In June 1995, the jury at the OJ Simpson trial returned a not guilty verdict. The fallout from the dismal reactions highlighted significant conflicts and divergent views in America’s workplaces. In fact, whites and blacks had a different perspective on the OJ Simpson trial and life in general. Eighty-three percent of whites stated that Simpson was “definitely” or “probably” guilty, while only fifty-seven percent of blacks agreed with this assessment. Rather than carefully assess one’s point of view when evaluating a different culture, most people definitely make assumptions about other cultures.

Unfortunately, we have not yet learned this lesson in the United States. The past few days have been very busy as I try to answer students’ questions and address my own concerns about a recent gaffe at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary that has provided another headwind for others sharing the Good News. Let me say that we have all done foolish things and suffered the consequences.

Most of us have had to debate the impacts of this photo on our popular culture for our students and others. At Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth (TX), five seminary professors, including the dean of the School of Preaching, donned gangster gear (perhaps dressing like urban rappers), showing off their gold chains and one holding a gun. Written above the photo were the words “Notorious SOP,” which was a reference to the seminary’s School of Preaching and black rapper, Notorious BIG.

The teachers fought back, as this photo was a prank on the departing teacher. Many African Americans were offended when the news broke, while others, for the most part, silently wondered what it was all about. In fact, this incident was a prime example of things getting overdone with racing surface issues.

That being said, I would like to go in a different direction rather than return to discussing the merits of these different positions. This article focuses on how leaders with high cultural intelligence can create an environment where people are respected and valued, regardless of their cultural perspectives. Therefore, leaders will emerge who can function across cultural boundaries.

If one wants to see the racial divide in the United States, start with religious institutions. In the United States, Sunday morning at 10:30 a.m. has been declared the most segregated time of the week. It is quite difficult to build harmony and reconciliation with a largely separate history. Remember, the government forced the integration of schools, work and public outing.

Statistically, predominantly white denominations have shown only 1% or 2% integration over the decades, while predominantly black denominations have had marginal success in integrating their congregations. Additionally, Michael Emerson and Christian Smith, authors of divided by faithargues that white evangelical principles actually promote racism rather than eliminate it.

They explain: “A racialized society is a society in which race matters deeply because of differences and life experiences.” Therefore, blacks found solace in predominantly black churches where they are protected from these prejudices and allowed to direct and control their religious experiences. Although ministers have been preaching integration and denouncing racism for the past 100 years, congregations have largely ignored this mandate.

For many Westerners, the United States is the perfect example of different cultures working together. However, the world does not fully buy this statement as they see the segregation of our nation’s shorelines. Therefore, if today’s leaders in the secular and religious world want a different outcome when it comes to race relations, they will not do it through the same tried and tested methods.

Today’s leaders need a high sense of cultural intelligence in the United States in relation to African Americans and people of color. With the complicated history of race relations, people don’t see their own biases when dealing with others who are different from the majority. Organizations should try to promote a diverse workplace where teamwork and mutual respect can exist. Therefore, acceptance of individual differences is essential to building trust and a productive workplace. Dr. David Livermore, author of Leading with Cultural Intelligenceprovides a framework for world leaders to address the complexities of cultural differences.

Cultural intelligence (CQ) is related to “a person’s ability to function effectively in situations characterized by cultural diversity.” Dr. Livermore developed a four-step quality control system that involves the following: (a) regulating one’s motivation to learn about other cultures, (b) acquiring knowledge of other cultures, (c) becoming more self-aware and from others who are culturally different, and (d) adapt one’s behavior to suit other cultures. The western mentality often brings a superiority to other cultures.

For example, travelers from the United States visit other countries and try to use their own cultural beliefs in the host country. Why are they taking so long to reply to me? Why don’t you open on Sunday so I can have my coffee? All of these biases create an environment where no one really wins at cultural challenges. Likewise, leaders must understand cultural challenges beyond the superfluous familiarity of different cultures.

Dr. Livermore notes, “Leadership today is a multicultural challenge. Few of us need to be convinced of that fact. We are competing in a global marketplace, managing a diverse workforce, and trying to keep up with rapidly changing trends. ..Cultural intelligence helps a leader develop a general repertoire and perspective that results in more effective leadership.” By surveying 2,000 managers in 60 countries and various training initiatives,

Dr. Christopher Earley and Dr. Elaine Mosakowwski argued for the importance of cultural intelligence in achieving success abroad: “Given the number of cross-functional assignments, job transfers, new employers, and distant positions, it is likely that most corporate managers experience over the course of a career, low CQ can become an inherent handicap. The authors attribute three sources of CQ, which are (a) Head -learn about the beliefs, customs and taboos of foreign cultures, (b) Body – demonstrate one’s understanding of a culture through actions and behaviors, and (c) Heart – adapt to the new culture while overcoming obstacles and personal setbacks.

When the head, body and heart work together, leaders have a high CQ. Conversely, when these key elements don’t align well, leaders have low CQ. Mistakes are likely to happen with a low CQ leader in a different culture. The basic steps to cultivate cultural intelligence include; (1) Personal insights into CQ and any cultural biases, (2) CQ training to strengthen cultural awareness, (3) Application of CQ training, (4) Acquisition of personal CQ support, (5) Immersion in the environment appropriate culture to master cultural competencies, and (6) Self-assessment and continuous improvement of CQ. Thus, cultural intelligence is not an accident. Leaders must be strategic in developing cultural intelligence for themselves and their organizations.

In short, cultural intelligence is critical to understanding today’s diverse communities. If today’s leaders do not understand cultural intelligence in the United States, they will find themselves disconnected from a global community with cultural differences. Therefore, US citizens do not have to go far to deal with cultural differences. They can start with the historical problems the United States faces with blacks and whites living together. When leaders, especially Christians, don’t understand the culture and how to navigate this great divide, it damages one’s credibility with followers.

This article demonstrated the value of applying cultural intelligence to leadership to create an environment in which people are respected and valued, regardless of their cultural perspectives. According to a study from the University of North Texas, praying together may be the ultimate solution instead of living together. Incidents like the one at Southwestern Seminary are not isolated; they are systematic breaks in society, while the majority of the population does not realize that low CQs damage good cultural relations (at home and abroad). Until we decide that cultural intelligence is a critical puzzle in healing the racial divide, nothing will change. As the United States is forced to deal with increasing demographic changes, it makes sense for leaders and organizations to take cultural intelligence seriously. I pray that it is not too late.

© 2017 by DD Green