I recently read an article about how doing business in China means turning the old adage, “Think Global, Act Local,” on its head. Frankly, it occurs to me that this inverse thinking, “Think Local, Act Global”¹ applies not only to working in China, and that many companies go about globalization completely the wrong way. In thinking globally first, organizations have ended up forcing standards and practices on local operations that are at best ineffective, because they simply aren’t relevant, or at worse counterproductive, because they’re demotivating and maybe even unethical or illegal in that culture. It is only by thinking locally first and truly understanding the specific business situation, the cultural context, the political/legal environment, the market pressures, and the competitive challenges that can you really hope to integrate the local business needs into an effective global solution.

The authors of this article go on to say, “The ‘think local, act global’ strategy implies a need for seemingly contradictory management skills. Managers do need to be local in their understanding, but they also must be global in their behavior. They must have real global experience and a mature understanding of (and appreciation for) MNCs’ global business conduct.”

To help you in your globalization journey, following is a list of The Behavioral Mistakes of Multinationals that global leaders must seek to avoid if they want to be effective in the world of Global 2.0:

1. Don’t apply double standards
2. Know the law and follow it
3. Don’t bend the rules
4. Avoid making symbolic moves
5. Avoid aggressive tactics over intellectual property
6. Guard against management insensitivity
7. Don’t strip-mine the profits
8. Don’t use local operations as “test labs”

We all need to challenge the status quo a bit more often and invert our thinking sometimes if we want to achieve breakthrough results.
————————–

¹“The Challenge for Multinational Corporations in China: Think Local, Act Global.” By Seung Ho Park and Wilfried R. Vanhonacker. MIT Sloan Management Review. 31 May 2007.