Cultural intelligence: drive, knowledge, strategy and action

Cultural intelligence, often called CQ, is defined by the Cultural Intelligence Center as the capability to function effectively in culturally diverse situations. The idea grew out of academic research, including work by Soon Ang, Linn Van Dyne and colleagues, who developed a twenty-item scale and tested it across samples in the United States and Singapore. Their studies found that different parts of cultural intelligence were related to different outcomes, such as the quality of cultural judgments and decisions, adjustment in new cultural settings, and task performance in culturally diverse work. The research describes four related capabilities, which the Cultural Intelligence Center names drive, knowledge, strategy and action.

Drive is motivation: interest in and confidence about working across cultures, and willingness to persist when it is uncomfortable. Knowledge is understanding how cultures are similar and different, including frameworks like the GLOBE clusters, knowledge of languages, faith practices and history, and awareness of your own cultural patterns. Strategy is using that knowledge to plan and to make sense of what is happening: preparing for an interaction, noticing when something is not working, and checking assumptions as you go. Action is behaving flexibly and appropriately, such as adjusting how directly you speak, how you use silence, or how you open a meeting.

Notice where cluster frameworks sit. They feed knowledge, one capability out of four. Knowledge without strategy can become stereotyping, because nothing prompts you to check whether a pattern applies. Knowledge without drive can stay on the shelf. Knowledge without action changes nothing about how the meeting goes. This is why the Expand Your Borders series pairs each cluster with questions and practice, not just descriptions.

The Cultural Intelligence Center describes these capabilities as skills that can be developed through education, training and experience, depending on how people reflect on those experiences. That fits public service well. A case manager preparing for a first visit, a supervisor planning a meeting with a new team, and a policy analyst designing a listening session with county and Tribal partners can each work on all four capabilities. Some organizations use commercial assessments of cultural intelligence. This course does not assess anyone, and nothing here should be used to rate colleagues.

Fictional case: Jin, a new DSD supervisor, has read several Expand Your Borders summaries and can describe patterns for most of the ten clusters. In team meetings, though, she runs the agenda the same way every time and is surprised when some staff rarely speak. Her manager, Paula, suggests she look at how she is using what she knows. Paula points out that two quieter staff members wrote thoughtful comments on a draft afterward, so they clearly have views to share.

Before your next meeting that includes people with different working styles, write down one assumption you hold about how the meeting should run and one way you will check it during the meeting.

Of the four capabilities, which feels strongest for you and which gets the least attention? What is one small situation this month where you could practice the weaker one?