NSQ 2 digital - Flipbook - Page 24
Binational Culture
The variable that defines productivity, not affinity
By Maria Mata
In many discussions about nearshoring, the
cultural dimension is often addressed
superficially. Conversations tend to focus on
cultural proximity between countries,
l i n g u i s t i c a ffi n i t y, o r t h e e a s e o f
communication between teams. These
elements may help initiate collaboration, but
they rarely explain the performance of an
international operation on their own. The
productivity of a binational team does not
depend on cultural sympathy. It depends on
how different work cultures are integrated into
a single operating system.
When a company distributes part of its
operations to another country, it is not simply
transferring tasks or processes. It is also
introducing different communication styles,
distinct expectations about leadership, and
particular ways of interpreting individual and
collective responsibility within the workplace.
These differences are not necessarily a
problem. In fact, many international teams
operate at high levels of performance
precisely because they combine diverse
perspectives. The challenge arises when
organizations assume that those differences
will resolve themselves spontaneously.
Business experience suggests that this
rarely happens.
Various studies on global teams indicate that
cultural differences can generate productivity
variations of up to 30 percent when work
styles are not properly aligned. The issue is
rarely a lack of talent. More often, it emerges
through organizational friction that appears
when teams interpret fundamental
concepts—such as responsibility, authority, or
internal communication—in different ways. A
common example appears in how leadership
is understood. In some work cultures,
instructions are interpreted as general
guidelines that allow for a degree of autonomy
in execution. In others, they are understood as
directives that require greater precision and
continuous follow-up. When these
expectations are not made explicit within the
organization, misunderstandings begin to
emerge, affecting the pace of work or the
quality of outcomes. A similar dynamic occurs
with communication.
Teams operating across different countries
may have different response rhythms,
different approaches to feedback, or different
ways of expressing disagreement. Without a
clear organizational framework, these
differences can generate operational
22
Digital Edition
MARCH 2026
