Intercultural Zone

We've moved | Nous avons déménagé

2009-08-16T16:23:00.003+02:00

On August 15th, 2009 the Intercultural Zone moved to a new home.
You can find us here.

Le 15 août 2009, la Intercultural Zone a déménagé!
Retrouvez-nous ici.

Essential translation business tools

2009-06-21T10:54:00.003+02:00

Did I have a clue how many tools I depend on to run my business?

Not until my computer started to show clear signs of needing a major Spring-cleaning.

My husband will attest that I’m OK with the daily tidying up bit, but ask me to sort out closets and I run for the hills. My computer is more persuasive: “reinstall my OS from scratch or you’ll eat my dust.”

So I chose Saturday to overhaul my C:/ drive. I back up work everyday and do a full back up once a week, so I was all set to go. I figured I’d be done by lunch and be free to enjoy the rest of the day.

Yeah, right (mumbled in a very New York tempo). Like with your toothbrush, coffee maker, and ergonomic pillow, some things are so taken for granted you forget they are there and that you use them everyday. By dinnertime, I had just reinstalled XP Pro, all the drivers, and my essential business tools: what I absolutely cannot face Monday morning without. I had not even gotten to the stack of useful but more creative software (need another free day or two for those!).

Maybe novice or not too tech savvy colleagues will find something useful in this post, and I hope tech junkies will add suggestions to this list of resources. I’ll skip the basics – MS Office, firewall, anti-virus, Internet navigator, Adobe Reader.

My CAT tool is Wordfast Classic, which I use mainly for quality control and individual client glossary development purposes. Repetitions and fuzzy matches are not an issue in the type of work I do, but Wordfast boosts my efficiency and ensures I use client-specific terminology.

In addition to a host of online and paper resources, the Robert Collins French-English digital dictionary is practical when I’m on the go. We all know relying on MS’ spelling and grammar checker is risky and that’s where tools such as Stylewriter for American English or Antidote for French come in: they catch many (OK, not all!) bloopers – by v. buy for example – flag jargon you might want to avoid, zero in on spacing errors, and help you tighten up your final copy. Antidote also includes style guides, an extensive French dictionary, regional variant options, and thesaurus. For publication work in English, The Chicago Manual of Style digital version is an essential companion.

TO3000 and related applications from the great folks at AIT Software make running my business a heck of a lot easier. Quotes, invoicing, tracking payments, and managing work files are a tidy breeze. If you need to assess your productivity, know how much time you really spent on a project, or provide your client with proof of your work hours, then Time Stamp from Syntap Software is a great option.

Data preservation and safety are big issues. I back up work in progress every evening, automatically, with Mozy. If you click on this link and start using Mozy, then both of us will get an extra 256 MB of free storage space (thanks!). If your data gets corrupted or erased somehow, restoring those precious files securely with Mozy is a cakewalk.

Though I have a Gmail account, I prefer dealing with my e-mail off-line, with Outlook. To protect my computer from spam and malicious files, I use MailWasher. If you only have one e-mail account, then the free version will suit you. If you have several, go with the Pro version. MailWasher lets to see all incoming e-mail before it hits your computer (at which time, it is usually too late), set friends and blacklists, delete or bounce e-mail, and restore e-mail you might have deleted accidentally.

What are some of your favorite “I can’t face Monday morning without” tools, aside from a perfectly brewed cup of java?

Compétences interculturelles et campagnes de pub

2009-06-05T17:27:00.013+02:00

La variable interculturelle est souvent décisive dans la réussite d'une campagne de pub.

Sachant que je suis toujours à l'affut d'exemples pour illustrer ce parti pris, voici la dernière perle reçue d'un confrère traducteur qui lui fut transmise par un de ses clients. Nous ne savons pas si cette histoire, en l'occurrence, est vraie, mais elle demeure caractéristique de ce qui peut se produire lorsqu'une entreprise, ou son agence de pub', néglige de valider son concept auprès d'un professionnel en communication interculturelle.

Un commercial de Coca-Cola qui revient du Moyen-Orient très remonté. Il était parti pour y développer la marque.

Son ami lui demande alors : "pourquoi n'as-tu pas réussi avec les Arabes ?"

Il lui répond : « quand j'ai été envoyé au Moyen-Orient, j'étais très confiant de pouvoir faire de bonnes ventes car Coca-Cola n'est pas très connu là-bas. Mais le problème était que je ne parlais pas arabe. J'ai donc fait passer le message à travers 3 images…

La 1^ère image représentait un homme allongé dans le sable chaud du désert, totalement faible et épuisé…
La 2^ème représentait un homme buvant du Coca...
La 3^ème photo montrait notre homme totalement rafraichi…

Ces panneaux furent publiés dans toute la ville...

"Ben ça aurait dû bien marcher !?!.. " lui répond son ami…

"Aurait dû, comme tu dis." lui répond le commercial… "Si j'avais su que les arabes lisaient de droite à gauche..."

Buzz or cruise control: it isn’t just about rates

2009-05-24T11:30:00.008+02:00

Most often, discussions about translators’ business models center around the type of clients – direct or agency – and inevitably about rates.

When translators gripe about lousy or falling per word rates, the first advice others give is look for direct clients. That is not the right reason to prefer them and there is no guarantee net income is higher as a result.

Please note that I am referring to professional rates: if a zero follows the comma or period (depending on your country), it is not a professional rate. Also, I am addressing that part of the translation markets (sic) centered on translation as adaptive copywriting (or transcreation, as it is sometimes called), my bailiwick.

A couple of my colleagues posit there should be no difference in the rates charged to direct or agency clients as long as the expertise and service provided are the same. To an extent, I agree with them: why should there be a difference based on who writes your check? But the service is rarely the same: for example, at minima, professional translators pay a proofreader to do a final check before returning work to direct clients while agencies take on that task (do they always?).

Focusing on unit rates for translating instead of the hourly income earned with all aspects of running a business included can distort reality. I’ve not found any statistics on this: based on my experience, I estimate the net income earned by an experienced translator working for agency clients is similar to that earned by a translator working only for direct clients. If anyone has statistics, let me know.

Why, then, would one prefer working for direct clients rather than agencies, given the time it takes to find them, land them, keep them and secure a credible marketing backlog?

It depends on how one is wired up. In companies, some staff prefer to carry out and some prefer to spearhead. The same is true with translators: some draw satisfaction from the security of cruise control -- work comes in, you translate it, you send it back, sometimes you receive feedback, you invoice and get paid (ok, I’m simplifying slightly). Even those who prefer that matrix will complain sometimes about “the black hole”: the frustration of not knowing what the end-client thought of their translation or where it ended up.

Others need the buzz that comes from seeking opportunities that allow moving beyond *production* (for lack of a better word) to partner as consultants in a client’s project.

I, for one, need that buzz. It does not happen overnight. It takes time make your way through concentric circles. A first collaboration places you at the outskirts, where last phase production largely disconnected from an existing project takes place.

With time, smart client management, mutual trust and recognition of your added value, opportunities arise that bring you further inside those concentric circles where upstream decisions and programming occur.

It’s not just about rates. It is a personal choice between relative stability and predictability and being motivated by the risk inherent to a client expecting you to stick your neck out and the adrenaline rush that comes with it. Perhaps it boils down to what makes one’s entrepreuneurial fiber tick.

For example, I’ve just spent several months working almost exclusively on one project. The instant availability it often required so far precluded my taking on other significant projects simultaneously. My net hourly income, all told, would probably have been better had I been on cruise control working with agencies.

The opportunity to integrate La Maison de La vache qui rit’s outstanding project team I had been hearing about for over a year set off my “buzz meter”. Indeed, my role exceeds being its dedicated translator to include intercultural communications and pedagogical consulting (institutional, tourism, children), adapting and copywriting all English language materials in and about the Maison (print, web, video, multimedia), editing French language materials for intercultural relevance and consistency, and so on.

The buzz comes from working on a “feel good” project (how can you not smile or recall childhood memories with The Laughing Cow staring at you every morning?), teaming with talented and convivial people, knowing your expertise made a real difference, having that added value recognized by your client, and seeing the result of the team’s work.

Sometimes, my checkbook advocates cruise control. It does not realize that, for me, absence of periodic adrenaline rushes would liposuction creative energy. Knock wood, another nifty project that has been in gestation since last December should be gelling soon.

Buzz takes time...

The new Google Profiles and marketing professional services

2009-04-29T08:23:00.005+02:00

I subscribe to Duct Tape Marketing's newsletter and the last issue presented the new Google Profiles offering. At first glance, this seemed to be a great way for independent professionals to promote themselves and their services. The promise of a page 1 appearance is indeed enticing.

Like many, I strive to strike a balance between enhancing my professional visibility on the Web and protecting my privacy. Any Web marketing opportunity must support the professional image I wish to convey to a target audience (Facebook, mybloglog, and such do not) and let me fully control - now and in the future - what information is public and how it is presented.

Google Profiles was tempting. But several articles from both the mainstream press and techie journals cooled my enthusiasm. Take a glance at TIME Magazine's "Why Google Wants you to Google Yourself" and Wired's "Google Wants You to Profile Yourself".

As Wired's Ryan Singel put it:

But someday, when Google needs more ad revenues, the walls within Google will fall.

Its spiders follow the links you gave it — it will classify your Flickr photos, root around in your blog posts and Twitter feeds, check out your friends and then it will be able to build a very complex profile of you in order to sell you to advertisers.

That spider will start with your Google profile, which you could not help but making.

Thanks, Google, but I think I'll pass.

What about you?

Relecture: quésaco et combien ?

2009-04-24T10:42:00.003+02:00

Parmi les questions récurrentes, celle de la relecture arrive dans le peloton de tête.

« Nous avons un document de 10 000 mots à relire pour demain, vous me le faites à combien ? »

Je caricature à peine : bon nombre de demandes s’expriment ainsi.

Que demande le client ? Voici le premier point à définir. Pour faire simple :

Il peut souhaiter une relecture finale, pour choper les dernières coquilles, de type faute de frappe, de grammaire, de ponctuation, de typographie.

Il peut en fait vouloir une révision pour non seulement corriger les dernières coquilles, mais aussi peaufiner style et tournures afin que le texte soit fluide et agréable à lire, comme s’il avait été rédigé d’emblée dans la langue cible.

Mais en demandant une relecture, il se peut qu’il souhaite une révision comparée du texte source et du texte cible pour s’assurer de la cohérence de la traduction (faux amis, contresens, transpositions erronées...), de l’homogénéité de la terminologie employée, et de l’adéquation du ton par rapport au cahier des charges (par exemple, un texte source technique traduit pour une cible grand public). Et, bien sûr, pour valider que la traduction soit complète !

Vous l’aurez compris, ce sont 3 demandes bien différentes, chacune se reposant sur des compétences précises. Aider le client à préciser sa demande et son besoin, c’est lui rendre service.

Bien que la tarification au mot semble la méthode la plus facile, c’est en fait une formule – pardonnez ma franchise – débile.

Quelques exemples suffisent à illustrer ce propos :

Une relecture finale simple d’une traduction exécutée dans les règles de l’art n’est pas chronophage. Avec une tarification au mot, le client risque fort de payer plus cher qu’avec une tarification à l’heure.

La révision d’une traduction brute de décoffrage peut prendre un temps fou sans que le résultat soit pleinement satisfaisant (on ne rattrape pas une traduction comme une mayonnaise). Si le linguiste applique une tarification au mot, il travaille à perte.

La tarification au mot pour une révision ouvre la boîte de Pandore : nombre de mots cible ou mots source + mots cible ?

Le client veut une estimation du coût en amont, et c’est normal. En envoyant textes sources et cibles au linguiste, celui-ci, en bon professionnel, pourra conseiller son client sur le niveau d’intervention requis (relecture, révision, révision comparée) et le nombre d’heures que celle-ci représente.

Parfois, et le cas se présente plus souvent que l’on ne peut le penser, remanier une traduction médiocre coûte plus cher que de la faire refaire.

D’où l’importance du choix du traducteur dès le départ, les économies du « low-cost » pouvant être chimériques.

10 conseils pour maîtriser les coûts de traduction

2009-02-09T10:58:00.006+01:00

Les coûts de traduction ne se résument pas à la note d’honoraires de votre prestataire.

Il faut tenir compte de l’investissement en temps côté client : préparation des documents à traduire, gestion du projet et du (ou des) prestataire(s), contrôle et validation du travail effectué.

1. Demandez à votre traducteur de vous aider à finaliser vos documents avant traduction

Tout comme un consultant, un traducteur professionnel a un réel rôle de conseil à jouer. Il est particulièrement à même d’apprécier la cohérence, la lisibilité et la clarté de votre document et de mettre en exergue les difficultés interculturelles. Apporter des changements au texte source pendant la traduction perd du temps et est source d’erreurs. Les révisions supplémentaires requises coûtent cher.

2. Fournissez tous les éléments de référence nécessaires

Vous avez un glossaire maison ? Un organigramme ? Des documents similaires déjà traduits ? Les transmettre à votre traducteur lui permet d’intégrer d’emblée les préférences de son client, sans perdre de temps à effectuer des recherches supplémentaires ou à demander des clarifications au donneur d’ordre.

3. Veillez à la « traductabilité » de vos documents

Raisonnez « international » dès la rédaction de votre texte source pour éviter l’emploi de termes, de tournures ou de références culturelles qui n’ont pas leur contrepartie naturelle dans une langue et une culture étrangères.

4. La totalité du texte doit-elle absolument être traduite ?

Pas toujours, et éliminer ce qui s’avère inutile hors de nos frontières est une importante source d’économies.

5. Privilégiez le format .doc, .rft ou .txt

Votre traducteur n’est pas un graphiste et lui demander de « bidouiller » vos mises en page, tableaux et autres graphiques n’est pas une utilisation efficace de son temps – ni de votre investissement. A chacun son expertise.

6. Planifiez le travail à l'avance

N’attendez pas la dernière minute pour envoyer vos documents en traduction ! Votre traducteur risque de ne pas être disponible. De plus, un travail effectué en urgence, le soir ou le week-end coûte plus cher.

7. Accordez les délais nécessaires

Un traducteur professionnel « produit » en moyenne 2000 mots par jour et travaille sur plusieurs projets en même temps. Pour maîtriser votre budget de traduction, calculez vos délais sur la base maximale de 1000 mots par jour, hors relecture.

8. Effectuez un feedback

Une fois le projet terminé, prenez quelques minutes pour faire un retour à votre traducteur. Ces appréciations sont essentielles pour forger une relation durable et transmettre les codes propres à l’entreprise. Un traducteur « rôdé » aux us et coutumes de votre entreprise est un partenaire efficace qui vous fait gagner du temps (et le temps, c’est de l’argent).

9. Donnez son ours à votre traducteur

Ceci ne vous coûte rien, mais responsabilise et récompense votre prestataire.

10. Envisagez un contrat-cadre annuel

Si vous avez des besoins récurrents, lissez votre investissement sur l’année. L’avantage financier ne provient pas d’une réduction tarifaire sur le volume qu’un traducteur professionnel n’accepterait pas (les mots ne s’achètent pas au kilo !), mais de la possibilité pour le professionnel indépendant de revenus prévisibles tous les mois.

Euronext plumbing translations

2008-07-14T10:10:00.004+02:00

Euronext’s ladies’ room and anthropomorphism

We all suffer from that occasional pesky digestive disorder, but this is the first time I’ve seen plumbing subject to the same risk!

Intercultural communications and signage

2007-06-21T17:12:00.001+02:00

Parisians and New Yorkers wouldn't necessarily find this signpost problematic: when you need to cross the street, you do so (of course watching for oncoming traffic). Moreover, the pavement was clearly marked with an appropriate street crossing zone for pedestrians.

Of what nationality was the one member of our happy little troop to notice the signage and be be puzzled by seeing pedestrians striding forth with little hesitation?

Faces have been blurred to protect individual privacy.

Satire

2007-06-06T23:47:00.001+02:00

Apologies, I've not fulfilled my New Year's resolution to post more regularly.

But I had to drop in to to post the link to a satire video clip a friend told me about.

It is hilarious, spot on... and intercultural.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/05/05/maher-slams-
conservatives-who-poison-the-national-debate

Enjoy

Lokahi & Quill

Le français se perd et nous avons enfin compris pourquoi...

2007-02-15T09:27:00.000+01:00

Amoureux de la langue de Molière, il y a le feu au lac.

Si vous n'avez pas de bambins scolarisés en France, vous devez être, comme nous, béatement confiants et innocents. Pour ceux qui sont déjà au parfum, vous pouvez zapper ce poste.

Un gamin éveillé, intelligent, et auquel les parents parlent d'une manière civilisée, c'est une bonne chose, non?

Manifestement pas. Innocents non informés, accrochez-vous.

Nous avons passé un merveilleux dimanche avec des amis qui ont trois garçons entre 12 et 6 ans. Ils ont fait notre éducation. Un jour, le petit dernier rentre de l’école avec un mot de sa maîtresse demandant aux parents de faire en sorte que le petit élève cesse d’utiliser des mots déplacés et trop intello pour un gamin de son âge. Les mots en question étaient « cellule » et « plaquette ». Au cours de la semaine de classe, il avait expliqué pourquoi une alimentation saine était nécessaire aux cellules. Il avait aussi réconforté un pote qui s’était égratigné et donc saignait en lui disant de ne pas s’inquiéter, ses plaquettes allaient arrêter tout cela vite fait.

Nous étions pantois : le nivellement par le bas en classe s’étend maintenant à une requête de l’Education nationale de limiter l’instruction d’enfants éveillés et débordants de questions à la maison. On commence à comprendre pourquoi le taux de réussite au bac est impressionnant alors que peu de bacheliers sont capables de rédiger un courrier sans fautes d’orthographe ou de grammaire.

Cela se corse. Le « Mammouth », non content de limiter le vocabulaire autorisé par tranche d’âge, développe un language propre à lui qui est à l’image de sa lourdeur administrative et l’opacité de sa communication.

Deux exemples suffisent. Savez-vous ce qu’est un « référentiel bondissant » ? Un ballon.

Dans « l’ancien temps », on nous apprenait que pour avoir une belle plume, il fallait s’exprimer clairement et succinctement et ne pas utiliser deux mots (ou plus) si un mot unique existait pour exprimer notre pensée. Tout ça, faut le savoir, c’est fini.

Etes-vous un « géniteur d’apprenant » ? C’est un parent d’élève. Mais là, vous le concevez bien, il y a un couac. En 2007, un parent d’élève n’est pas nécessairement son géniteur. Merci à l’Education nationale de soutenir et de valoriser les familles recomposées (et leurs enfants souvent particulièrement sensibles), c’est une preuve supplémentaire de sa sublime démarche pédagogique.

Enfin, chers lecteurs, merci de votre tolérance face à notre désespoir !

Un jour, les livres ou vidéos pour apprendre à lire aux enfants, traduits du français vers l’anglais, nous feront suivre l’assemblage des lettres en disant :

« Follow the bouncing referent »

A bientôt,

Lokahi & Quill

Resolutions, language and intercultural details

2007-01-05T13:09:00.001+01:00

If the New Year is a time for resolutions, then I wish to achieve at least one: posting more regularly.

To do so, I need to let go of the “excellent writing” and “useful insight” matrix I box myself into so easily that even when I have something to say, or have read an interesting tidbit worth discussing, my fingers freeze up while my mind says “who’d be interested?”

This resolution can be applied to areas of life other than keeping this blog alive. No sooner had I made it that my resolve got sorely tested.

An American colleague of mine in the translation industry and her French husband are creating a management-oriented blog. She rang up and asked if I would be willing to do a podcast interview for them on some of the intercultural aspects of delivering oral presentations.

Of course, at first, I balked. Do you know anyone who likes to hear 30 seconds of his or her voice on an answering machine? And this is a 20-minute clip… Never mind that, as a trainer, my voice gets heard a lot: this would be taped for posterity. Gasp.

I finally agreed and we started to discuss their format, style, the types of presentations they had in mind and so on. I started to list some of the key do’s and don’ts, remembered some vignettes that illustrate critical cultural differences, when my colleague – with whom I chat in English – quips, “we want to make it ‘ludique’,” – in other words, fun, amusing, off-beat.

She said it in French.

“In which language do you plan to conduct this podcast?” I asked.

“Oh, in French. Didn’t I tell you? There is so much stuff out there for managers in English, and so little in French,” she replied.

The first thought that raced through my mind was what is the TONE of this podcast?

Will we be speaking in the 'vous' - more formal, professional, serious – or in the 'tu' – more relaxed, casual, intimate? What impact would/could that have on how the information contained in the podcast might be perceived by French listeners? Should we err on the side of the “no holds barred” style of some late night French TV talk shows (such as On ne peut pas plaire à tout le monde where the prevalent 'tu' is often accompanied by language that might not pass US censors!) or should we maintain a professional reserve and integrate the ‘ludique’ in other ways?

They hadn’t thought about that and the differences the use of ‘tu’ or ‘vous’ in such a context might make. They are going to ponder the question and get back to me.

Remember, in intercultural communications, the differences are often in the details…

Until next time,

Lokahi & Quill

Quand les faux amis nous opposent….

2006-11-30T09:28:00.000+01:00

Les mots identiques n’ont pas toujours une signification…..
identique.

Combien de fois voyons-nous « the liberal senator from X » traduit « le sénateur libéral de l’état X » ?

Politiquement parlant, ‘libéral’ en France signifie de droite, favorable à une structure économique capitaliste et fiscalement conservatrice, profil de quelqu’un que l’on verrait plus facilement siéger au MEDEF qu’au comité de direction d’ATTAC.

Aux Etats-Unis, c’est l’inverse. « Liberal » est un adjectif que l’on voit accolé aux démocrates traditionnels et tout particulièrement ceux qui prônent engager les sous de l’Etat au profit des plus démunis.

Une discussion de politique contemporaine entre un Français et un Américain qui ne connaîtraient pas ces pièges pourrait devenir très vite… chaude.

Un autre mot piège de la langue parlée, vivante, que j’affectionne et qui, pour le coup, n’a rien de politique, est « spécial » et son homonyme « special ». « He/she is a really special human being » complimente un être qui est, en tout état de cause, probablement généreux, chaleureux et altruiste. Traduit littéralement en français « il/elle est quelqu’un de spécial » signifie étrange, curieux, peut-être même franchement bizarre, un être qui pourrait avoir sa place à Sainte-Anne (hôpital psychiatrique parisien) !

Plus sérieusement, quand une entreprise annonce que « les bénéfices [de la vente de produit X] seront reversées à telle ou telle bonne cause » et que la traduction déclare « the proceeds will be donated », l’entreprise en question est-elle consciente de cette soudaine majoration ? En effets, « proceeds » signifie produit ou recette et non pas bénéfices.

A bientôt,

Lokahi & Quill

Intercultural Management: Managing teams across cultures and borders (III): A reader's comments turns into an interesting discussion!

2006-10-30T22:09:00.000+01:00

Roger L. posted an exhaustive comment October 30th on the post Intercultural Management (II) that I wanted to bounce off on and discuss. As that is apparently not possible to do, it appears in toto below, interspersed with our comments and reactions.

Thank you, Roger, for opening up the first discussion on the Zone!

***************************************************************************************

This is a good story, and it illustrates some sound management and organizational principles. But I think you're placing too much of the blame on the boss, Benoit, and not enough on Steve.

As far as the initial email (sent on Wednesday) is concerned, the "when" is adequately defined by Benoit when he says that he wants his report by the end of the following week. Any responsible subordinate would know, or at the very least assume, that this means by Friday, latest, and would therefore try to get the report out by Thursday, or Friday morning (boss' time). I think that when you criticize Benoit's email by asking "WHEN: What is ‘end of next week’? What day, what time, in what time zone?" you are putting too much of the onus on the boss to be overly specific, when there's no need to be. (Of course, if he did want it by, say, Thursday morning at 9:00am his time, and didn't say so, then he would be at fault for not getting it on time. But he didn't, so the subordinate can safely conclude that the deadline is what I said above.)

If this were a purely US + colocated team+ they knew each other, I would agree. However, this is not the case. Time, timing and "end of the week" can mean very different things in different cultures. End of the week for Benoit for example can mean Thurday at 9 AM, 6PM, sometime Friday -- or even early the following week in fact. If the first, that meant mid-week for Steve. I have worked with teams who encountered serious project delays for things as similar and seemingly inoccuous as this.

You also criticize Benoit for not being specific enough in his request, in that he only says that he wants a "status report" on Widget 913, without further details. I disagree. A "give me a status report" message can admittedly be somewhat vague, but if it appears that way to the subordinate, then that person should just put him/herself in the boss' shoes, imagine what is of import to the boss, and do the best under the circumstances. If the most important points are covered (e.g., production schedule, cost or customer issues, any other problems) then chances are the boss will be happy with the report.

Steve does not know Benoit. He has no clue what will please him or not, what his standards are. His level of involvement in project Widget 913 is narrow in scope, he does not have a full view of it. A status report can be for internal use, or Benoit may have to present it to HIS boss, or it may be presented to outside interest holders. Even the format of the report (text document, phrased, bullet pointed, Powerpoint presentation etc...) can have an impact on how the information is received depending on the audience.

A GVT manager is the driving force (or should be) behind the team's developing its own culture and best practices. The manager needs to inform, motivate, reward, observe and mediate about twice as much as usual. GVTs in general need about twice the amount of communication as colocated teams.

Benoit here is not a bad manager per se. He shows some lacunae typical in one who is not used to managing interculturally and internationally. He has not yet acquired the optimal reflexes that will make him a great manager and his team a successful and motivated one.

As far as blaming Benoit for not informing the other team members of his request is concerned, that may be considered an oversight, and not the best practice in a perfect world, but any problem caused by this could easily be overcome by Steve forwarding the email himself to his two colleagues. (More on this later.)

Lastly, you define as a problem the fact that Benoit did not define each team member's responsibilities. You say: "What is each of them supposed to do (i.e.: who does what?)? Who holds overall responsibility?...." Yes, if Benoit had the inclination, he could have written more on those topics, but it seems to me that by sending his email to Steve, he more or less put him in charge of gathering the information and generating the report, and Steve should have assumed as much.

Indeed, I agree with your analysis. However, there is another member of the team, a senior one, who is of yet another culture and one particularly sensitive to signs (and slights) related to seniority and status. In this situation, Benoit put Steve between a rock and a hard place. None of the parties (Benoit, Steve, Günter) perfomed optimally: cultural sensitivities got in the way as they are wont to do with humans.

So, all in all, I think that Benoit could have sent more details on the "who, what, when, and why" but I don't think he deserves as much of the blame that you place on him in your example.

Indeed, I would blame Steve the most for the ensuing problems. The first thing he should have done, having noted that Benoit did not copy the other two team members on his email, would be to send them the email himself. He should have written something like "I just got this from Benoit, and I'm sharing it with you in case he didn't send you separate copies. Let's talk tomorrow morning. I'll call you." In other words, he should have immediately gone into action, assuming that being the only recipient of Benoit's request gave him some degree of authority and responsibilty regarding the status-report project, Instead, like some somnolent dork, he wastes a whole day just waiting to hear from Gunter, for reasons I cannot fathom. (Actaully, he probably just freaked out and froze.) He then emails Benoit for clarification, but getting no response, he gets stressed and starts to send emails to his colleagues that reflect his anger and frustration, and that (rightfully so) starts to piss them off. Matters get worse, with Gunter dragging his feet on getting Steve the needed information, and Michelle withdrawing as far as she can from this boondoggle. I don't blame them. With a fool like Steve apparently running things, I would not be too cooperative either.

While I agree Steve could and should have been more proactive with his colleagues, I feel you are being rather rough on him at the end of your paragraph. In addition, the email you wrote for him is far from foolproof: "Let's talk tomorrow morning, I'll call you". Here we go with the times again! Are Michelle (+ 6 hours) and Günter (+ 7 hours) supposed to conclude that Steve is going to call them at 9 AM THEIR time (ie at midnight that day California time?) or at HIS time (ie at 6 and 7 PM respectively their time, after they have left work?). Neither option is credible and the declaratory statement can be ill perceived as it does not take into account the mere possibility that they might be unavailable even if the time zone problem were non-existant.

You conclude, and rightfully so, that a source of all the problems is that "Before this episode, this GVT suffered from a lack of team identity and shared culture. They had never met as a group nor determined collectively the best practices they needed to respect in order to work effectively together."

As a result "At this juncture, this GVT is mired in petty unspoken conflict that, if left unresolved, will continue to plague its performance and that of each of its members. Mutual trust and respect needs to be restored."

You're right. If a team is formed within an organization for a project or goal-specific purpose, it would be pretty silly if they didn't make an effort to meet, or at least to hold conference calls from time to time in order to get to know each other. (Benoit, as the boss, is definitely at fault here, if this was never done, and he never encouraged them to do it.)

Unfortunately, we do not live in an ideal world. Bringing together a team whose members are spread out across the globe is a very costly thing to do: costly in terms of finances and costly in terms of work-time loss. Corporations are often reluctant to invest in that critical, essential, all-important first meeting unless they have already experienced the direct and indirect costs of a delayed, unsatisfactory or failed project and come to realize how determinative face time can be. Conference and video conference calls are most successful when participants have already met and developed a relationship and when the subject at hand is specifically defined.

On the other hand, I think you need to emphasize an issue that your story illustrates, which is "communication." I think that if I had to boil down your example to its essentials, I would say that the primary cause of the initial confusion and the subsequent problems was the method of communication, mainly EMAILS!

Indeed! And when one realizes that over 70% of a communication is contained in vectors other than the words (vocal, verbal, non-verbal), one begins to grasp how important word choice and expression are in an email, particularly between people who do not know each other and are from different cultures.

Benoit started it with his vague one, Steve expected one from Gunter that he never got, Benoit never answered Steve's, and Steve sent nasty ones to Gunter and Michele.

No, Steve did not send nasty emails to his colleagues. His disappointment and frustration will come out surely in other ways later on though.

Wouldn't it have been easier if Benoit had just called Steve at the outset and answered any questions Steve might have had, on the spot? Wouldn't it have been more effective for Steve to call Gunter and/or Michele (a conference call perhaps? --not a bad or a mad thing to do) to share Benoit's message, discuss the outline of the report, and agree on who would do what?

Indeed again! And as team manager and initiator of this request for a report, it was up to Benoit to facilitate that. As a GVT leader, that is a key part of his job.

I could say more, but suffice it to say that I have seen untold damage being done through emails, when verbal communication would have been just as easy, and much more effective. But, restricting myself to your example, I would enunciate one important principle regarding communications via email: If there's any doubt that the recipient might not understand what you say, or might need more information, either communicate verbally in the first instance, or at the very least conclude the email with "If you need further information or have any questions, call me"!!!

The phone still exists, and has not been made obsolete by emails. Let's not forget that.

Images et icônes en voie d'extinction

2006-10-29T12:40:00.000+01:00

Ce post dépasse un peu les frontières des sujets que nous traitons habituellement.

Juste un peu….

Souvent, quand on pense à un pays, on lui associe une image, une odeur, une ambiance. Quand je pense à mon Vietnam natal, par exemple, j’ai tout de suite l’odeur des tonneaux de nuoc mam (sauce de poisson) qui macéraient près du port quand j’étais petite ou des énormes mangues qui embaumaient les étals de Ben Thanh, le marché central.

A l’annonce que le tabac serait interdit dans les cafés, bars et restaurants à partir de 2008, j’ai ressenti une tristesse que je n’arrivais pas à articuler avec précision.

Manifestement, je n’étais pas seule à pressentir que nous allions perdre quelque chose. Art Buchwald, journaliste et chroniqueur américain, y a consacré un article dans le Washington Post, traduit et publié dans le No. 834 de Courrier International.

Il écrit :

En France, dans les cafés, les fumeurs avaient besoin d’avoir une cigarette à la bouche pour commencer à discuter. Jean-Paul Sartre, Simone de Beauvoir, Pablo Picasso et Alexandre Calder ont trouvé toutes leurs idées dans la fumée qu’ils exhalaient….Il est difficile d’imaginer la France sans tabac…. Un ami français, Henri Fouquet, a dit un jour : « Quand les Américains ont arrêté de fumer, leur culture a décliné. Il va se passer la même chose en France. »

Sa missive fait but : je n’arrive pas à imaginer la perte des cafés enfumés remplis d’étudiants, d’intellos ou de collègues de travail qui font pause autour d’un café, d’une fine ou d’un demi pour discuter à bâtons rompus sans compter le temps qui passe, sans que le serveur les presse à partir ou à commander une autre tournée. Bien qu’il n’y en ait quasiment plus à Paris et de moins en moins en province, bon nombre ont toujours en tête l’image du pépé en bleus de travail avec son béret sur la tête, sa clope au bec (préférablement une Gauloise sans filtre, merci), sa baguette sous le bras, rentrant du boulot sur son vélo ou sa vieille mob. Ces images font autant partie des symboles français que les toilettes turques, les dents mal soignées, et le bain hebdomadaire qui eux, heureusement, se font de plus en plus rares (ou plus nombreux dans notre dernier cas!)

J’ai « vécu la France » tour à tour en tant que fumeuse et non fumeuse et dans les deux cas, même si trop de fumée me pose problème, j’aime l’ambiance qui va avec. Je n’ai jamais fumé de Gauloises, mais leur odeur me manque depuis que les blondes caracolent en tête des ventes. Mon café de quartier va me manquer…

Heureusement, je pourrai toujours croiser Gaby au visage merveilleusement buriné sillonnant les petites routes de ma province sur sa vielle mob, en bleus de travail, béret sur la tête et clope au bec. C’est une icône à lui tout seul.

A bientôt,

Lokahi & Quill

Certes, fumer est mauvais pour la santé et la tabagie passive aussi. Ce ne sont pas les seules choses qui sont dangereuses. En voulant de plus en plus nous protéger contre nous-même, la vie risque de devenir stérile. Et c’est dommage qu’alors que bon nombre d’autres nuisances tout aussi dangereuses (la pollution des véhicules qui crachent leur poison pile à la hauteur des enfants pour ne citer qu’un exemple), celles-ci ne sont pas contrées avec autant d’énergie interventionniste de la part de nos gouvernements.

Intercultural Management: managing teams across borders and cultures (II)

2006-10-22T10:49:00.000+02:00

Small incidents or deficiencies can have unforeseen consequences when managing at a distance.

If you read the previous episode, you may be wondering: did Benoit get his report on time?

The short answer is yes…and no.

Benoit received a document around lunchtime Friday in Paris that did not live up to his expectations. Moreover, the following Monday morning, water cooler gossip suggested that there were some grumblings within his team. Benoit was not happy with these developments; in his mind, direct reports are supposed to provide solutions, not cause him more problems.

What had happened?

After receiving Benoit’s email, our San Franciscan – let’s call him Steve – waited for a day or so hoping he would hear from Günter about the report on Widget 913. He did not. Steve also emailed Benoit, his boss, to ask for some clarifications about the context of the report (remember, Steve, as an American, is from a low context culture; it is difficult for him to operate in a vacuum). Benoit did not reply.

Steve’s stress level was starting to rise: he felt great responsibility for getting this report done, needed to collaborate with others on his team to do so, and reacted to all this email silence negatively. When he finally emailed Günter and Michelle, he did not notice to what extent his frustration and feeling of being let down transpired in his words.

Günter, as the senior member of the team, was furious. Benoit had not informed him directly about his request. Moreover, he had given this “Steve” responsibility for coordinating it. And now Steve was “demanding” his collaboration without clearly explaining what he needed and why. Protocol had not been respected, Günter felt offended and concerned about his status within the company. He was certainly in no mood to be forthcoming and cooperative. He eventually sent off some interim data about Widget 913 a few days before the report was due.

Michelle, on the other hand, was in a panic. As the newest member of the team, she felt a need to prove herself constantly. But she knew preciously little about Widget 913, a project that had started many years before she had joined the company. None of the colleagues she had befriended in her office could shed any light on it either. After a few sleepless nights, she concluded it was safer not to respond rather than to admit to her lack of useful knowledge. After all, her boss Benoit had not asked her to participate and Steve was far away.

Steve thus spent 3 days and nights painfully assembling a report as best he could with the information he had on hand. He bemoaned the lack of team playing skills and cooperation of his foreign colleagues and started to fall into the trap of cultural stereotypes. He emailed the report to Benoit around 10 PM Friday night San Francisco time explaining as delicately as he could given his state of mind the lack of cooperation he encountered from Günter and Michelle. He expected to receive a response and feedback from Benoit when he logged onto his email the following Monday morning.

Before this episode, this GVT suffered from a lack of team identity and shared culture. They had never met as a group nor determined collectively the best practices they needed to respect in order to work effectively together.

At this juncture, this GVT is mired in petty unspoken conflict that, if left unresolved, will continue to plague its performance and that of each of its members. Mutual trust and respect needs to be restored.

Until next time,

Lokahi & Quill

Intercultural Management: managing teams across borders and cultures

2006-10-07T11:41:00.000+02:00

Imagine this all too frequent scenario:

You have been working for a high tech multinational for about a year, one of the American members of a GVT (global virtual team). You are sitting in your open plan office on a sunny Wednesday afternoon in San Francisco when your computer says, “ding!” and delivers an email from your boss, Benoit, in Paris.

Benoit writes:

“Please prepare a report on the status of Widget 913. Work with Michelle and Günter. I need it by end of next week.”

The email is not copied to Michelle and Günter – members of your team you’ve never met who are located, respectively, in Sophia Antipolis and Munich. Günter is senior to you in the company, Michelle is relatively new.

In Benoit’s mind, he has been very clear about what he needs, when he needs it, and who is to work on his request. He would be surprised to realize his request has generated questions and anxiety.

What information is missing to insure Benoit obtains what he wants from his staff? Here are a few examples:

WHEN: What is ‘end of next week’? What day, what time, in what time zone?
WHO: Are Michelle and Günter informed? Have they received the same email?
WHY: Why is the report needed? What questions should it address? To whom is it supposed to speak? In what context?
HOW: What is each of them supposed to do (i.e.: who does what?)? Who holds overall responsibility? In what format is the report to be prepared? How will the report be used (read or delivered as a presentation?)

What core management principles are involved here? How do you think this will play out? What issues will come to the fore as Michelle, Günter and our San Franciscan pull together this report?

Until next time,

Lokahi & Quill

Quand le mot lui-même est porteur de valeurs culturelles : Time aux Etats Unis, le temps en France

2006-10-01T10:53:00.000+02:00

Les études menées, par exemple, par Edward T. Hall, identifient 3 variables clés pour commencer à expliquer les différences interculturelles : le contexte, le temps, et l’espace.

Nous avons évoqué la différence entre les cultures à haut contexte et faible contexte dans la communication verbale et visuelle la semaine dernière.

La signification du temps comme valeur culturelle est un vaste sujet : temps inné, temps acquis, temps monochronique, temps polychronique, vitesse ou lenteur comme facteur positif ou critiquable …

Parfois le vocabulaire lui-même dans son exploitation nous offre les premières pistes pour appréhender les différences culturelles. Il est intéressant de noter que les noms communs « time » et « temps » illustrent bien la divergence entre la culture américaine à faible contexte et la culture française à haut contexte.

Quand on fait l’inventaire des significations possibles du nom commun « time », on remarque qu’à de rares exceptions prés c’est un concept mesurable, linéaire. Lorsqu’il évoque une période qui se conjugue sur la durée, le mot est utilisé au pluriel alors qu’en français il est invariable (in ancient times v. à l’ancien temps). Quand il mesure une répétition, il est également exprimé au pluriel alors qu’en français le mot adéquat est lui aussi invariable (five times v. cinq fois ; how many times v. combien de fois). Par ailleurs, les expressions courantes construites autour de ces mots soulignent les différences culturelles liées à cette valeur : alors qu’aux Etats Unis, le temps, c’est de l’argent, une ressource précieuse et irrécupérable qui peut être investie, perdue, offerte ou gaspillée, en France, elle retient encore cette texture ronde aux frontières floues, difficilement morcelable dans son concept, qui colore la perception de la vie dont il faut bien sur profiter.

Est-il étonnant alors que les Américains paraissent souvent comme des êtres pressés ? Que dans leur souhait d’efficacité ciblée ils soient perçus comme trop directs et brusques quand, par exemple, ils se lancent dans le vif d’un sujet en faisant l’impasse sur les échanges de politesse, porteurs de contexte préalable ? Que les Américains s’étonnent des congés payés ou des horaires hebdomadaires français et les perçoivent comme une paresse nationale ? Qu’ils soient complètement déroutés lorsque, en pause d’une réunion apparemment positive, les Français privilégient d’autres sujets au cours du déjeuner ?

A bientôt,

Lokahi & Quill

High context v. low context cultures: getting your message across is not simply a question of vocabulary and grammar

2006-09-23T09:35:00.000+02:00

For an American, communicating successfully with a French audience requires more than mastering la langue de Molière. As in many other language pairs, getting your message across orally or in writing requires putting the target audience’s culture at the forefront of your efforts to seduce, persuade and convince.

The major difference between high and low context cultures is the amount of information that a person can comfortably manage. In a high context culture, background information tends to be implicit. In a low context culture, much of the background information needs to be made explicit in the communication.

English, perhaps particularly American English, lobbies for direct, active voice expression, crystal clear explanations, and believes that it is the writer or speaker’s responsibility to insure the message is fully intelligible to the target audience about which very little, if anything, is assumed. The meaning of the message is in the words. Language is instrumental and words seek to transmit information in the form of facts and data.

French, on the other hand, is a high-context language. Expression tends to be indirect and suggestive, to create an ambiance and to rely on historical or cultural references. Here, the audience is expected to do most of the work involved in comprehending the full significance of a message. Language is expressive, often emotional. The meaning of the message is in the context, a context rooted in the person and the situation.

It is extremely easy to see the difference when viewing television commercials on cars, for example. Rather than the hard data on horsepower and gas consumption prevalent in an American ad, a French commercial will seduce through dreamy films of a horse running through a field or an exciting drive along mountain roads with hairpin curves. Sometimes, you may even have to guess the brand name of the vehicle….

Regardless of the media, however, it is critical to keep in mind the needs and expectations of high and low context cultures when striving to get your message across. Your professional performance and your company’s success depend on it.

Until next time,

Lokahi & Quill

L'importance des acronymes dans le management interculturel

2006-09-16T21:21:00.000+02:00

Les multinationales sont friandes de politiques ou programmes diffusés au niveau mondial. Dans un esprit de soi-disant efficacité, ces politiques sont la plupart du temps connues sous leur acronyme, abréviation qui peut avoir des conséquences inattendues.

Inventons un exemple, puisque je ne peux citer de cas réels.

Suite à un sondage interne, la direction des ressources humaines d'une multinationale américaine spécialisée dans les média découvre que les salariés sont fort peu exposés aux cultures étrangères, ce qui limite les capacités de cette entreprise à créer de nouveaux produits pour ses marchés étrangers. Afin d'encourager les salariés à diversifier leurs lectures et séances de cinéma, par exemple, l'entreprise lance un programme nommé Foreign Literature Immersion Committee. L'acronyme de ce programme - FLIC - est un jeu de mots, car "flic" en argot américain signifie "toile" (let' go see a flic / on se fait une toile?).

Le programme est mis en oeuvre dans tous les pays où cette entreprise est présente.

FLIC arrive donc en France.

Vu la signification de ce mot dans l'Hexagone, comment les collaborateurs français risquent-ils d'accueillir ce programme?

A bientôt,

Lokahi & Quill

Bienvenue | Welcome

2006-09-10T18:50:00.000+02:00

Ce blog est né de la volonté de mettre en valeur les synergies entre Lokahi Interactive et Franco-American Quill, deux activités professionnelles qui se rejoignent sur le terrain de la communication interculturelle et tout particulièrement franco-américaine.

Au fil du temps, nous partagerons points de vue, expériences ou constats qui peuvent être utiles à d'autres - parfois en français, parfois en anglais, suivant l'inspiration du moment.

Mais ce que nous souhaitons tout particulièrement est de pouvoir apporter un début de réponse, un petit peu d'aide à ceux qui confrontent une problématique de communication interculturelle écrite ou orale dans leur vie professionnelle.

Pour vous donner un exemple classique du genre de question qui pourrait être soulevée: comment un américain accueillerait-il le "c'est pas mal" typiquement français après avoir passé tout son week-end à rédiger un rapport pour son manager?

A bientôt,

Lokahi & Quill