What Does It Mean To Be Authentic Across Cultures?

This is the final post in a three-part series exploring my working definition of intercultural competence:  The capacity to communicate and act effectively, appropriately, and authentically across cultural differences, locally and globally.

In September, I explained that effectively means there’s something we’re trying to do—some outcome we want to achieve—that involves navigating cultural differences. Last month’s post focused on how doing so appropriately may require adapting our behavior, message, communication style, or other ways of going about achieving our goal to the cultural context. This month, I’m exploring what navigating cultural differences authentically means.

In his book Global Dexterity, Brandeis University International Business Professor Andy Molinsky (2013) explains that the conundrum of navigating cultural differences “is that to be successful you have to adapt, but in the process of adapting, you can feel like you are losing yourself” (p. 25). Navigating differences authentically means we don’t lose ourselves—or violate our core values—in the process.

I added “authentically” to my definition several years ago because of conversations I was having with people when conducting individual debriefs of their Intercultural Development Inventory (IDI) results. I’ve written about the IDI and the model it’s based on—the Intercultural Development Continuum (IDC)—in other posts. The model explains intercultural competence as a developmental process in which we move from less complex (monocultural) to more complex (intercultural) mindsets or ways of experiencing cultural differences and similarities. Talking with people during individual debriefs about their strengths and challenges when navigating differences and similarities, I began to recognize the important role authenticity plays in intercultural competence.

It’s important to understand that how we make meaning of any part of this definition—including but not limited to the “authenticity” piece—has a lot to do with our own intercultural development. From the monocultural mindsets, authenticity might be interpreted as “just be yourself.” However, that’s not what’s meant in this definition.

I often debrief people with an IDI score in Minimization who say, “But I don’t understand. I’m code-switching all the time. Isn’t that adapting?” While people in the transitional mindset of Minimization may engage in adaptive behaviors, their capacity and worldview are quite different than someone adapting from the intercultural mindset of Adaptation. In Minimization, we tend to emphasize commonality and similarity, drawing attention away from deeper differences. We may adapt out of necessity or habit—particularly around our non-dominant or marginalized identities and experiences—to fit into the dominant culture patterns around us, perhaps out of a desire for safety, belonging, and inclusion. We’re adapting in ways that may feel necessary, but not authentic. The locus of control seems external. This is often referred to as assimilation, which involves adapting because you feel you must, whether that’s done consciously or not. It can be hard to imagine adapting in ways that feel choiceful and authentic from a Minimization mindset.

Developing from Minimization into the intercultural mindset of Acceptance involves building capacity to shift perspective and empathize in a deeper way with culturally different ways of thinking and acting. As a result, however, we may struggle with issues of cultural relativity, thinking, “I respect the different perspectives involved and don’t necessarily see mine as better or worse, so what do I do now?” It feels like taking action would be a form of judgment—something we try to avoid—so we get stuck in analysis paralysis. The developmental task at Acceptance “includes making efforts to weigh your values and those of other groups and then making ethical judgments taking cultural differences into account” (IDI Individual Profile Report for Acceptance).

When we adapt our behaviors from the intercultural mindset of Adaptation, the locus of control feels more internal than when adapting from a Minimization mindset. We choose to adapt, in a way that’s appropriate to the cultural context, to achieve our goal. The adaptation is context-specific, goal-oriented, temporal, and choiceful. We’re not unconsciously assimilating, but consciously choosing to flex our style or approach in a particular situation—in a way that’s respectful of the cultural context and differences at play—to accomplish our goal.

What’s sometimes difficult for people to understand about Adaptation if they haven’t developed that complexity of mindset themselves is that it does not mean we adapt to whatever cultural differences exist, even those we find morally reprehensible. That would be inauthentic. That’s why people navigating difference from an Adaptation mindset often find it helpful to ask themselves, “What is my goal? What is my role? And how do I do that without losing my soul?” (original source unknown).

Consider the following example:  You’re volunteering with a humanitarian organization in a part of the world with high female mortality rates, trying to reduce that number. One of the contributing factors is that female circumcision is a common practice in the area. Intercultural competence does not mean you need to accept and adapt to that practice. However, you’d likely be both inappropriate and ineffective if you were to go into the community righteously deriding “female genital mutilation” (a term laden with judgment) and declaring why you think they ought to change. Practicing intercultural competence in this situation might look like first getting to know people and the community, becoming curious about how different populations feel about and view female circumcision, and trying to understand and empathize with them. Once you’ve developed relationships and have a deeper understanding of what people care about and why this practice persists, then you might think about adapting how you communicate, your messaging, or how you go about trying to make change so that others feel respected, and your efforts are more likely to be effective. For example, imagine you learn that many people feel circumcising young women helps keep them safe from future harm. In that case, you might emphasize alternatives that prioritize women’s safety. Or if you learn who’s most influential in the community, you could focus your efforts on them. You’re adapting how you go about achieving the goal, not simply adapting to a cultural difference that violates your core values. That’s how you maintain authenticity.

Some might argue that authenticity is a privilege mostly afforded to people from dominant or majority culture groups. Remember, developing along the continuum means we’re increasing our capacity to navigate cultural differences effectively, appropriately, and authentically. Different people struggle with different pieces of this puzzle, depending on their personal experiences and where they are in their own intercultural development. Some might not feel capable of being as authentic as they’d like when navigating differences. Others may struggle more to be effective or appropriate because they don’t recognize how their own assumptions are culturally-influenced or how others experience things differently. Yet becoming more aware of our own strengths and challenges when navigating cultural differences is an important part of the developmental process for everyone.

This concludes the series exploring my definition of intercultural competence. What has or hasn’t resonated with you? Where might you want to focus your own developmental efforts right now—on becoming more effective, appropriate, or authentic?

If you’re an educator who’d like to develop intercultural competence—your own and others’—check out True North Intercultural’s professional development programs and services here.

Photo credit:  Brian Mann, Unsplash