Introduction

In a globalized professional world, building a strong team goes far beyond organizing a cheese night or a PowerPoint seminar in a conference room. When cultures collide, expectations, interaction styles, and even the very definition of "team spirit" vary widely. In When Cultures Collide, Richard D. Lewis reminds us that what builds cohesion in an American team might lead to discomfort or confusion in a Japanese or French one.

“A variety of team-building exercises exists, and multinationals have tried them all. [...] A basic tenet of most team-building exercises is that all members must together face some difficulty and assist each other according to individual skills and available resources.”

Richard D. Lewis, When Cultures Collide

This quote highlights a key idea: in many Western contexts, team building often involves facing a challenge together. But is that really a universal approach ?

2. The Cultural Roots of Cohesion

Lewis identifies three main cultural categories:

• Linear-active (e.g., Germany, USA) : The team is structured by defined roles, and trust is built through action. Off-site activities (games, simulations, sports challenges) are seen as effective catalysts.

• Multi-active (e.g., France, Italy, Brazil) : Emotional connection is central. Sharing a meal or informal gathering might strengthen the team more than a structured activity.

• Reactive (e.g., Japan, Korea, China) : The group takes precedence over the individual, but open displays of emotion are avoided. Harmony is cultivated through discretion, and overly expressive team-building efforts may be seen as inappropriate.

2. Leaving the Office Yes, But How ?

In some cultures, stepping away from the formal work setting helps release tension and fosters more fluid communication. But the approach must be culturally appropriate:

• Anglo-Saxons enjoy crisis simulations or solution-oriented workshops.

• Scandinavians prefer calm, nature-based activities.

• Japanese may open up during formal dinners, but still avoid “losing face” in front of colleagues.

So, simply “leaving the office” isn’t enough. You have to know where to go, with whom, and for what purpose.

3. Common Pitfalls in Intercultural Team Building

1. An American manager organizes a paintball session to encourage bonding. His Indian colleagues feel embarrassed, interpreting it as a loss of dignity.

• A German director plans a timed problem-solving activity. Spanish team members prefer to first build a fun, informal atmosphere before diving into the task.

• A Chinese manager proposes karaoke to “relax together.” Her Swedish colleague feels it’s an invasion of privacy.

4.Building Teams Without Imposing a Single Model

What Lewis emphasizes is that effective intercultural team building doesn't come from standardizing but from mutual understanding. That requires :

• Observing implicit cultural codes before choosing activities.

• Co-designing the program with team members from different backgrounds.

• Adjusting the level of interactivity, emotional expression, or visible hierarchy based on the group’s profile.

Conclusion

Leaving the office to foster connection isn’t a magic fix. As Lewis reminds us, successful intercultural team building doesn’t start with a physical activity or a night out but with listening, cultural sensitivity, and intelligent adaptation. A cohesive multicultural team is not a happy accident it is the result of careful craftsmanship, built in nuance and respect.