5 Cross-Cultural Mistakes Therapists and Coaches Make

The more I work internationally, the less I believe in universal communication rules.

What feels emotionally healthy, respectful, supportive, professional, emotionally mature, or even “obvious” is deeply shaped by culture. And yet, many coaching and therapeutic conversations still happen through the lens of the practitioner’s own cultural “default settings,” often without realizing it.

Coaching (and honestly, therapy too) often has a very Westernized foundation by default, because it assumes ideas like individuality, emotional openness, direct communication, self-prioritization, and independent decision-making are universal values.

So as professionals, we need to stay mindful not only of our own cultural biases, but also of the default assumptions built into many of the practices, frameworks, and methodologies we use.

And one of the biggest examples of this is the relationship with authority itself.

In coaching spaces especially, we often talk about partnership, equality, and adult-to-adult dynamics. And yes, ideally, that’s the goal. But the reality is that many clients still come into the room seeing us as the expert, authority figure, specialist, or somebody whose opinion should not be openly questioned.

And depending on the cultural background, that dynamic can become very strong.

For example, in many Middle Eastern, Asian, Eastern European, or Latin American cultures, respect toward authority figures may be deeply ingrained from childhood. Challenging a teacher, openly disagreeing with a specialist, or questioning expertise can feel uncomfortable, disrespectful, or even inappropriate.

So a client may nod, agree, and say: “Yes, that makes sense.”

Not because they actually agree. But because disagreeing directly with the professional sitting in front of them feels culturally unnatural.

Meanwhile, a coach or therapist from a more egalitarian culture like the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, or Canada may interpret that response as alignment, engagement, or commitment to action.

And then everybody leaves the session thinking the conversation was clear… while having completely different understandings of what actually happened.

After working with clients from more than 35 countries and living across multiple cultural environments myself, I’ve noticed that cross-cultural work is rarely about language alone.

It’s about meaning.

The same behavior, decision, reaction, or emotional response can carry completely different implications depending on the cultural context behind it.

Here are some of the most common mistakes I see practitioners make when working across cultures.

This article was originally written by me for It’s Complicated, where I share insights on cross-cultural coaching and working with international clients.

Read the original article on It’s Complicated or visit my practitioner profile to learn more about my work.

1. Mistaking your cultural defaults for objectivity

Coming from a Russian background, I grew up with a communication style where directness was often associated with honesty and respect. Say what you mean. Be clear. Don’t waste people’s time. Time is money.

Then I started working in Latin America and quickly realized that what felt respectful and efficient to me somehow didn’t quite come across the same way. I’d often get feedback that I was too cold, too aggressive, too offensive, or overly blunt to somebody else.

Meanwhile, from my perspective, I genuinely thought I was simply being transparent and professional.

I still remember presenting a project idea early in my career in Nicaragua and hearing: “Hm… I think that might be difficult.”

In my mind, difficult meant challenging but possible. So naturally, I kept trying to convince the person, proposing solutions, clarifying my reasoning, reassuring them I could handle the risks.

Only much later did I fully understand that this was the no.

Nobody had explained to me yet that in many Latin American cultures, preserving harmony and avoiding direct confrontation can be more important than explicit clarity.

This happens constantly in coaching and therapy too.

A German or Dutch client may appreciate very direct challenge and feedback.A Japanese or Colombian client may experience that exact same communication style as emotionally harsh or even unnecesary confrontational.

Directness may be interpreted as aggression. Indirectness may be interpreted as avoidance. Emotional restraint may be interpreted as disconnection.

And both practitioner and client usually think they are being perfectly clear, nice and respectful.

1. Forgetting that decisions don’t happen in a vacuum

One thing I think practitioners underestimate is how much culture shapes not only communication, but decision-making itself.

Take relationships and divorce as an example.

In many Western societies conversations around marriage are often centered around individual fulfillment:

• happiness

• emotional support

• compatibility

• personal growth

• intmacy & sex

• respect

• love & romantic connection

Divorce, while painful, is generally still perceived as a socially acceptable option if the relationship no longer feels aligned.

But if you apply that exact same framework to a client from a more collectivist cultural background, for example parts of India or the Middle East, the situation may become infinitely more layered.

For some clients, divorce may involve:

• family shame

• loss of community

• social isolation

• religious implications

• financial dependency

• impact on extended family systems

• loss of identity or belonging

The decision is no longer only about the romantic relationship itself.

And this is where practitioners need to be extremely careful not to unconsciously project their own cultural assumptions about autonomy, freedom, boundaries, family roles, or “healthy choices.”

Sometimes what sounds obvious from one cultural lens becomes deeply complicated from another.

3. Misunderstanding different relationships with time

Time is another fascinating cultural continuum that shows up constantly in international work.

For one person, “the session starts at 5pm” means:“I am already connected at 4:59.”

For another person, especially in cultures where relationships and flexibility are prioritized over rigid scheduling, arriving within the first 5 or even 10 minutes may still feel perfectly “on time.”

Neither side necessarily sees themselves as disrespectful.

They simply have different internal relationships with time, structure, flexibility, urgency, and human interaction.

I experienced this constantly while adapting from a more structured Russian environment into Latin American cultures like Colombia and Nicaragua, where relational flow often mattered more than rigid punctuality.

And honestly, this creates misunderstandings everywhere:

• coaching sessions

• business meetings

• deadlines

• follow-ups

• communication expectations

And honestly, this goes far beyond punctuality or scheduling.

Different cultures also have very different relationships with long-term planning, life structure, age-related expectations, and the invisible “shoulds” around life paths.

In some cultures, there’s a very linear understanding of how life is supposed to unfold: education, career, marriage, children, stability, retirement. There’s often strong pressure connected to age milestones, long-term planning, and having a clear direction.

In others, life may be approached in a much more flexible, adaptive, or present-oriented way, where relationships, opportunities, or circumstances shape decisions more organically over time.

That deeply affects how clients relate to:

• goal-setting

• career decisions

• uncertainty

• planning

• commitment

• timelines

• “falling behind”

• success and failure

And if practitioners are not aware of those cultural relationships with time and life structure, it becomes very easy to unintentionally project their own assumptions about what a “healthy” pace of life or decision-making should look like.

This becomes especially important in therapeutic and coaching relationships because even small moments around time, structure, expectations, and pacing influence emotional safety and trust.

4. Assuming trust is built the same way everywhere

This one changes everything.

Some clients need structure to feel safe:

• “How many sessions will we have?”

• “What’s the framework?”

• “What are the goals?”

• “How will we measure progress?”

• “What happens next?”

For clients from cultures like Germany, Switzerland, or Russia clarity and predictability may create trust and professionalism.

But for other clients, especially from more relationship-oriented cultures like Italy, Portugal, Brazil, Colombia, or parts of the Middle East, that same level of structure can feel overly clinical, rigid, distant, or unnecessarily limiting.

They may prefer:

• more flexibility

• conversational flow

• relational warmth

• spontaneity

• trust-building through human connection first

I’ve noticed this particularly while working across cultures, where many people often enter relationships with a relatively high initial trust baseline. The relationship itself develops organically over time.

Meanwhile, clients from other cultural backgrounds may need much more structure, predictability, and contracts annd explicit agreements before relaxing into the process, letting go of masks and leaning into vulnerability.

Neither approach is wrong.

But if practitioners only know how to build trust one way, they may unintentionally alienate clients whose relational expectations are completely different.

5. Confusing cultural conditioning with psychological patterns

Not everything that looks “off” through one cultural lens is unhealthy or dysfunctional. Not everything is avoidance, lack of boundaries, emotional unavailability, people pleasing, insecurity, resistance, or poor self-awareness. Sometimes people are simply operating from a different cultural rulebook.

In some cultures, like Japan, Korea, or many Middle Eastern and Latin American countries:

• disagreement is softened

• authority is not openly challenged

• harmony at the moment matters more than direct expression

Meanwhile, in cultures like the US, Australia, or the Netherlands, direct emotional articulation and verbal self-expression may be interpreted as emotional health and confidence.

Neither is universally “better.” They are simply different cultural models of functioning.

And if practitioners are not aware of these cultural continuums, it becomes very easy to overinterpret or misinterpret behavior.

That’s why curiosity matters so much more than assumptions.

Questions like:

• “What feels respectful to you?”

• “How are difficult conversations usually handled in your environment?”

• “What communication style feels supportive?”

• “How is trust usually built in relationships where you come from?”

• “What would feel uncomfortable or inappropriate for you in this process?”

…often reveal far more than immediate interpretation ever could.

The part of the story we often miss: The cultural layer in cross-cultural coaching and therapy

I think one of the most important skills for professionals working internationally is learning to distinguish how much of what they’re seeing is truly about the client as an individual… and how much is connected to cultural background, adaptation, or the context the person is currently living in.

Especially with clients who work in international teams, live outside of their home country, or navigate multicultural environments daily, many seemingly “normal” situations can carry an extra layer of cultural tension or frustration underneath.

A conflict with a manager may not only be about communication skills, but also completely different expectations around hierarchy, authority, or feedback.

Difficulty building relationships at work may not simply be “social anxiety,” but exhaustion from constantly translating yourself culturally and emotionally.

Feeling disconnected, overly emotional, withdrawn, or “less confident than before” may sometimes have less to do with personality and much more to do with operating in an environment where the person no longer intuitively understands the social rules around them.

And I think this is where cross-cultural awareness becomes incredibly valuable in coaching and therapy. Not only to help practitioners avoid misinterpretation, but also to help clients themselves recognize and name the cultural layer of what they’re experiencing.

Because sometimes, the moment people realize:“Wait… maybe I’m not broken. Maybe I’m navigating two different systems at once.”

…something starts making a lot more sense.

Final thoughts

Cross-cultural work requires much more than learning a few cultural “dos and don’ts.”

It requires humility.

Because the further you work internationally, the more transparent your own idea of “normal” becomes.

And honestly, one of the most useful things any practitioner can do before working with clients from a different cultural background is spending time exploring cultural continuums and frameworks. Not to stereotype people, but to become aware of potential blind spots in your own interpretations.

A few resources I often recommend:

• The Culture Map – Erin Meyer
  

• Hofstede Cultural Dimensions
  

• The Lewis Model

• Edward Hall’s High-Context vs Low-Context Cultures
  

• Dancing Between Cultures – Tina Stoltzfus Horst
  

The more culturally aware we become, the easier it is to distinguish between psychological patterns and cultural conditioning.

Because culture doesn’t only shape how people communicate.

It shapes what communication, trust, vulnerability, boundaries, conflict, authority, and even healing are supposed to look like in the first place.

A significant part of my work focuses on supporting expats, international professionals, and leaders navigating life and work across cultures, including cultural adaptation, identity shifts, cross-cultural communication, career and leadership transitions, and decision-making in unfamiliar environments.

If you’re navigating your own international transition, you can learn more about my coaching and mentoring work or book a discovery conversation.

About the author

Having lived in five countries and worked in English, Spanish, and Russian, she has supported leaders, executives, professionals, expats, and organizations across more than 35 countries through coaching, leadership development, and organizational consulting. Alexandra brings both professional expertise and personal insight into the realities of cultural adaptation, global leadership, and navigating personal and professional transitions. Her work focuses on executive coaching, leadership development, cross-cultural leadership, and organizational effectiveness, helping clients make better decisions, strengthen leadership effectiveness and presence, and navigate complexity with greater clarity, confidence, and intention.

Her goal is simple: helping people move through complexity and uncertainty with greater clarity, confidence, self-awareness, and a little less drama.

Explore more resources, podcasts, articles, and media appearances, or connect to discuss coaching, leadership development, and organizational consulting.