WITH our world almost broken apartby the forces of geopolitical selfinterest，cross-cultural understandingis the glue needed to hold it together.It means recognizing the fact that as people andnations， we are all the same but different.

With China established as the world’s secondlargest economy， there is now a vast literature abouthow to do business in China and about cross-culturalunderstanding. It stresses that China is different，something that my Chinese colleagues wouldstrongly endorse.

Different， though， from what？ From the Westernnorm， it would seem， a perspective surely cloudedby at least two falsehoods.

The implicit assumption is that there is a singleWestern norm， something hard to reconcile withthe fact that the structures and policies of the EuropeanUnion were initially designed explicitly not tobe American. Likewise， it seems a perverse idea toanyone who has listened to the diversity of opinionslinked to party and culture expressed in debates inthe European Parliament.

There are， in truth， as many norms as there arecultures. However， perhaps after more than a centuryof U.S. hegemony – Hollywood， McDonald’s，Afghanistan – “different” means different fromsome idealized conception of the American wayof doing things. We return to the global implica-tions of this later.

The second falsehood is the presumption thatChina departs from the norm， where the norm isviewed as doing what is right. For many of us， theright way of doing things is how our mothers andfathers did them. When eating an apple， did theyeat the core or not？ Did they clean their teeth beforeor after breakfast or， even not at all？

With at least 3，000 years of continuous culture，many Chinese social norms are traceable to thewritings of Confucius and his followers. Confucianismis perhaps best construed as a philosophy， alogical system the aim of which was to create a harmonioussociety that fostered human well-being

Elsewhere， historical ideas of righteousness wereoften passed on by religious leaders. However， multiplewars fought in the name of religious dogmaconfirm the falsity of a single universal religioustruth， a right way of doing things.

As individuals， we encounter different culturesthrough their representation in the media， by meetingforeigners or， if lucky enough， by traveling toother countries and moving within diverse communities.In each case， we spot difference by referenceto our own culture and interpret it through thesame lens. This， though， is a distortion.

Teaching at Oxford University， I noticed that Chinesestudents were incredibly diligent， writing downeverything said in class and not challenging a wordof the teaching. This behavior， so strikingly differentfrom that of European or American students， wasinevitably interpreted with reference to culturallyframed beliefs about China.

China， the Western media repeatedly – butwrongly – asserted， is a totalitarian state witha government that seeks to control everything，even people’s thoughts. Therefore， the view commonlyheld among Oxford academics was thatChinese students were simply afraid， fearful thatanything that they said would be reported backto the Chinese government by spies in the classroom.

The privilege of living in China affords a profoundlydifferent understanding. Education is highlyprized both as a route to social 01f89dcca2f7aad3e96dcbf8c29b87fd10cada42993b258c128fd88d5d79df53mobility and to becominga virtuous person. Chinese poets， scholarsand thinkers have been venerated throughout historyas sages， passing wisdom down the generations.The teacher teaches what is deemed to be true andthe student， listening， absorbs their truth.

This pattern of behavior is not confined to theChinese classroom. In Chinese businesses， subordinatesare reputedly unlikely to contradict their superiorsor to voice their opinion. In a paper publishedby the American Institute of Mathematical Sciences，Shuo Wang and Pasi Fr?nti， viewing Chinese culturefrom a Finnish university， conducted interviewswith employees of two European subsidiaries of Chinesecompanies. Local employees considered theChinese operations to be organized hierarchicallylike a steep pyramid and characterized by one-waycommunication， the disempowerment of staff， andsalaries based on status not performance.

Wang and Fr?nti interpret their findings withrespect to the concept of “power distance，” how unequallypower is distributed within an organization.Be this as it may， it could equally be viewed as amanifestation of Chinese respect for authority. Suchrespect stems from the Confucian ideal that hierarchyis an expression of virtue， demonstrated by theconcern shown for the well-being of persons lowerin the hierarchy.

Observing， and seeking to understand differenceare important first steps to respecting othercultures. To respect difference is to accept the existenceof differing understandings and ways of doingthings， to be prepared to accommodate them， andto be open to learning from them.

Since the Enlightenment in the 17th and 18thcenturies， European scholarship has contrived toseparate ideas from the individuals having them，and then to subject the ideas to forceful critique.This clinical separation of the person from theirideas fits uneasily with the Chinese concept ofmianzi ， face， with its connotations of self-respect，reputation and social standing.

With knowledge and learning being highlyprized， to have one’s understanding publicly criticizedrisks loss of face. Failing to recognize this inmy first venture into collaborative research withChinese academics， I spent a decade wonderinghow I had managed to offend a colleague and closefriend.

The avoidance of public criticism arguably extendsto the critique of policy and government. Asa policy analyst trained in Britain to draw attentionto policy failure with a view to stimulating improvement， in China I was destined rapidly to lose face.In time， one comes to appreciate that recognizingwhat is good about policy is to show respect. Onlythen， is it both appropriate and possible to offer suggestionsfor how policy might be further improved.The endpoint is the same， the means of reaching itare profoundly different.

Courses on cross-cultural understanding designedfor businesspeople typically start with areminder of the distorting influence of our own culturewhen encountering another. They then focuson the importance of understanding the beliefs andvalues of other cultures. The next step is learning torespect cultural diversity. This makes it possible todevelop the practical skills necessary to negotiatedifference and to capitalize on the resulting multiculturalinsights.

The four steps underpinning training in crossculturalunderstanding are relevant to addrefad2341e6b6eb9d521ce8b13e7d16e6617e7537e4fc1f73e1ef0629a0abf4c12ssingthe geopolitical tensions currently inhibitinginternational business collaborations and culturalexchanges.

World trade serves as an instructive example.Globalization is currently under threat. Rightlycriticized for disproportionately benefiting richcountries and wealthy individuals and corporations，it has nevertheless delivered unprecedented globaleconomic growth. The World Trade Organization（WTO）， designed to regulate trade， is subject to theU.S. boycotting of its appellant system. Economicsanctions constraining trade or imposed in retaliationfor alleged trade offences are in place， manyjudged to be illegal， against China and 36 mostlydeveloping countries.

On its establishment in 1995， the WTO inheritedand refined a set of principles grounded inU.S.-style liberal economics that encapsulated theAnglo-Saxon and continental European varieties ofcapitalism. These principles were then externalizedas rules and norms – the right way of doing trade– to be imposed on others. They included a marketeconomy based on private ownership， clear andlegally enforceable distinctions between public andprivate sectors， and a commitment to free marketsand the rule of law.

China， a socialist market economy integratingmarket principles and public ownership， acceded tothe WTO in 2001 after negotiations lasting 15 years.At that time， China’s GDP was only 13 percent thatof the U.S. The expectation of WTO negotiators，viewing China through their distorting culturallenses， was that China would inevitably become aliberal market economy by 2015.

Now， with China’s economy challenging the U.S.in size， high income countries are recognizing， butnot respecting2cb814d67be2ae95e0a40df7ae818a6b43fdbe4df3eead2fa3af594a6a77926e， difference. Instead， China is accusedof being a systemic rival seeking to disrupt theWTO. Joint statements from the U.S.， EU and Japanare demanding that China effectively abandons itssocialist market economy to “address nonmarketorientated policies” that allegedly create “unfaircompetitive conditions.”

As individuals studying cross-cultural understandingknow， acceptance and respect for differentcultures precedes successful collaboration. So it isfor governments. Difference is not a threat but anopportunity to work together to construct a worldtrade system that works for the many， not just thefew.