Secrecy, Competition, and Culture

The secret of success is secrecy." Not always.

"The secret of success is secrecy." This phrase may describe the philosophy that contributed to the demise of Osama bin Laden; it can also be used to describe the approach taken in very competitive cultures, among them Vietnam. In the former case, the strategy appears to have been critical to the success of the mission (i.e., not sharing information with Pakistani intelligence before the raid commenced); in the latter case, the strategy of secrecy hampers the exchange of ideas critical in solving complex problems.

I recently spent a semester in Hanoi teaching psychology courses to American college students. Over the semester, talking to new friends and acquaintances, the students learned a lot about how business is conducted in Vietnam. One memorable phrase that emerged from their exchanges was "The secret of success is secrecy." Writing about this phrase in a final paper for a course in Industrial and Organization Psychology, one student said of this secretive approach, "Simply put, the Vietnamese do not work well in teams."

Why? A student argued that the competitive environment in which Vietnamese students are educated extinguishes a cooperative attitude. Having talked to her Vietnamese contacts about the Vietnamese educational system, this student reported that from very early on, grades are posted publicly for all to see and a ranking system occurs within each classroom. Students compete head-to-head and each month the top student can be identified. In the workforce, my students learned, Vietnamese workers generally do not share ideas; employees fear their contributions will be stolen and their input unrecognized (and therefore unrewarded).

Vietnam is not alone in demonstrating the negative consequences of a competitive environment, an environment that ultimately rules out or at least undervalues collaboration and poorly prepares people to work in teams. Many top tier research universities in the United States could be described in just the same way. Yet research in psychology suggests that decisions made by groups will in many cases produce solutions superior to those made by individuals. Further, there is little doubt that teams are increasingly critical to success in the workforce given the rate of change and the complexity of problems we face in a global economy.

Fortunately, recognition that teams are important is emerging, even in Vietnam. My students reported that some Vietnamese colleges incorporate courses on teams in their curriculum. For example, on the website of Vietnam National University, one of the courses in the undergraduate psychology curriculum is listed as "Psychological Basis for Team Leaders." In the United States, some business school programs (e.g., Wharton) have students spend their entire MBA education as part of the same team or cohort. These approaches are important steps in recognizing the value of collaboration.

Many Westerners who travel to Vietnam find the culture, from its food to its tube houses (i.e., houses that are on long and narrow lots, with rooms on each level connected by corridors), fascinating and fundamentally different from their own. At first glance, the cultures seem to have little in common. How surprising, then, that Vietnam and the West share a core behavior and also its unfortunate consequences. In the competitive nature of the Vietnamese school environment, and subsequently the work environment, we in the West may recognize a scenario we know all too well. Some consequences of competition transcend the boundaries of culture.