Culture is something we do not usually think about unless we encounter cultural differences, which often manifest as disruptions to our expectations of normality. Even then, culture tends to surface only as a retrospective explanation for what appears to be an unexplainable deviation from the norm. As a result, culture is frequently perceived as a trait of others who are different from us. This externalisation of culture is often evident in intercultural training, where programs are designed as manuals for how to interact with people from groups labelled as different (typically due to national, religious, linguistic, or other visible differences). 

While such education can provide useful information, it also risks reinforcing stereotypes more than helping to overcome communication barriers. Moreover, this concept of culture tends to be restricted to the exotic. Rarely, in this framework, do we consider that being a single mother or father, approaching retirement age in a young team, or being a new employee in a workplace with a strong institutional culture might also place individuals in unique positions, making them vulnerable to implicit group expectations. 

For a truly inclusive workplace, formal policies aimed at integrating identity groups that face frequent structural or everyday discrimination are essential. However, such policies are ineffective without a broader institutional culture of openness, acceptance, and empathy. This is where cultural awareness, beyond diversity guidelines, plays a vital role. It is a learnable skill that begins with recognising that difference is not an attribute of others, but a relation between two people. This understanding enables us to see how our own experiences shape our perceptions of the world, and it helps us abandon the illusion that we hold a central place in the universe. 

What is true for individuals is also true for groups. Institutional culture is often rendered invisible by routines and unspoken norms. Developing cultural awareness within a collective allows these hidden norms to be acknowledged, reviewed, changed, reinforced consciously, or simply accepted. In any case, integration for newcomers becomes smoother and more effective. 

Self-awareness is the first step in building cultural awareness. It involves exploring and better understanding one’s own cultural identity.  This forms the foundation for the second step, which is to turn consciously and meaningfully toward those who, for various reasons, occupy the margins of mainstream society (whether due to structural discrimination, socio-economic disadvantages, or simply being in the minority within a specific collective). For both social justice and efficiency, it is crucial to shift from an essentialist understanding of their position to a more relational and contextualised view of difference. In other words, Muslim women or racialised workers in a European workplace do not need special attention because of inherent vulnerability, but because their subjective experiences, relative to the mainstream society place them in a unique position. 

Cultural differences thus become differences in frames of reference. No two individuals, seeing the world from distinct positions, will adhere to the same hierarchy of values, interpretations of experiences, or basic assumptions. These divergent, and sometimes opposing, frames of reference often lead to conflicts and misunderstandings. Preventing and resolving such conflicts is the third step in building cultural awareness. In a workplace, cultivating a culture of cultural awareness is not only important for creating a more pleasant environment for all but also serves to foster cooperation and participation—key elements of performance. 

Cultural awareness is closely linked to diversity. It is widely accepted that “diversity, equity, and inclusion” foster collaboration and create an inclusive atmosphere. Diversity promotion goes beyond cultural awareness: its main objective is not merely to prevent conflicts rooted in cultural differences. Instead, it seeks to actively foster diversity in an organisation for the sake of increased creativity and more effective problem-solving. The theory behind this practice is that problem-solving and decision-making processes involve both convergent and divergent phases. 

The convergent phase is about progressively reaching a common definition of the problem and possible solutions. In the divergent phase, opposing or contradictory opinions emerge, offering new perspectives on the problem. The process completes a full circle, with a second convergent phase where a collective agreement on the solution is reached. In a homogeneous group, it is easier to arrive at this final convergent phase because less time is spent in the divergent phase, which reduces the likelihood of developing radically new ideas. In contrast, in a multicultural team (in the sense of bringing together diverse viewpoints), the divergent phase lasts longer, making it more challenging to reach consensus. However, the solutions that emerge are likely to be more innovative and creative. 

Based on this, one might be tempted to view diversity as a simple tool for boosting innovation and productivity. However, without creating a safe space for everyone, this strategy will not succeed. Without fostering an organisational culture rooted in cultural awareness, one that emphasises flexibility, patience, and the ability to consider entirely new perspectives, diversity strategies are bound to fail.