This is something I see more and more in cross-border work.
The China team says HQ doesn't understand China.
HQ says the China team doesn't understand the brand.
Both sides think the problem is on the other side.
Sometimes they're both right.
HQ usually wants consistency.
The China team wants something that actually works in China.
HQ says:
"We can't change this."
The China team says:
"If we don't change it, nobody will buy."
Then the meetings begin.
I used to think this was mainly a communication problem.
I've come to think that quite often, it's not.
It's a decision-rights problem.
Who gets to decide?
What does HQ decide?
What does the local market decide?
What is a brand principle?
What is simply an execution preference?
If those things aren't clear, every small question becomes another negotiation between HQ and the market.
Say the China team wants to change the website.
HQ says:
"That's not consistent with the global brand guidelines."
The China team says:
"Chinese consumers don't understand it."
Both may be right.
But without a higher-level principle, the meeting just goes around in circles.
Eventually nobody wins.
Everyone simply decides:
"Let's not change it."
I've seen that become one of the most expensive solutions of all.
That's why I increasingly think some so-called "China problems" need to be solved at HQ.
Not by having HQ make every decision for China.
Quite the opposite.
HQ needs to decide earlier:
What must be globally consistent, and what should be left to local judgement?
Once that boundary is clear, a surprising number of things become easier.
The China team doesn't need to ask permission for everything.
HQ doesn't need to approve everything.
The difficult part of cross-border brand work has never really been taking a European playbook and putting it into China.
Nor is it letting the China team do whatever it wants.
It's finding the point where:
the global brand provides enough direction, and the local team has enough freedom.
Get that right, and many so-called "cultural differences" become much less frightening.
The real problem is often much simpler:
Nobody knows who gets to decide.
