At the beginning, there was urgency. Laptops hastily set up on kitchen tables, impromptu video conference meetings, floating schedules. Then teleworking became established permanently, structurally, globally, today it is no longer just a question of workplace but of cultural cohabitation at a distance.
Because behind the screens, ways of working, communicating and conceiving of authority intersect. And sometimes, which collide.
Teleworking is no longer an exception, but a hybrid norm
In 2024, according to a study by the International Labor Organization (ILO), nearly 28% of employees in developed economies work at least two days a week remotely. In Europe, this rate exceeds 35% in the digital, consulting and financial services sectors. In France, INSEE estimates that one in four employees regularly telework, compared to less than 10% before 2020.
But these figures mask a more complex reality: teleworking is rarely homogeneous. It is hybrid, split between countries, time zones and professional cultures.
When work cultures meet… without seeing each other
Working remotely with a German, Brazilian or Japanese colleague does not pose the same challenges as a shared office. The unsaid take up more space. Misunderstandings too.
According to a study published in 2024 by McKinsey, 67% of international managers believe that cultural differences are more difficult to manage remotely than in person. Body language disappears, silences are interpreted, response times become implicit signals.
In some cultures, responding quickly is a sign of commitment. In others, taking a step back is a sign of seriousness. From a distance, these nuances blur.
The relationship with time: first cultural shock of teleworking
Time is undoubtedly the most sensitive factor. A Hofstede Insights study updated in 2025 shows that multicultural teleworking teams encounter more tensions around:
- deadlines,
- meeting times,
- and perceived availability.
So-called “monochronous” cultures (Germany, Switzerland, Nordic countries) value strict punctuality and locked agendas. Conversely, in more “polychronous” cultures (Latin America, North Africa, certain regions of Asia), flexibility takes precedence.
When working remotely, these differences do not disappear. They are amplifying.
Authority, autonomy and silent misunderstandings
Teleworking also disrupts the relationship with authority. In hierarchical cultures, the lack of visual control can generate managerial anxiety. In more horizontal cultures, conversely, excess reporting is experienced as distrust.
A survey conducted in 2025 by Gallup reveals that employees working remotely in an intercultural context are 21% more engaged when the objectives are clear, but the methods left open. Autonomy yes, blur no.
The problem is not teleworking, but the lack of shared rules.
Language: an underestimated factor of cognitive fatigue
Even when everyone speaks English, language remains a filter. According to a study by the University of Cambridge (2024), non-native employees spend up to 30% more cognitive energy in remote meetings, especially during long video conferences.
At a distance, we talk more. We write more. Emails replace informal exchanges. This linguistic overload accentuates cultural inequalities, which are often invisible.
Result: some express themselves less, not because of a lack of ideas, but because of fatigue.
Adapt practices, not smooth cultures
Faced with these challenges, some companies have attempted to standardize. Same tools, same processes, same schedules. An illusion of equality that doesn’t always work.
The most mature organizations do the opposite: they adapt practices without erasing cultures. Shorter meetings, structured speaking turns, decisions formalized in writing, explicit rules on response times.
According to the Boston Consulting Group, companies that invested in cross-cultural remote work training saw an 18% improvement in collaboration and a 25% drop in team conflict between 2023 and 2025.
The key role of the remote manager
In this context, the manager becomes a cultural translator. Its role is no longer to monitor, but to connect. To make explicit what is no longer naturally explicit.
A good manager in intercultural teleworking:
- clarifies expectations,
- secures the rhythms,
- accepts different work styles,
- and creates informal, even virtual, speaking spaces.
The numbers speak for themselves: according to Gallup (2025), well-managed remote teams are 43% less exposed to disengagement, regardless of their cultural diversity.
Teleworking, more revealing than revolutionary
Basically, teleworking has not created cultural differences. He made them visible. He removed the shock absorbers of everyday life: the shared coffee, the knowing glance, the hallway discussion.
What worked implicitly must now be formulated. What was tolerated must be explained. What was perceived must be said.
It’s demanding, but also deeply healthy.
Towards a new maturity of global work
In 2025, teleworking is no longer a social advantage. It is a test of organizational maturity. An indicator of the ability of companies to get different people to work together, remotely, without forcing them to look the same.
The figures confirm this: according to the ILO, companies capable of sustainably integrating intercultural teleworking display 12% higher productivity on average, and a higher talent retention rate.
Working together without sharing the same space requires more attention, more listening, more relational intelligence. But it is also what makes the work fairer, more flexible and, sometimes, more human.
Remote working is not the end all be all for company culture. It is perhaps the most demanding version.
