Fall 2006 IMQ

....

Intercultural Management Quarterly Integrating Culture and Management in Global Organizations

Fall 2006 Vol. 7, No. 3

In This Issue...

Economic Theory, Culture and Antiglobalization ...... 3

by Geert Hofstede Build Trust and Improve the Bottom Line: A Global Virtual Team Trust-building Model ................ 4

by Christine King Culture Shake ...................................................................... 7

by Brian Kimberling Know Thy Audience: Publishing Advice From an Industry Insider ............... 8

by Patricia O’Hare

Intercultural Management Quarterly: www.imquarterly.org Intercultural Management Institute: www.imi.american.edu

From the Editor

IMQ STAFF Publisher: Dr. Gary R. Weaver Managing Editor: Chris Saenger Publication Manager: Anna Lee

Welcome to the Fall 2006 edition of Intercultural Management Quarterly. I am pleased to begin my tenure as Managing Editor with an article by Geert Hofstede, a world-renowned leader in the field of intercultural relations. Dr. Hofstede bridges the very different cultures of academic economics and the antiglobalization movement to demonstrate that culture can serve as a “neglected cornerstone” for a global economic understanding.

We see the challenges of globalization in Christine King’s reflections on the difficulty of building trust within “virtual teams.” Managers can no longer count on team members sharing a first language, a cultural context or even a time zone. King offers thoughts on creating an effective team in situations where e-mail replaces face-to-face contact as the primary means of communication.

After exploring the shifting sands of globalization, it may be a relief to read Patricia O’Hare’s “old-fashioned” and very practical advice on publishing in the intercultural field. The world still needs well-crafted writing that helps readers understand more about our world.

Finally, Brian Kimberling injects a bit of fun as he gives thanks that Margaret Thatcher is not the only woman in England.

Longtime readers will notice some cosmetic changes to this edition. I welcome your comments and criticism on all facets of IMQ as I do my best to maintain the high standards of quality and relevance set by my predecessor Adam Mendelson. Please send your letters to imqeditor@american.edu.

Chris Saenger Managing Editor

Editorial Review Board David Bachner, Anna Lee, Annmarie McGillicuddy, Adam Mendelson, Darrel Onizuka, Karen Santiago, Gary Weaver, Sherry Zarabi Interculutral Management Quarterly (IMQ) is published by the Intercultural Management Institute at American University. IMQ combines original research conducted in the field of interculutral management with the applied perspectives of industry experts, professors and students.

SUBMISSION GUIDELINES Professionals, scholars, and students are invited to submit articles of 1,000-2,000 words on issues related to the study and practice of intercultural management.

Articles must be innovative and contribute to the knowledge in the field but should avoid overly academic jargon. Footnotes or endnotes are discouraged except for direct quotes or citations. Each submission is refereed by the members of the IMQ editorial review board. Accepted pieces are subject to editing.

REPRODUCTION No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, without the express written permission of the Publication Manager.

Please contact the Managing Editor for reprint availability.

CONTACT IMQ Intercultural Management Quarterly Intercultural Management Institute 4400 Massachusetts Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20016-8177 Phone: (202) 885-6436 Fax: (202) 885-1331 imqeditor@american.edu

AMERICAN UNIVERSITY W A S H I N G T O N ,

2

D C

© 2006 Intercultural Management Quarterly

Intercultural Management Quarterly

Economic Theory, Culture and Antiglobalization

By Geert Hofstede

T

he social sciences as they have developed in Eu rope and North America over the past hundred and fifty years have established a division of labor into academic disciplines. This responds to the limited capacity of human minds to handle complexity, but it is easy to forget that economics, political science, anthropology, sociology, psychology and social psychology all study facets of one and the same social reality. Disciplines need the products of each other’s labor to build on, but the academic system in most universities punishes rather than encourages borrowing wisdom from neighboring departments.

Even more than other social sciences, economics claims for itself a separate status. Many economists behave as if their discipline is not social at all, but belongs to the exact sciences. In the meantime, economic theories are built and econometric calculations carried out based on assumptions about human behavior, both individual and social, which, when spelled out, look almost incredibly primitive and simplistic to students of other social disciplines.

In the French newspaper Le Monde of 7th June 2002 I read an interview by editor Philippe Simonnot with professor Gary S. Becker, prominent representative of the Chicago school of economics and author of “Human Capital” (1964). Becker explains that part of the success of the Chicago school is due to applying economic reasoning in non-economic domains, like the family, crime, drugs, education and law. In doing this, the Chicago school assumes that the only relevant unit of analysis is the individual, and that society can be seen as a sum of individuals. Individuals are supposed to be rational, which means that in allocating scarce Geert Hofstede is Professor Emeritus of Organizational Anthropology and International Management at the University of Maastricht in the Netherlands. He is a founder of comparative intercultural research. His book “Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind” (1991, new edition 2005, co-authored with Gert Jan Hofstede) has so far appeared in 17 languages.

resources they will choose the course of action which they expect to lead them towards their goals. The Chicago school thinks that individuals, even the least educated ones, should be free to pursue their own goals.

What these goals are is an issue which does not belong to economics. Chicago economics deals with means, not with ends. Becker thinks this means that the way he works is value-free.

My old Dictionary of Economics (Bannock, Baxter & Rees, Penguin, 1972), tells me that the word “value” in economics is used in two senses: A narrow one, equivalent to ‘price,’ and a broad one, equivalent to ‘utility.’

Price is measurable, but utility can only be measured ordinally, as a preference for one thing over another. As such it has non-economic roots: It is, the dictionary writes, ‘essentially a psychological thing.’ This confirms Becker: what people’s goals are does not belong to economics. However, as utilities are at the basis of economic calculations, what do economists base their assumptions about utilities on?

Is Chicago economics value-free? To me it is pregnant with implicit value positions. Values represent the choice of ends in life, which precedes the choice of means. Choices are rational only within the limits of a values system. Our values systems are inherited from the environment in which we grew up. Many studies have shown value systems to have a national component. Therefore, nationality constrains rationality.

Chicago economics as described by Becker reflects very particular choices on three national culture dimensions: it is individualist, masculine, and shortterm-oriented. Individualist, because it has no concept of social system. Masculine, because it has no concept of social responsibility for the weaker members of a society. Short term oriented, because it does not weigh short-term against long-term effects. This combination of cultural positions is relatively often found in countries with an Anglo heritage: Britain, the USA, Australia, Canada, New Zealand.

Chicago economics is the dominant paradigm of the globalizers of our days, not only within the World Continued on Page 10

Fall 2006

3

Build Trust and Improve the Bottom Line: A Global Virtual Team Trust-building Model

By Christine King

G

lobal virtual teams have replaced the conference room as the arena for executing short- and long-term business strategies in global organizations. Escalating oil prices and the looming threat of global terrorism have fueled a growing trend toward reduced travel budgets and increased numbers of global virtual teams. Through e-mail, instant messaging, video and teleconferencing, list-servs, PDAs, on-line training and blogs, we now connect Tokyo, Paris, Rio, New York City, Shanghai and Moscow in an instant.

Organizations depend upon their global virtual teams although their members represent vastly diverse cultures, speak different languages, work in different time zones, rely upon technology to communicate and may never have met each other face-to-face. These teams are expected to deliver everything from product development to seamless customer relationships. And when asked about the bottom line, executives are hard pressed to discern precisely how their new global virtual teams may be positively or negatively impacting profitability.

Most CFOs have not yet systemically analyzed—by observation, measurement and integration—the bottom line impact of global virtual teams on their global organizations. While they have probably noted considerable surpluses in travel budgets, they may not have had an opportunity to identify the profits and losses that are directly or indirectly related to the operations of their new global virtual teams.

CEOs, CFOs, HR VPs as well as other executives are beginning to raise creative questions to further understand the factors that influence their global virtual teams’ results. The primary, systemic issue and perhaps the single most significant challenge global virtual Christine King, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor at Barry University. As a trainer and consultant to Fortune 500 companies, she develops solutions to increase the effectiveness of global virtual teams.

4

teams face is, how can global virtual team members build trust? How to build trust among team members whose cultural roots are so diverse, who speak different languages, live in different time zones and may only have in common the shared task and goals of their team?

This very “soft” factor, virtual trust-building, is becoming one of the most important “hard” factors impacting global organizations’ profitability. And very few organizations have recognized it, named it or addressed it. As an IT Director of a global virtual team in the United Kingdom commented in a recent training program: “Well, this is so obvious we all have missed it.”

The wisdom of scholarly research as well as common sense tell us that high levels of trust among team members in face-to-face teams increases productive, profitable outcomes. Is trust any less valuable to global virtual teams? Of course not!

Definitions of trust vary, depending upon the circumstances. Global virtual trust is defined here as the mutual team expectation that team members consider each other’s concerns and needs, supporting and encouraging the best in each other as well as consistently demonstrating their commitment to achieve the team’s goals. High levels of global virtual trust evolve from respectful behaviors that demonstrate an understanding and appreciation that team members will build trust differently and that will impact trust levels differently.

The manner in which a team develops trust cannot be dictated, but rather curiosity and a commitment to understand each other will, in itself, lay the foundation for trust to grow.

Like their face-to-face counterparts, global virtual teams also depend upon the trust shared among team members to function effectively and profitably. Trust, however, is more tenuously built in global virtual teams than in face-to-face teams. Because global virtual team members cannot rely upon the subtle verbal and non-verbal cues that they have learned to use for determining whether “to trust or not to trust,” virtual team

Intercultural Management Quarterly

members have fewer indicators available, fewer cues to process and fewer bits of information from which to form trusting impressions.

to build trust. As team members practice using the model, they develop the skills to communicate virtually in a manner that builds trust. As trust increases, virtual team members collaborate, executing their team’s goals without falling into the traps of avoidance, miscommunication, misunderstanding and even sabotage, that could cost the organization—directly or indirectly—millions or even billions of dollars.

In virtual communications, each message takes on a significance that it would not normally carry in a faceto-face setting—as if each virtual message becomes encoded with extra signals that subtly signal to the receiver “trust or distrust.” The data that are received through How can we build trust among team members who speak difemails and instant ferent languages, live in different time zones and may have in messages become “loaded” with meancommon only the shared task and goals of their team? ing, “loaded” because there are simply fewer visible or audible signals being sent and received for the brain to process, so The model is a dynamic, cyclical process that enables those that are received become exaggerated in their team members from diverse cultures to reflect and ask weight, importance and influence. All messages ulti- themselves questions. It is designed so that each step mately build or reduce trust. As a result, specific atten- encourages a recognition and respect for individual cultion and focus upon trust-building among global tural differences, an awareness of the levels of trust and virtual team members is strategically essential. the impact the virtual message will have upon trust in the team.

I recently delivered a series of five pilot global virtual team trust-building training programs in the US and Initially, as the new skills are being learned, team Europe to a multinational drug research company. members reflect upon the model’s steps before sending The training program modules were based on the prin- each virtual message. Like riding a bicycle, learning the ciple: “Every virtual message either builds or reduces skills embedded in the model takes some focus and attrust; there is no such thing as a neutral virtual mes- tention in the beginning. However, after a brief period sage.” of time, the skills become a part of the team member’s intuitive wiring, making it possible to choose and act, Through these pilots as well as my other research and sending virtual messages that support trust without experiences consulting and training in global organiza- the need for pausing and reflecting. As the model betions, I have observed that as global virtual team mem- comes more familiar, team members can easily enter bers genuinely embrace this principle and apply it in into the cycle at any step and gather additional infortheir day-to-day virtual communications, their team mation, insights, support or direction for building relationships strengthen and the levels of trust increase. trust.

In order to concretely and pragmatically enable global virtual teams to translate this principle—that every message either builds or reduces trust—into new behaviors and new skills, I developed the global virtual team trust-building model. The model encourages team members to reflect and make choices that intend

Fall 2006

The experiences of participants from my global virtual team training programs and presentations are indicators of concrete results that are possible from learning the skills that develop when global virtual team members consistently intend to build trust in

5

Building Trust in Global Virtual Teams... their virtual communications. A few participant experiences are listed below: Paolo in Brazil: “Once I realized that I just needed to think about trust, everything started to change; it is a matter of my focus. I see now how much power I have to build or reduce trust. It is a constant choice.”

Dietrich in Germany: “We make things unnecessarily complicated. Regardless of the cultures of our team members, everyone wants respect. If I remember that before I hit ‘Send,’ then my messages change. I don’t need to process a lot of complex information about cultural differences, I just consistently communicate in a thoughtful, respectful manner. It works.”

Joan in the USA: “I used the model the other day and I may have saved an account—an entire account, as in millions. I realized that I was in trouble with Jorge and Carlos in Madrid, that they were lost in space. Instead of sending another pushy email, I called Francisco in Milan. He understood where we were going and I asked him to help. He did; he worked closely with Jorge and Carlos and turned it around and now we are all supporting the customer together. Quite simple— but we came close to blowing the whole deal.”

George in the USA: “I used to have one crisis after another in our team. Now I take the time to build relationships at the same time that we focus on the task at hand. The big place where I see a difference is when we do have a crisis, an unexpected impossible deadline, most of the team rises to the occasion and does their best work. That didn’t happen before.”

As these statements indicate, virtual communications are affected by the cultural and individual perceptions and expectations of team members. Virtual messages that build trust reflect an appreciation and respect for the respective cultural roots, values and beliefs of team members. Given the cultural differences among team members, perceiving, reading and building trust can seem exponentially complex at first. However, the global virtual team trust-building model points the way to transform the complex into the simple: actions and choices that ultimately will build stable trust in global virtual teams.

The above quotes and others like them convince me that building trust virtually is not only possible, but also not so difficult to achieve. I am passionate about the power of the intent to build trust: when high levels of trust become the driver behind virtual communication exchanges, teams swiftly shift to overcome obstacles and positively impact the organization’s bottom line.

I encourage CEOs and their leadership teams to ask questions about the levels of trust in their global virtual teams and to explore strategies for ensuring that global virtual team members are equipped with the tools and skills to build virtual trust. The model outlined in this article is just one of potentially many approaches for increasing trust. There will be others. Your organization’s initial curiosity about how to increase virtual trust, as well as your measurements to determine its impact on your bottom line, are the essential first steps towards building high trust levels in your global virtual teams. i

Elizabeth in Switzerland: “I see now that when distrust develops within a global team, we avoid each other, not responding to e-mails or voice mail messages, disregarding deadlines. This avoidance had become like a habitual response, especially when we were stressed.

We are figuring out how to turn that around, I just wish we had known how to do this in the beginning, then we wouldn’t have developed these bad habits that are hard to change and must cost us a lot of money.”

6

Intercultural Management Quarterly

Culture Shake

By Brian Kimberling

D

espite having lived and worked in Europe for several years, I still am surprised how seldom I shake hands. Especially in Britain, where I’ve been for the past two years, the handshake is regarded as a rather formal gesture. It may be used on meeting someone for the first time or while completing a business transaction, but it rarely transpires casually between friends, and I find I almost never shake women’s hands. Instead, friends and acquaintances of opposite sex exchange kisses on one or both cheeks—I never really know which, myself—while British men, in rare transports of fraternity, will clasp my arm or shoulder at best.

Growing up in Indiana during the ‘80s, I had my hand nearly wrung off. Getting in a friend’s car, getting out of the car, meeting after any significant interval of separation, in congratulation and in condolence, my hand was clasped and bobbed vigorously. A firm handshake implied strong character. Men, women, boys, girls, teachers, often my dad and always my friends’ parents, fellow passengers on airplanes (but not Greyhound buses—there are limits to everything), and even shop assistants of particular helpfulness. Yet these handshakes were not obligatory, de rigueur, what the English would dismissively call “the done thing.” They were simply how civilized people sincerely expressed respect and affection for one another. It was a kind of socio-emotional currency.

In Britain, I feel like I’m walking around with sawbucks in my pockets. Not knowing which or how many cheeks to kiss, or whether to plant my kisses firmly and wetly on the skin or simply make sounds in the air, not knowing how to stand or whether to embrace or even shake hands in mid-kiss—this is all akin to not knowing the language or finding the wrong currency in my pocket. Physically, I find that exchanging kisses plays me false; it forces me into a brief facial intimacy which may not—usually does not—correspond to my actual daily relations with the other person. If I Reprinted with permission of the Morning News, http://www.themorningnews.org

Fall 2006

met Margaret Thatcher at a party I would be forced to bury my antagonism momentarily while plunging my nose into her abundant hair—something I am emphatically unenthusiastic about. If, while withdrawing my lips from her cheek, I were to demand that she justify corrosive statements made and brutal acts perpetrated during her time in office, I would feel more than hypocritical.

Conversely, if we looked one another in the eye while shaking hands, we might establish a respectful rapport within which we might reasonably discuss our differences, not too heatedly. (Actually, I’m probably not up for that.) The handshake is not without intimacy. Indeed, a long look deep in her eyes might tell me all I need to know; I might find there the rapaciousness I expect, but I might see instead the anxiety of a woman ruler in a man’s world, or the selflessness of a true public servant, however misguided; I might, in that moment, come to understand Mrs. Thatcher as a fellow human much more than I do now—which, if it is saying little, is saying more than nothing.

The intimacy of exchanging kisses on the cheek, on the other hand, is semi-sexual. With my lips just millimeters from her ear, her neck, her lips, it cannot be otherwise. This is not so much revolting as simply false.

I am not trying to sleep with Margaret Thatcher—why this meaningless pass at bodily intimacy? Why not look one another in the eye? It teaches me only the size of her pores, the dimensions of her earlobe, the depth of her makeup, and the freshness of her hair dye. None of these things aid me in judging her character, though I may discern her taste in cosmetics.

Fortunately, Mrs. Thatcher is not the only woman in England. Mostly I get through the moments of greeting and parting with minimal embarrassment. The women I meet are charming and clever and have noses and hair and nose hairs somewhat less prominent than Mrs. Thatcher’s.

Which, if not saying much, is saying more than nothing. i

7

Know Thy Audience: Publishing Advice From an Industry Insider

by Patricia O’Hare

F

or several years, I have had the pleasure of publishing books in the intercultural field.

There is great satisfaction in professional publishing, rather than trade or textbook, because one can offer readers material that just might advance their success at work, develop a knowledge base, and maybe bring some balance to personal lives as well. For me to write to you about the intercultural profession, however, would be foolish; you are the scholars and practitioners. What I can tell you a little bit about is getting published.

In the digital, internet, Blackberry, iPod age, the printed book appears to be losing its relevance. Plenty of information can be found, most of it for free, on the web. The attention span of younger readers gets shorter, and I hear many parents bemoan the lack of reading in their homes. And yet, the US publishing business increased from $23.7 billion in 2004 to $25 billion in 2005, according to the American Association of Publishers. At the same time, the number of books published declined by nearly 10% to 172,000 titles, with most of the drop due to more targeted programs by small- to medium-sized publishers (Bowker). Still, 172,000 new books published in the USA in one year, the second highest year on record—that’s a lot of books.

The business has changed, and it continues to redefine its core activities. The days of the dedicated editor who spends years refreshing every sentence and crafting every word passed with Maxwell Perkins. In the big New York trade houses, editors are more like venture capitalists, as the expense of publishing, promoting and paying the advances to authors goes astronomical.

The jacket, the bibliographic information, the endorsements and the marketing plans need to be in the

Patricia O’Hare is President of Nicholas Brealey North America and Publisher of Intercultural Press. She’s always looking for great proposals. To learn more, please visit http://www.interculturalpress.com.

8

national databases six months ahead of publication.

Bookstores (virtual or physical) pay about half the list price for each book, with publishers receiving payment no sooner than 90 if not 120 days later. And they can send them all back!

It is among the smaller presses that some attention is still paid to the authors, because in these smaller houses, every author and every book has got to count.

Small presses are unfortunately under the same financial burdens as the big guys—bookstore chains and Amazon dictating terms, very slow payment cycles, and the encouraged “co-op” advertising, which is payment to get your book featured. It’s no surprise that smaller houses had fewer titles published in 2005, which was, from experience, a very tough year for the industry. That’s to say nothing of the new media and electronic delivery of content that has us all both nervous and excited, as whole new worlds open up.

And still the submissions come in over the transom, and the vast majority of them are declined. We are always looking for the next big book, even a mediumsized book, but one that can last past the typical run of a trade title. That’s about 6-8 weeks in stores, or as my friend, the poet Charles Coe, says, the shelf life of a quart of yogurt. In professional publishing, you look for a book that burns more steadily for years to come rather than producing the big splash. And we’re always looking for these kinds of books.

Here is some advice about what to consider if you have the courage and the patience to begin writing:

Tell the story I worked with an editor a long time ago who told me that if you can’t pitch a book in an elevator ride to one floor, you couldn’t sell it. The buyers at national chains have about that much time to hear about any given book. Your idea needs to be compelling, original, and easy to grasp. And try to make it interesting! In the initial proposal, spend some time really describing the book—not a book report, but a reason to publish. Does

Intercultural Management Quarterly

the world really need another book on work and life balance? Maybe, but it had better be different and it better be proven. Does our field need another view of cultural differences? Probably, but not the same ideas, over and over. Do travel readers really need that account of your years living abroad? Only if the story helps others understand another culture, another view.

Remember your Hall: high context vs. low context Many proposals come in that make large-scale assumptions about potential readers, their interest, and how much they understand about the topic. If readers knew all about your subject, why would they buy another book? Explain simply and clearly, and avoid assumptions. Anecdotes and examples liven the book, but they also illuminate your points and make them real. If you are writing for a general audience, you have to assume that this information is fresh, make it interesting, and don’t assume your readers understand feminine/masculine cultures or know the iceberg.

Platform, platform, platform It’s the new buzzword. Publishing a successful book is much more of a partnership than it has ever been.

There is only so much that a publishing company can do to promote a book, and the author’s platform has got to be the starting point. There was a time when the consultant wrote the book to establish his or her practice, like a $35 business card. The opposite is true today. Your speaking events, your business, your clients, your connections to the media…these are the bedrock of a book’s success. Without the author’s own stage, a book rarely makes it past the printer.

might be true that a book cuts across a number of audiences, but there has to be one clear, recognizable reader, someone you can imagine with your book in hand. Pick your main audience, or you will miss them all.

Teachers need to be careful not to be overly pedagogical if writing a general interest book. Trainers and coaches need to remember that people absorb information very differently in training sessions than alone with a book; use a different tone. Remember that you make an agreement with the reader early on: “If you buy my book and commit the time to read it, I will, in turn, make sure that you learn something you can use in your work and in your life. There is a purpose to this book, and you, dear reader, are it.”

There is always room for a well-crafted book that helps readers understand more about our world, more about our work. While publishing has changed, the recipe for success has an old-fashioned ring to it: a good—no, a great—idea on a need-to-know topic; a well-written, persuasive manuscript from a committed author with a solid platform; and a good deal of patience.

And one more thing—no dissertations, please. i

Know thy audience Then there is the author who believes his book is perfect for his professional audience, the racecar drivers in Detroit, as well as the mechanics and the folks who make the tires, and by golly, just about everybody. It

Fall 2006

9

Culture and Economic Theory Continued from page 2 Bank and the International Monetary Fund, but also within multinational corporations. The value positions in their policies and practices remain implicit; like Becker, they may believe themselves to be value-free.

Antiglobalizers, of whom there are many kinds, are groups defending different values. Some take issue with the globalizers’ individualism—they feel it threatens the maintenance of their society. Some take issue with the globalizers’ masculinity. They feel they are their poorer brother’s keepers. Many take issue with the globalizers’ short term orientation. They call for sustainable development. These are voices that will nevermore be silent, and will continue to challenge what presently stands for globalization.

Becker in the interview calls for economics to invade other fields of society. The struggle between globalizers and antiglobalizers shows a need for exactly the opposite: Other social sciences, the ones studying human motives, societal values, and political processes should be welcomed inside economics. In particular, economic policies for the whole world can no longer use theories founded on cultural values prevalent in a small part of this world. Differences in culture have to be taken into account. Culture as a variable is the neglected cornerstone for a global economic theory. i

IMI Skills Institutes Spring 2007

Programming for International Education David Bachner January 27-28 and April 7-8, 2007

Cultures of International Development JP Singh February 3-4, 2007

Leadership and Diversity: The Theory and Practice of Managing Cultural Dynamics in Organizations Ben Alexander April 21-22, 2007

please visit www.imi.american.edu for details and registration

10

Intercultural Management Quarterly

Does Culture Still Matter?

The 8th Annual IMI Conference, A Forum for Business, Education and Training Professionals Keynote Speaker: Lawrence E. Harrison, Senior Research Fellow and Adjunct Lecturer at the Fletcher School at Tufts University, author of The Central Liberal Truth: How Politics Can Change a Culture and Save It from Itself and co-editor, with Samuel Huntington, of Culture Matters: How Values Shape Human Progress. Other keynote speakers to be announced.

The 8th Annual IMI Conference is a two-day interactive dialogue and debate on the dynamic field of intercultural management, bringing together business, education, and training professionals while covering a broad range of topics. Global business management, training methodologies, global organizational development, and conflict management are only a few of the areas to be explored. Diverse program offerings include lectures, panel discussions, interactive simulation exercises, and roundtables.

March 15-16, 2007 American University visit www.imi.american.edu for more information and to register

Fall 2006

11

The Intercultural Management Institute Associates Program You are invited to formally join us in the education and discovery of intercultural management and training at American University. Become an IMI Associate and receive the benefits of being more closely involved with the Institute by receiving: * 10% off all IMI workshops and conferences (this does not include Skills Institutes, which are considered academic courses through the School of International Service; also, 10% discount is in addition to any other discounted rates); * The IMI Update, which contains information about current trends and events in the field of intercultural communication, as well as announcements from fellow Associates and links to related intercultural web resources; * A one year subscription to IMQ and free e-copies of IMQ upon request; * Invitations to Associates-only events.

Annual Association fees:

Regular fee: $50

Student fee: $20

AU Faculty/Staff Fee: $20

Subscription form for the Intercultural Management Institute Associates Program

Regular Member ($50)

Student Member ($20)

AU Faculty/Staff Member ($20)

Name: Title:

Organization:

Address: State:

City: Country:

Zip:

Email:

Phone:

Fax:

Check Enclosed

Credit Card (circle one) MasterCard VISA AmEx

Cash Enclosed

Made payable to American University

Name on card:

Exp.date:

Signature: Mail to:

Intercultural Management Institute, American University 4400 Massachusetts Ave., NW Washington, DC 20016-8177

Fax to:

(202) 885-1331

Card #: Date: Questions? e-mail: imi@american.edu or call (202) 885-6436