communicator can practice giving clearer, more structured input when working with direct cultures. This flexibility increases mutual understanding, strengthens collaboration, and improves team outcomes.

To build trust with international partners who have different relationship-building expectations, I recommend a flexible, culturally intelligent approach:

If you’re from a task-based culture (trust built on performance and expertise):

• Allow extra time for personal conversations and small talk.
• Share some personal details about yourself, even if it feels unrelated to business.
• Remember that in relationship-based cultures, people trust the individual—not just the company.

If you’re from a relationship-based culture (trust built on personal connection):

• Recognize that task-oriented people trust based on competence and consistency.
• Be clear and logical when expressing expectations, roles, and responsibilities.
• Demonstrate professionalism through reliability and delivering on promises—“walking the talk.”

The key principle is curiosity and respect: stay open to the fact that “the culture is whatever it is,” without judgment. When you accept the local way of building trust, you strengthen your common business interests.

Here’s an example from the book Global Cultural Interplay that highlights a trust gap: A French sales representative named Thierry worked for a German chemical company. One day, a long-time French customer asked if a delivery could be moved forward by two weeks, without paying extra. Thierry knew the supplies were available and that logistically it was possible. However, the final decision was up to Günther, his German manager. Günther insisted that no exceptions should be made and that the customer would need to pay the usual extra fee for early delivery. From the German (task-based) perspective, rules apply equally to all customers to ensure fairness and legal clarity. But from the French (relationship-based) perspective, offering a “geste commercial” (a commercial gesture or goodwill) to a valued customer is an important part of maintaining the relationship and trust. By sticking strictly to the rules, Günther unintentionally signaled to the French customer that they were not special or valued, leading to a crisis in the business relationship and, ultimately, the customer taking their business elsewhere.

This story perfectly illustrates how differing expectations on the Trust spectrum—relationship-based vs. task-based—can result in misunderstandings and business loss if not handled with cultural awareness. Also, This story shows that it is important to remember that: we often unconsciously trust people from our “in-group” (those who seem like us) and may misjudge or undervalue those who build trust differently. To avoid this trap, it’s crucial to understand the basis of your trust—is it because of personal connection, demonstrated skills, or just familiarity? By reflecting on these drivers, you can adjust your approach and avoid costly misunderstandings.

Varying cultural attitudes toward hierarchy shape leadership approaches significantly across regions, as detailed in Global Cultural Interplay.

In egalitarian cultures (like the Netherlands, Australia, and Scandinavian countries), leadership tends to be open, participatory, and informal. Employees are encouraged to challenge ideas, use first names regardless of rank, and contribute opinions openly. Leaders are expected to act as facilitators rather than authoritative figures, and it works well because it aligns with cultural expectations of equality and inclusion.

In hierarchical cultures (like India, China, Japan, Spain, and many Middle Eastern countries), leadership is often top-down, formal, and status-based. Titles and surnames are used to show respect, and decisions typically come from the top. Subordinates may hesitate to challenge their managers openly, as doing so could be seen as disrespectful or even insubordinate. Leadership here often means giving clear direction, maintaining boundaries, and carefully preserving face and respect for rank.

For example, in a story from the book, a U.S. manager struggled to get a Taiwanese team to speak up in meetings. While Americans value open, creative exchange (egalitarian), the Taiwanese followed a hierarchy where juniors waited their turn and only spoke when invited. Once the manager understood this, he adjusted his approach by building informal one-on-one conversations outside meetings, which gradually encouraged the team to share more ideas.

These cultural differences mean that global leaders need cultural intelligence - the ability to flex their leadership style to fit local norms. Egalitarian leaders working in hierarchical cultures must learn to show respect for rank and formalities, while hierarchical leaders in egalitarian settings should embrace openness, empower team voices, and be prepared for casual interactions.

First of all I would like to say that the Process spectrum is relatively new and underexplored compared to the other three (Trust, Communication, and Authority), but I see it as one of the most critical areas for improving intercultural understanding in global business settings.

Therefore, it is so important to learn how to balance structure and flexibility and to make the whole better than its parts. Cultures with a fluid process approach (such as Israel, Rwanda or Poland) focus on improvisation, creativity, and adapting as they go. In contrast, cultures with a fixed process approach (such as Germany, Switzerland, or Taiwan) invest time upfront in careful planning, aiming for stability and minimizing later changes. To balance these differences, I suggest:

For fluid-process cultures:

• Provide detailed explanations of decisions and plans to help fixed-process partners feel secure.
• Share the logic, risk calculations, and next steps, and notify partners promptly about any changes.
• Recognize that what feels like positive improvisation to you may feel like destabilizing chaos to others.

For fixed-process cultures:

• Break projects into smaller parts to help track and assess creative changes from fluid-process partners.
• Stay open to the idea that risk-taking and improvisation can yield exciting, valuable outcomes.
• Maintain appreciation for your own strengths (strategic planning, detail orientation) while letting flexibility play a role when appropriate.

In short, leaders must actively coordinate expectations and intentionally combine the strengths of both approaches. This synergy often produces results neither side could achieve alone.

Developing cultural intelligence (CQ) has a major impact on an organization’s global business success, as highlighted in Global Cultural Interplay.

Cultural intelligence enables individuals and teams to:

• Predict potential misunderstandings and adapt their behavior accordingly.
• Show sensitivity to cultural differences and value diverse perspectives.
• Make inclusive decisions that respect others’ viewpoints.

Organizations that cultivate CQ create inclusive environments where cultural diversity becomes a strength, not a weakness. This translates into:

• More collaborative teams.
• Greater innovation.
• Better decision-making.
• Stronger employee engagement and retention.

Leaders who take time to understand, respect, and leverage cultural differences are better positioned to achieve superior global business outcomes.

My top three recommendations for global leaders wanting to enhance their multicultural business effectiveness are:

Learn About Yourself and About the Cultures You’re Working With

Before you can effectively lead or collaborate across cultures, you need to understand your own cultural positioning — because everyone carries cultural assumptions, often unconsciously. This is where the Personal Cultural Assessment Tool (PCAT™) comes in. It helps you assess where you stand on the four TCAP spectrums and compare your DNA with other cultures you are working with:

• Trust (task-based vs. relationship-based),
• Communication (direct vs. indirect),
• Authority (egalitarian vs. hierarchical)
• Process (fluid vs. fixed).

For more information about the cultural tools check: https://olm-consulting.com/cultural-assessment-tools/

Create a Safe Space for Clear Expectations and Open Dialogue

Armed with this dual understanding — yourself and the other — you can proactively design your interactions to reduce friction. A key part of this is setting clear, shared expectations early — including how to build trust, communicate effectively, manage authority, make decisions, and execute tasks. While establishing these mutual guidelines leaders also must foster an environment of psychological safety — where all team members feel secure to voice opinions, ask questions, admit mistakes, and challenge the status quo without fear of embarrassment or punishment. This is especially vital in culturally diverse teams, where differing norms can easily lead to misunderstandings or hesitation. By consciously creating this safe, respectful space, leaders unlock the full creative and collaborative potential of their teams.

Embrace Nonjudgmental Awareness and Cultural Empathy

Global leaders need to recognize that we all experience the world through different cultural lenses — we live in different “realities.” Effective leaders need to remain present, observant, and genuinely curious. To adopt a mindset of empathy, approaching interactions without judgment, and without labeling behaviors as “good” or “bad.” And - rather than focusing solely on cultural differences, leaders need to actively seek out common ground, approaching others with an open mind and a respectful attitude toward diverse norms and perspectives. This shift from a self-centered approach to a culturally sensitive and inclusive mindset allows much more effective cross-cultural cooperation.