Communication and adaptation

Many organizations and business train their employees in global communications skills in which the personal approach is leading to show understanding (instead of just understanding it in your head), to show confidence, to learn to present professionally, to be aware of body language, to develop verbal skills, to manage expectations and to make clear what you need, what you expect, what you want, what you want to do with your team and what you want to do across with the global teams. In the professional global business environment, you cannot be laid back like you are at home; you cannot expect things to happen because the people around you don’t know you for 20 years, like your family would (interview Kaul 2008). However, even though people learn to maintain themselves in this highly competitive global business environment, the adaptation to global communication skills has a price.

Adapting to the global communications environment is adapting to a collective imaginary model, which is mostly defined by American industry. It is as if most people are playing a character in a theatre play and dress and eat and relate to others accordingly (interview Upadhya 2008). Drivers of this adaptation processes are higher salaries and potential profit. Working in this global business environ- ment, while at the same time maintaining a local identity in personal lives, people are psychologically torn apart. In the IT industry in India, the effect of this discrepancy between professional and personal identity has led to new stress- related diseases, which India has not known before (inter- view Ilavarasan 2008). The question that poses itself is whether and how through global systems technology facilitated communication witnessing emerges. Interna- tional business experience shows that, next to global communication skills, patterns of presence and absence in physical presence are crucial for success. Collaborators tend to meet at the start of projects and when evaluating the project. In both moments, ethical issues (about what is good to do or was done) are at stake. In between, hierarchy and shared production values create smooth collaboration (interviews Upadhya 2008, Wilson 2008).