Purpose in leadership is more than a personal compass. It’s the lens through which team members interpret a leader’s decisions, priorities, and expectations. And in multicultural settings, that clarity is not just helpful – it’s essential.
When we work with colleagues from different cultural backgrounds, our behaviour can be interpreted in ways we never intended. Without making our why explicit, people fill in the gaps themselves – and their conclusions can be very far from the truth.
Brian – the generous leader misunderstood
Brian had always been known as “the generous one” – the engineer who loved sharing what he knew in his previous job in his home country. So why, just six months into his posting in a West African gold mine, did his local team seem distant and disengaged?
A seasoned production manager, a decisive D-type in the Global DISC model, and someone who loved challenges, Brian saw this expatriation as a big one – especially since it was his first international assignment. His mission was clear: “Ensure operational excellence and transfer technical knowledge to local teams.”
He thought he was doing just that – introducing better processes, briefing supervisors daily, and setting ambitious goals. His how was grounded in inclusive leadership, with less hierarchy than the team was used to. But his quick corrections during shift handovers were taken as criticism rather than guidance. Questions stopped coming. Some colleagues complied silently but didn’t apply what they had learned.
During our coaching process, Brian worked with the Global DISC tool. That’s when he realised his direct, results-focused style could feel abrupt in a culture that valued relationship-building and indirect feedback. He also joined a meaningful conversation activity, where he reflected on his own values and learned more about a colleague’s cultural and religious influences on communication.
Then he read Simon Sinek’s Start With Why. The line “People don’t buy what you do; they buy why you do it” struck him. He realised he had been explaining what and how, but never why. When he started telling his team, “I’m here to share what I know so you can lead these operations yourselves,” he also explained the cultural reasons behind his style.
It worked – but he also saw that bidirectional adaptation was needed. His team adjusted to his style, but he also learned to adapt to theirs. One thing that helped enormously was metacommunication – openly discussing how personal and cultural differences shape communication. That single shift removed misunderstandings and made knowledge transfer far more effective.
Mahmoud – the leader misread
Mahmoud was a respected superintendent reporting directly to Brian. His top priority was harmony in the team. He avoided public criticism to prevent colleagues from losing face, addressed problems privately, looked for collective solutions, and rarely expressed strong emotions at work.
To Brian, especially in the first months, this came across as avoiding responsibility, lacking ownership, and not dealing with problems head-on. The truth was, Mahmoud was deeply committed. But his approach was shaped by a context where preserving dignity, showing pride, and maintaining relationships were just as important as hitting production targets.
Because Brian didn’t initially explore these cultural drivers, they spent months misreading each other. Only when Brian started asking about Mahmoud’s reasoning – and listening – did he notice strengths he had overlooked: loyalty in the team, trust between colleagues, and a conflict-free environment.
It was equally important for Mahmoud to explain and communicate his own differences to Brian – sharing why he handled feedback, conflict, and emotions the way he did. This openness helped Brian see the value in Mahmoud’s approach and made it easier for both of them to adapt. From there, they began blending styles – Mahmoud being more direct in some situations, and Brian learning to value indirect approaches when they worked better.
The common expatriate blind spot
Brian’s and Mahmoud’s experiences are far from rare. Many expatriates lose sight of their deeper purpose once the novelty wears off and operational pressure kicks in. Without self-awareness and clear communication of purpose:
- local talent may feel undervalued or overlooked
- cultural differences in feedback, hierarchy, and communication style can cause misunderstandings
- knowledge transfer opportunities are missed
Another frequent mistake is thinking that adaptation should flow only one way – that the local team should adjust to the expatriate’s style. True collaboration requires bidirectional adaptation: the expatriate learns and adjusts to the local cultural context, while the local team also understands and accommodates the expatriate’s approach.
When purpose is communicated respectfully, it builds trust and stops unhelpful stereotypes – like “locals can’t handle complex tasks” or “they’re not proactive enough” – from taking root. It also creates the foundation for that two-way adaptation, ensuring both sides grow and benefit from the exchange.
Why this matters for leaders across cultures
In multicultural teams, purpose works like a translation tool. It bridges intentions and interpretations, prevents false assumptions, and builds mutual respect.
Communicating your why:
- aligns your team’s understanding with your real intentions
- shows respect for the expertise and potential of local colleagues
- encourages shared ownership of results
Across cultures, purpose-driven communication isn’t “nice to have”. It’s a leadership necessity. And like any skill, it can be learned, practised, and refined.
Writen by intercultures España & Latam.
Photo from Pexels.