SINCE THE MID-1990S, a growing number of CIOs have been faced with overseas responsibilities. Unfortunately, many CIOs are engaging in on-the-job training as they tackle their expanded roles, just as I did before I knew better. Expect to exit with residual scar tissue.

After 30 years of experience managing information technology for large organizations around the world, I am still surprised by the effects of national differences. When a U.S. company builds a new factory in China or Mexico, or opens a sales office in India or South Africa, the company's CIO is expected to provide the normal telecommunications and computer-based systems for those facilities, often in double-click time. However, even where English is the primary business language, differences in culture, infrastructure and the availability of skilled staff have a meaningful impact on current business activities.

The average per-capita gross domestic product of the United States is almost five times that of most Latin American people, almost eight times that of most Chinese and nearly 15 times that of someone living in India, according to The Conference Board in New York City. Less money means weaker infrastructure, including electric power, telecommunications and -- most important -- education.

Almost one-third of the people in the Middle East can't read, more than 40 percent in Africa can't read, and almost half the people in South Asia can't read. And far more people can read than can add and subtract. Think about what that could mean when you try to take a physical inventory in one of these countries.

My own lessons learned began with cultural nuances. A few years ago, I had the task of reorganizing a large division of one of the Near East's most important and most prominent energy enterprises. My client was the division chairman, and he and I quickly developed an excellent working relationship. I started by interviewing all of the management staff to get to know who they were, what they did and especially what they might be capable of doing. After a few weeks of this, I pulled together a first draft of a new organizational chart.

When I showed it to the chairman, he laughed. I had failed to factor in the all-important family relationships. There simply was no way that Bob would work for Sam or that George would accept being one level lower in the hierarchy than Jim. In this particular culture, I had behaved like a good but unaware American.

What to do? One of the chairman's assistants and I put all of the senior executives' names and salaries on individual 3-by-5 cards. Then we spread out the cards on the boardroom table and started rebuilding my tattered organizational concept. With the assistant's gracious help, we moved the cards here and there in a semilogical fashion until we hit on an org chart that was both rational from a U.S. point of view and cognizant of family relationships.

When we showed it to the chairman, he made a few changes based on family

• Email
• Print
• Share
  • Slashdot
  • Digg
  • Stumble
  • Reddit
  • Newsvine