Hierarchy is not a new concept for those working with Africans (and not only). It is one of those aspects that one needs to accept, however difficult it may seem from one's own cultural perspective. It has many consequences on work relationships and cross-cultural teams might experience many misunderstandings stemming from this one aspect. I'll analyse hierarchy and suggest some ways of integrating it into intercultural teams.
African societies are very hierarchical. Traditionally, they are organised around the family and the tribe. In both places, people move upwards in the hierarchy with age. Decisions are usually made by the eldest and nobody can really challenge them. These age layers can even be seen with the very young children: the one who is 5 must listen to the one who is 7. Even conflict resolution goes with the help of the "wise old": if there's a conflict between two parties, they mutually go to the wise (the head of the family, the chief) and let him decide of the outcome. They would not go to a younger one, even if that person were more suited for the conflict resolution or had more expertise in a certain field.
This hierarchy is omnipresent in the corporate world as well. Bosses are considered to be the Chiefs whose decisions are unquestionable. They are considered to be the wise who know everything (or at least more than their subordinates) and from whom one can only learn, certainly not bring new information. There is a one-way information flow that is presupposed between the boss and the subordinate.
This aspect has many consequences on the day-to-day work relationships. First, there is hardly any feedback for bosses coming from subordinates. If the boss asks for something or orders something to be done in a certain way, subordinates accept it even if they don't agree or have alternative solutions. They obey. Although this can be positive due to the seemingly smooth workflow and the lack of explicit rebellion coming from subordinates, I also consider it suboptimal, since the subordinates' ideas and skills are not really used. Two minds are always better than one alone, but this kind of thinking doesn't leave room for collective brainstorming or solution-seeking.
The solution I found to involve people was, once again, calm questioning. What do you think of this way of doing? Do you see any obstacles in it? Do you think you can do it all by yourself? What do you need to get it done? How else could we do it? Once confidence is established, people open up, because they don't feel anymore that they might lose face by coming up with a new idea.
Another dramatic consequence of the one-direction communication model is that subordinates hardly ever ask for help. They get the job, try to do it by themselves, but when they encounter a difficulty or need extra resources, they are shy to tell that to their boss. Once I had a coworker who was assigned to a new department where she was the only person working. It was obvious to me that the workload was far too much for just one person. When I questioned her about her views, she first said that she would manage, this is what she needs to so, so it will be ok. When results showed clearly that she couldn't handle all by herself, I gently asked her if she needed maybe more resources and after a while she acknowledged it. So I suggested that she go and talk to our boss asking for an extra person. She just couldn't do it. This was not something possible according to her internal rules. She saw it as losing face in front of her boss, acknowledging that she might not be capable to run the department alone. It took many one-to-one and group discussions with other coworkers to reassure her that it was normal to ask for help and mainly, it was in the best interest of the whole company. Finally she did it and she got two extra people. But it was a very tough time for her.
Second, there is a general presupposition that the boss knows everything, thus subordinates are not meant to find solutions themselves. They tend to be passive, waiting for the boss to come up with alternatives and then order the others to execute. Once I asked my assistant to have some documents stamped with the company stamp. She went to the office where the stamp was kept, then she came back, handed over the unstamped documents and while sitting down, she told me that it was not possible because the ink pad ran dry. For her, the assignment was done. Deep inside, I was shocked by the level of passivity and the one-task focus that this behaviour represented for me. So I looked at her, handed back the documents and asked her: "So, what's next? How will you go about having stamped these documents?". It was her turn to be shocked and I could see on her face a mixture of astonishment, embarrassment and irritation. She was thinking that I was mocking at her! How could I ask such an irritating question whereas I obviously knew the answer, since I was the Boss!
I had to explain to her that I don't know how to go about it, but I asked her to do the job, so I'd like her to come up with alternative solutions. What can she do/whom can she ask/what options are there to get a proper inkpad? She replied to me with several solutions, but her voice was still telling me that she was feeling tested. I had to do the same exercise several times so that she can understand that she was the one to come up with solutions, not her Boss.
I think it is important to establish a "What are the solutions then?" communication with one's colleagues. Being the boss and on top of it, the white person, put me on a very high level of the hierarchy where people didn't really feel the need to sort out problems by themselves. It is very difficult at the beginning, since this is a new thinking habit to set up, but practice, repetition and perseverance bear their fruit.
