Scheduling and Bridging the Gap

Linear Time 

Flexible Time


Perhaps the most interesting thing about the Scheduling scale is that those from each side of the scale see those from the other side as inefficient and imagine they must lead lives that are terribly difficult and stressful.

Scheduling is a state of mind that affects how you organize your day, how you run a meeting, how far you must plan in advance, and how flexible those plans are. Yet what is considered appallingly late in one culture may be acceptably on time in another.

When people describe those from another culture using words like inflexible, chaotic, late, rigid, disorganized, inadaptable, it’s quite likely the scheduling dimension is the issue.

The importance of relationships seems to be a key to understanding the Scheduling scale. It’s only logical that if relationships are a priority, you will put them before the clock. Thus, it’s natural that cultures that put a premium on relationship building tend, with a few exceptions, to fall on the flexible-time side of the Scheduling scale.

As you might expect, the scheduling dimension also impacts the way we plan our time and how fixed or flexible those plans are felt to be.


Bridging the Gap

In a Linear-Time culture:
• Arrive on time and end on time
• If you are to be late, keep other
informed of your arrival time so they can plan accordingly
• Use an agenda; if an issue is raised that is not on the agenda, don’t assume that everyone is willing to discuss it at that meeting

In a Flexible-Time culture:
• Put relationships before timeliness
• Use an open agenda, and be willing to        entertain topics that aren’t on your agenda
• If you really need others to arrive on time and/or if you really need to end on time, make this explicit and/or make a game of it