“To travel is to discover that everyone is wrong about other countries.” Aldous Huxley

When designing research it’s critical to consider the potential impact of cultural differences on research responses. Some things considered the norm in some markets are problematic and even inappropriate in others. The ethnicity data that we are so familiar with at local market level can be highly problematic when attempting to make comparisons internationally. For example typical ethnicity classifications reflecting the population make-up in the USA don’t have equivalents in the UK or Australia and, as a rule, ethnicity is not asked at all in France or Germany. In fact, in France, collecting ethnicity data is against the law and is not permitted except under special circumstances.

The way that we respond to question scales also varies across markets, a key consideration when designing surveys and interpreting results.  This often entails some compromise on the number of points on a scale as 5-point scales typically won’t give enough variation in high scoring cultures and 10-point scales leave too large a cultural gap between nations. Depending upon the market mix 7-point can work well providing the perfect “Goldilocks” option.

Japanese research participants have been shown to have a greater preference for mid-points and to be less likely to use scale extremes.  

North American participants are more likely to agree or give a positive response to a question and to display extreme responses often resulting in higher average scores for North American responses versus Northern European ones for example.

Many studies have highlighted that the Millennial generation displays different attitudes and behaviours to previous generations. They typically exhibit lower trust in people and organisations and higher importance on the societal contribution of employers and companies that they choose to buy from.

It is also important to understand that business “norms” are not universal – i.e. something that is perceived standard in one country cannot automatically be superimposed elsewhere.  For example, a study targeting C-suite in different markets on the assumption that they will all know and be able to respond to the same questions could provide strange results when trying to compare findings.  In Japan, the traditional business style means that decisions are often rubber stamped at senior levels having been agreed by committees of lower rung executives.  There is no way “around” this – if you target exclusively C-suite on the basis that they are decision-makers Japan will indicate anomalies.  If you target genuine decision makers who are more than rubber stampers you might find titles vary widely across markets.  If you genuinely need both then you must look carefully at the markets involved and aim for a mix of titles and roles.  

The good news is that cultural differences can be accounted for or minimised in international research with a bit of forethought and planning.

‍