Milestone map
Milestone map
3 milestones
Apply a Cultural Framework to Analyse Two National Business Cultures
2–3 weeks
Select two countries with distinct cultural profiles. Apply Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions (or Trompenaars' or Globe study frameworks) to characterise each culture's approach to business across at least four dimensions. Ground the analysis in empirical evidence beyond the framework scores — published business case examples, negotiation research, leadership studies, or academic cross-cultural research.
Proof required
Submit a cross-cultural comparison (minimum 1,200 words) covering: (a) the two countries chosen and rationale for the pairing (e.g. relevant business relationship, expansion context), (b) Hofstede or equivalent dimension scores for both countries with source, (c) four empirical examples of how cultural differences have manifested in real business interactions between these two countries or in each country's business environment, and (d) the two most practically significant cultural differences for a business professional working across these contexts.
What gets checked
- Empirical examples are real and sourced — not hypothetical illustrations
- Framework scores are from the original source (hofstede-insights.com) not secondary summaries
- Most significant differences are assessed for practical business impact, not just theoretical interest
Common mistakes
- Analysis relies entirely on framework scores without empirical grounding in real business behaviour
- Country pairing with minimal practical relevance to business contexts the submitter is likely to encounter
Resources
What a verifier looks for
- Challenge one of the empirical examples: 'You cited this negotiation outcome as evidence of high power distance — but what other explanations could account for the same behaviour? How do you rule them out?'
Apply Cultural Analysis to a Real Cross-Cultural Business Scenario
2–3 weeks
Apply your cultural analysis to a specific, real cross-cultural business scenario — a joint venture, international expansion, cross-border M&A, or multinational team management challenge. Identify the specific cultural friction points, their likely business consequences, and concrete mitigation strategies.
Proof required
Submit a cross-cultural business analysis (minimum 1,500 words) covering: (a) the real business scenario chosen (with source or your direct experience), (b) identification of the specific cultural friction points arising from the dimensional differences identified in milestone 1, (c) assessment of the business consequences of each friction point if unaddressed, and (d) at least three concrete mitigation strategies grounded in the cultural analysis.
What gets checked
- Scenario is real — not a hypothetical composite
- Friction points are specific to the cultural dimensions identified, not generic cross-cultural challenges
- Mitigation strategies are actionable — not 'build cultural awareness'
Common mistakes
- Mitigation strategies are generic training recommendations rather than specific to the identified friction points
- Business consequences are described as 'communication challenges' without specifying the actual business risk (deal failure, employee attrition, product-market misfit)
What a verifier looks for
- Challenge the mitigation strategies: 'Your third mitigation is to run cultural awareness training — but research on cross-cultural training effectiveness shows significant variability in outcomes. What specific training design would address the power distance gap you identified, and how would you measure whether it worked?'
Present Analysis to a Cross-Cultural Business Professional
1 week
Present the cross-cultural analysis to a professional with cross-cultural business experience (international business manager, expatriate assignment specialist, cross-cultural trainer, or international business academic) who will challenge at least two of your cultural assessments.
Proof required
Submit: (a) Q&A log from the review session (minimum 250 words with at least two challenges and responses), and (b) attendance record with reviewer name and credentials.
What gets checked
- Reviewer has genuine cross-cultural business experience — not just experience working in one foreign country
- Q&A log challenges specific cultural assessments
- Responses engage with the challenges analytically
Common mistakes
- Review session with someone who has not worked cross-culturally
- Responses confirm the reviewer's alternative view without analytical engagement
What a verifier looks for
- Your most useful challenge probes the framework's limits: 'Hofstede's research was conducted in the 1970s and relied on IBM employees. Which of your conclusions might be different if you used more recent data — and which would hold regardless?'
- Provide written confirmation (minimum 150 words) of your cross-cultural experience and the challenges raised.
Part of