ONE of the most commonly voiced impressions of Finns made by foreigners is that of modesty. Tell a Finn that they look nice, and they will invariably insist that they don’t. Tell a Finn that their work was excellent, and they may suggest that it was really the other members of their team who did all the work.

For most of us, this is a very positive impression and a refreshing change from the culture of arrogance and self-aggrandisement regularly seen on our television screens.

It is certainly something my own culture could learn something from. Much like Americans, New Zealanders and Australians grow up in a culture which emphasises independence and Do It Yourself above all.

During the WWI battle of Gallipoli, British soldiers frequently called their counterparts in the Australian and New Zealand Army Corps (ANZAC) ‘Sir’ not because they were officers, but because Australian and NZ soldiers behaved as if they were officers. While British troops waited for orders, ANZAC soldiers thought and acted independently.

The downsides of this over-confidence are clear. Workers volunteer for management positions they lack the skills for, do not always accept authority well and frequently step on the toes of those around them. There is inherent arrogance in wanting to lead –as if suggesting that no one else could do the job better.

But I have also started to wonder whether Finnish modesty is a good starting point for leadership. In cultures where we take on leadership roles young, we learn by failing. We learn that the guys on the football team respond to encouragement. We learn that teams work best when players are trusted, motivated and well led. In this model many people get to experience leadership, and those who enjoy it greatly improve their skill set.

The Finnish path to management works differently; few seek out leadership, whilst many have it thrust upon them. Leaders are often chosen not on the basis of leadership skills, but because they have excelled as workers. Unfortunately, great workers do not always make good leaders – if anything, the opposite is more often the case.

This is very evident in many Finnish offices, where managers eschew feedback as a concept, and maintain such a low profile that many staff have no relationship with senior management at all. Finnish managers tend not to lead from the front, and spend less time at the coal face than they do in meetings.

While I don’t claim that Finnish offices function less effectively than their American cousins, it is clear that staff here are often less informed, less motivated and less aware of company strategy than they might be. But for Finnish companies to enjoy better management, we would first need leaders and leadership to be more respected. Perhaps we could export a little of our modesty, and import a little arrogance instead.

David Brown