The Global Values Gap: Why Context Matters in Corporate Culture

Janet Hitchen: 

I recently read a LinkedIn post where the author mocked a company for listing a core value they considered obvious. They dissed it as a red flag and performative.

Many professionals nodded along, dismissing any organisation that dares to explicitly name values like respect, integrity, or collaboration as fundamental principles.

Here’s my problem with this trend: it reflects a dangerously narrow, Western-centric view of how organisations should operate globally.

We’re Missing the Cultural Context

In many cultures, explicitly stating values like respect isn’t redundant—it’s essential. In hierarchical societies across Asia, Africa, and Latin America, openly declaring respect as a core principle signals a commitment to breaking down traditional power structures. When a company there emphasises respect, they’re often making a deliberate statement about creating psychological safety in environments where questioning authority has historically been discouraged.

Similarly, when organisations in post-conflict regions emphasise integrity, they’re addressing specific historical contexts where institutional trust was broken. These aren’t empty corporate speak; they’re responses to real cultural and historical challenges.

One-Size-Fits-All Thinking is Lazy

When we dismiss these values as “obvious” or “performative,” we’re essentially saying that our cultural context is the universal standard. We’re ignoring the reality that what seems implicit in one culture may need to be explicitly reinforced in another.

This isn’t to defend lazy corporate communication or meaningless mission statements. Plenty of organisations create values as tick-box exercises, in closed rooms, then hurled at their teams in a flurry of “culture”. Eugh. 

But the solution isn’t to mock any company that names fundamental principles—it’s to look more closely whether those values are lived, not just listed.

A Better Approach

Instead of jumping to judgment, what if we approached corporate values with curiosity? What if we asked:

• What cultural context might make this value particularly important here?
• How does this organisation’s history or location influence their priorities?
• Are these values reflected in their actual practices and policies?

The most successful global organisations understand that effective leadership looks different across cultures. They know that building trust in Germany requires different approaches than building trust in Ghana or Guatemala. If you want great reads on this check out Erin Meyer’s The Culture Map or the work of Gustavo Razzetti.

Maybe…

We need conversations that consider cultural nuance and context, not just content. We need curiosity over quick clicks. We need to stop polarising and start getting comfortable with the messy middle of nuance and challenge and ambiguity. 

Before we dismiss an organisation’s values as silly, let’s pause and consider: maybe they’re not talking to us. Maybe they’re addressing challenges and contexts we haven’t experienced. And maybe that’s exactly what thoughtful, culturally aware leadership looks like.

The goal shouldn’t be universal corporate speak that offends no one or worse tech bro speak that jars with who you are and what you do. It should be credible communication that serves the specific communities and cultures where the company operates.

That’s not performative. That’s leadership.

+++

Janet Hitchen is a communication consultant and writer based in London. She is a Strategic columnist and co-host of the Navigating Disruption Podcast

Written by: Editor