#314 from Innovative Leader Volume 6, Number 12          December 1997

A Multi-Systems Approach
by Walter R. King

Mr. King is principal of King & Associates, involved with process design and project management for the food industry (Kerman, California; phone 209-846-3868).  Written in consultation with Cultural Studies & Analysis, Philadelphia, PA.

A recent feasibility trip to Morocco was a first-hand opportunity to explore the challenges of cross-cultural innovation.  But more than this, it yielded an overview of the larger system within which we must sometimes operate. 

This excursion took me to a part of the world with a far different mind-set than my usual American way of problem-solving.  I became acutely aware that solutions should be considered only after appreciating the human values that actually define the technical problem or opportunity.  In this North African setting, far from my California home base, I also got a valuable lesson in problem definition.

As creativity research often shows, the way in which a problem is framed has everything to do with the way it is approached and how well (or whether) it is solved.  The old adage holds true: to the man with a hammer, every problem is a nail.  The solutions that come as an automatic response in one culture must therefore be built from the bottom up and examined from every aspect when in a different culture.

Many Factors to Consider

It seemed straightforward enough.  Through the U.S. Aid for International Development, we were seeking a simple go/no-go recommendation to start a fresh-cut vegetable operation in Casablanca.  This is Morocco’s largest urban center, where half the work force is employed in agriculture, in a land area roughly the size of California--but with only 18% arable land. 

It soon became clear that, as ecologist Howard Odum observed, "In order to understand a system, you must first understand the system it fits into." On the surface, it may appear that the question is, "Does it make financial sense to install a fresh-cut plant in the area?" But once that thin surface is broken by a few "information consultations" over tea and couscous, a far greater task emerges: understanding the cultural system the processing plant must fit into.

The larger system involves economics, social history, religion, custom, law, ethics, the global economy, family control of business, the land, transportation, and cross-cultural relations, as well as the more quantifiable aspects of energy, resources, people, power, and expertise. By mental mapping these concerns, larger issues than process and pricing emerge.  In fact, considered together as a network of cause and effect, these issues determine whether the project is even appropriate.  Several vegetable operations have already opened and closed for want of regular, consistent and quality suppliers.   

How are deals made and maintained?  How are contracts made, and how reliable are they?  We had to reconsider, within a different cultural environment, trust, investment, short- versus long-term commitment and the forces of competition versus cooperation.  What is the hygiene level?  How do restaurants and caterers operate and contract within their settings? How do local values and practices—employment, wastage, scrap, automation, wages—match what a processing plant offers?  And how do locals recognize and receive those benefits and drawbacks?

Estimates of capital and equipment were a small subset of assessing the cultural capital and equipment, the ways of thinking and behaving that rule everything from land use to family ties to dining customs.  As an example, fresh vegetables we see as dishes in themselves, are used merely as a garnish for meat dishes.

Like most human problems with values attached, these must be addressed in human terms.  Good technical solutions must fit into life as it is lived; as answers to needs, values, and priorities—the invisible system of culture.  If the new fresh-cut plant saves on scrap, it may also leave a gap in the way "waste" food is processed to make stews and side dishes, or as fodder for animals.  A more efficient way to process may, and often does, displace labor.  It can unbalance relations between businesses and their profits.  What works in the U.S. may be counter-productive elsewhere.  That's why technical questions must be seen as systems problems, with the vegetable processing plant as one small, but tightly connected, feature.

These are all factors with impact on a "simple" business or technology decision.  With awareness of the cultural dimension, the problem definition can be redrawn from "if" to "how."  The choice becomes one of how to work within the "box" of these factors by accommodation, modify them from inside, or introduce a new system. 

A Model

To make our go/no-go decision, we looked at McDonald’s operations in Morocco.  Casablanca's beachside McDonald's is one of the world's ten busiest, serving 4,000 meals a day. Unlike the U.S. profile as “low cost,” it's the trendy place to dine.  And, compared to more local fare, isn't inexpensive.  Most of its menu is imported.  Only the lettuce and bread are locally produced.  But this store brings far more than fast food to the scene.  

The powerful McDonald's name and organization carries "family" weight in a manner that fits the local culture. They have a clearly defined hierarchical structure and written guidelines outlining responsibilities and obligations. The hamburger giant's standards for efficiency and

cleanliness are upheld across national borders and are independent of local practices.  These include standards for sanitation, temperature control (including refrigerated trucks), and assured sources of consistent quality supply. "Sole supplier" contracts with growers fit the family-owned dynamic already in place. The assurance of this type of "faith-in-the-future" agreement has allowed, for the first time in Morocco, introduction of iceberg lettuce, growing on five separate plots in each of the several climactic zones, for year-round production. 

No Go

In the case of the U.S.AID project, however, building a fresh-cut plant was not supported sufficiently by the cultural infrastructure to justify the investment.  To turn out a European- or American-standard product, more muscle would be needed up front to run the operation and connect it with its local markets and dining habits.  For instance, we would have to answer the question local restaurateurs are now asking, "But what do I do with the employees I now have processing vegetables?"  Without a mega-system like McDonald's, which connects to the local cultural ethic on its own terms, the recommendation, for now, was "No go." 

This was an eye-opening experience.  Now, even when I examine local business opportunities, I make sure that I get an overview of the general “culture,” an appreciation of the history, the environment and the people involved.