Everyone talks about building a relationship with your customer.
I think you build one with your employees first.
- Angela Ahrendts -
The findings of studies conducted over the years suggest that cultural diversity and the misunderstandings that often arise as a result of different temporal perspectives have an impact on staff retention: workers will either adapt to the organizational culture (good "personality-job" fit), or they will leave.
In most organizations, "good time management" is often intended as the ability to tackle tasks orderly and sequentially within a given clock block (hours, minutes), but polychrons prefer to work on multiple tasks simultaneously and switch between them at will (Hall claimed that "Matters in a polychronic culture seem in a constant state of flux. Nothing is solid or firm, particularly plans for the future; even important plans may be changed right up to the minute of execution.").
Generally speaking, polychrons are best suited for a work environment that offers variety, teamwork, flexibility, and a certain degree of autonomy, while monochrons are likely to thrive in an environment where emphasis is placed on meticulous planning, coordination, privacy, and deadlines.
Below, a quick recap of the main monochronic and polychronic traits.
“Early is on time and on time is late.”
- Bo Schembechler -
For monochrons, punctuality relates to one's reputation: in any society and/or organization characterized by a monochronic culture keeping time is paramount, activities are scheduled ahead of time, specific time slots are allocated to each task for tracking and performance evaluation purposes (e.g: "Underestimating the time it takes to do one task, while overestimating another, can cause a worker to not be able to finish a project on time.", from Chron).
In monochronic organizations usage of time management tools and techniques (such as to-do-lists, activity logs, time-sheets) is common and encouraged.
With regard to international business, in monochronic cultures "formal" relationships are mostly transactional and short-term: while for members of monochronic/low-context/individualistic cultures the development of personal relationships with their stakeholders is often a consequence of successful business dealings conducted together, for the members of polychronic/high-context/collectivist societies personal relationships are the foundation upon which long-lasting and mutually rewarding business relationships are built.
To put the above paragraph in context, let's check some of the answers foreign workers provided to the question “For those of you who work for Japanese companies, what are some of the best or worst things about it?” in a post shared a while ago by Japan Today):
- “Very tough to get decisions pushed through in a timely manner”;
- “[…] meetings which very rarely produce anything constructive”;
- "[…] the reason for these long meetings is the fault of their indirect communication style; so getting things discussed, decided and accomplished takes easily twice as long as a western company".
Now, while this example focuses specifically on the Japanese environment, it is important to note that most polychronic/high-context/collectivist societies share some common traits that set them aside from the majority of W.E.I.R.D. societies: a collectivist mindset, a flexible approach to time management, an indirect communication style, and a distinctive “being orientation”, as opposed to the “doing orientation” that’s predominant in the Anglo- and in the Germanic clusters (“doing” cultures are structured and prioritize tasks, self-interest, the importance of getting things done and of being productive; “being” cultures, on the other hand, tend to be more flexible and to place a greater emphasis on human relationships, on tradition, on group well-being.).
On a related note, while group work is important in both monochronic- and polychronic organizations, in the former the main focus is on individual achievements, and group work is intended as the work of individuals performing individual, distinctive tasks well within the context of a group assignment (task compartmentalization).
“If anything is clear, it is that a rigid, unchanging way is wrong.”
- Adin Even-Israel Steinsaltz -
In polychronic environments tasks will be completed (eventually), but interactions and connection are the main priorities. Hall observed that in polychronic cultures people tend to change plans frequently, they borrow and lend from others with ease, they are interested in building long term-relationships with others, they don't necessarily distinguish between task- and social time. Furthermore, they are unlikely to plan ahead, they aren't overly concerned with meeting deadlines, they are comfortable with change and likely to initiate it.
According to Bluedorn et al., two specific behaviors are indicative of polychronic time preferences:
- simultaneity, the ability to work on multiple assignments at the same time but without the focus on speed;
- dovetailing, the ability to fit different tasks together smoothly to make the best use of time (not every task requires one's undivided attention).
With regard to stress management, research suggests that polychrons are "better adapted to high-pressure jobs and situations", based on the premise that "polychrons are more likely to be able to juggle activities in order to complete a specific task on time. Monochrons wish to stay on schedule; feelings of pressure to complete a specific task may call an established schedule into question, causing monochrons to feel that they have performed poorly."
Polychrons would therefore be expected to "thrive in careers which require great juggling of tasks, such as tour directors, administrative assistants, creative developers of products and of advertising, receptionists, and emergency room personnel are just a few possible illustrations. Such jobs require that the individual constantly adjust to incoming new jobs and responsibilities, integrating them with other activities which have already been scheduled. They enjoy change as part of their job, in which they are challenged to make a better fitting schedule which meets everyone's needs" (monochrons, on the other hand, prefer to adhere to schedules and don't handle interruptions particularly well, as as they have the potential to “destroy plans, alter deadlines, and devastate projects” - Romeo, 1993).
It is important to note that while organizations do often expecting/require polychronic behaviour (multi-tasking) from their employees, individual performance is, in most cases, evaluated according to monochronic standards (ability to complete certain tasks within specific time slots, ability to meet tight deadlines, etc.).
The above is an excerpt from the course on Time Management [free lesson preview], available here. Next, we are going to discuss about the links between Time- and Space- Management (on average, monochrons tend to be more territorial and concerned with privacy than polychrons): to receive updates on new content and upcoming courses, please subscribe to “Oddities & Curiosities”, Mudita’s newsletter).
SOURCES (bibliography for the full course):
Ali, A. J., & Azim, A. (1996). "A cross-national perspective on managerial problems in a non-western country". The Journal of Social Psychology, 136(2), 165-172
Avruch, K. (1998). "Culture and conflict resolution". Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press
Beebe, S., Beebe, S. and Redmond, M. (2014). "Interpersonal Communication: Relating To Others". 7th ed. Boston: Allyn & Bacon
Benabou, C. (1999). "Polychronicity and temporal dimensions of work in learning organizations". Journal of Managerial Psychology, 14, 257–270. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683949910263792
Bluedorn, A., Kaufman, C., & Lane, P. (1992). "How Many Things Do You like to Do at Once? An Introduction to Monochronic and Polychronic Time". The Executive, 6(4), 17-26. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4165091
Bluedorn, A.C., Kalliath, T.J., Strube, M.J. and Martin, G.D. (1999). "Polychronicity and the inventory of polychronic values: the development of an instrument to measure a fundamental dimension of organizational culture''. Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 14 Nos. 3/4, pp. 205-30
Brkich, M., Jeffs, D., & Carless, S. (2002). "A Global Self-Report Measure of Person-Job Fit". European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 18, 43-51.
Brown, G., Lawrence, T., & Robinson, S. (2005). "Territoriality in Organizations". The Academy of Management Review", 30(3), 577-594
Bruneau, T. (2004). "Time and Nonverbal Communication". The Journal of Popular Culture. VIII. 658 - 666. 10.1111/j.0022-3840.1974.0803_658.x.
Bruneau, T. (2012). "Chronemics: Time-binding and the construction of personal time". ETC: A Review of General Semantics, 69(1), 72-92. Retrieved August 9, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/42579170
Burgoon, J. K., Stacks, D. W., & Burch, S. A. (1982). "The role of rewards and violations of distancing expectations in achieving influence in small groups". Communication, 11, 114-128
Circella, G., Mokhtarian, P. L., & Poff, L. K. (2012). "A conceptual typology of multitasking behavior and polychronicity preferences". Electronic International Journal of Time Use Research, 9, 59–107. doi:10.13085/eIJTUR.9.1
Clegg, S. R., Hardy, C., & Nord, W. R. (Eds.). (1996). "Handbook of organization studies". Sage Publications, Inc.
Deeds Ermarth, E. (2010). "What If Time Is a Dimension of Events, Not an Envelope for Them?". Time & Society, 19(1), 133–150. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961463X09354421
Fink, Gerhard, Meierewert, Sylvia (2004). "Issues of time in international, intercultural management: East and Central Europe from the perspective of Austrian managers". Journal for East European Management Studies, ISSN 0949-6181, Rainer Hampp Verlag, Mering, Vol. 9, Iss. 1, pp. 61-84 - https://www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/90304
Gudykunst, W. B., & Kim, Y. Y. (1984). ”Communicating with strangers: An approach to intercultural communication”. New York: Random House
Hall, Edward T. (1976). "Beyond Culture". New York: Doubleday
Hall, Edward T. (1969). "The Hidden Dimension". New York: Doubleday
Hall, Edward T. (1963). “A System for the Notation of Proxemic Behavior.” American Anthropologist (Blackwell Publishing Ltd) 65 (1548-1433): 1003-1026
Hall, Edward T. (1959). "The Silent Language". New York: Doubleday
Hall, E.T. (1983). "The Dance of Life: The Other Dimension of Time". New York: Doubleday
Hall, E.T. (1990). "Understanding Cultural Differences: Germans, French and Americans", New York: Doubleday
Hassard J. (1990). "Introduction: The Sociological Study of Time". In: Hassard J. (eds) The Sociology of Time. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-20869-2_1
Hassard, J. (1991). "Aspects of Time in Organization". Human Relations, 44(2), 105–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872679104400201
Hecht, T. D., & Allen, N. J. (2005). "Exploring links between polychronicity and well-being from the perspective of person-job fit: Does it matter if you prefer to do only one thing at a time?". Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 98, 155-178
Henrich, J., Heine, S., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). "The weirdest people in the world?" Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2-3), 61-83. doi:10.1017/S0140525X0999152X
Henrich, J., Heine, S. & Norenzayan, A. "Most people are not WEIRD". Nature 466, 29 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1038/466029a
Hofstede, Geert H. (1997). "Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind (second ed.)". New York: McGraw-Hill
Huang, D., Rau, P., Su, H., Tu, N., & Zhao, C. (2010). "Effects of communication style and time orientation on notification systems and anti-virus software". Behaviour & Information Technology, 29, 483 - 495
Kaufman, C. F., Lane, P. M., & Lindquist, J. D. (1991). "Exploring more than 24 hours a day: A preliminary investigation of polychronic time use". Journal of Consumer Research, 18(3), 392–401
Kaufman-Scarborough, Carol & Lindquist, Jay (1999). "Time Management and Polychronicity: Comparisons, Contrasts, and Insights for the Workplace". Journal of Managerial Psychology. 14. 288-312. 10.1108/02683949910263819
Kluckhohn, F. and Strodtbeck, F. (1961). "Variations in value orientation". New York: Harper Collins
Leclerc, F., Schmitt, B. H., & Dube, L. (1995). "Waiting time and decision making: Is time like money?". Journal of Consumer Research, 22 (1), 110-119 - https://www.jstor.org/stable/2489704
Lewis, R. D. (1996). "When cultures collide: Managing successfully across cultures". London: N. Brealey Pub
Lyman, S. M., & Scott, M. B. (1967). "Territoriality: A neglected sociological dimension". Social Problems, 15(2), 236-249 - https://www.jstor.org/stable/799516
Martin, J. N., & Nakayama, T. K. (2014). "Intercultural communication in contexts". New York: McGraw-Hill
McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1996). ”Fundamentals of human communication: An interpersonal perspective”. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press
Orbe, M. (1998). “Constructing co cultural theory: An Explication of culture, power, and communication”. Thousand Oaks, NJ: Sage Publications
Persing, D. L. (1999). "Managing in polychronic times: Exploring individual creativity and performance in intellectually intensive venues". Journal of Managerial Psychology, 14(5), 358-373
Purcell, J., Kinnie, N., Swart, J., Rayton, B., Hutchinson, S. (2009). "People Management and Performance". London: Routledge
Schein, & E. H. (1985). "Organizational culture and leadership". San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers
Slocombe, T.E., & Bluedorn, A.C. (1999). "Organizational behavior implications of the congruence between preferred polychronicity and experienced work-unit polychronicity''. Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 75-99
Zakay, D., & Fleisig, D. (2011). "Psychological time, time perspective, culture and conflict resolution". Culture and Neural Frames of Cognition and Communication, 123-137