Typically, this includes the on-line system, process and form filling that needs to be completed and submitted to HR or line managers. At best the appraisal system helps to 'manage' performance but has minimal impact on actually 'improving' and 'maximising' performance. It's the conversation itself that really counts!

The performance conversation is the constructive dialogue that takes place between two or more people to exchange and feedback, information, perspectives and experiences on their performance.

It's the quality and frequency of these conversations that can make the biggest difference in Indivduals and teams feeling motivated and engaged to perform (or learn to perform) at their very best.

In my experience, both in the UK and internationally, managers and leaders do not like and frequently avoid giving feedback. In many cases they find it difficult, 'unpalatable' and in some cases scary. At best they have the desire and willingness to carry out these conversations but are not always sure HOW to best carry them out and appropriately deliver feedback.

So how should we give feedback and does this differ internationally?

Most of us will not think before we give feedback. Often, this comes naturally and little thought is given to how we deliver our feedback. Probably most people will think that they are following the 'standard international' rules for giving feedback. However, more often than not, this could not be further away from the truth. How we voice our opinions, talk and give feedback is greatly influenced by culture. Our manner of speech, whether we use our hands during talking and whether we use the tone of our voice are all factors influenced by culture. This is something that can be easily forgotten, but can come at great cost if it is.

Cultural differences in giving feedback can lead to misunderstandings and disruption of a good working relationship. For example a South American's dominant style can be highly offensive to an African, while the softer, positive manner of an African may not make much of an impact on the South American. In this respect, it is important to know the main differences in management culture, and how to react to styles different from yours.

There are few globally accepted guidelines for giving feedback but stick to the following principles and you won't go far wrong:

• Describe the behaviour/actions of the other person (be specific and give examples)
• State the impact of the other person's actions or behavior on you, others and the business
• Allow the other person to react and respond to the feedback
• Ask the other person for his/her perception of the situation
• Make a suggest or request
• Build agreement on next steps

I was asked to facilitate one of the Strategy Group sessions on the challenges of delivering a global learning strategy. Over 30 people attended the session which centered on the results from our recent Global Edge (featured in the March edition of HR).

We discussed and debated the survey results and delegates shared their own views and experiences of delivering a global learning strategy inside their own organisations

It is clear that Global Growth is driving globalisation of L&D. But global growth is a big area and to ensure real focus in delivering a global learning strategy, the starting point is to establish exactly why YOUR organisation needs to deliver global L&D solutions. Is it and consistency of quality and standards, the need to build a global brand, improve networking and communication, or leverage talent, engage and develop employees on a global scale? All are important, but what is your key driver?

Our discussions then moved towards the need to prioritising our key challenges in delivering L&D globally. This can provide greater focus in terms of the areas we each need to think most about, and where we should be spending our time. There was general agreement that ensuring quality and consistency was one of the most difficult challenges as was sourcing providers with global capability and resources. There was a topical debate around the challenge of maintaining cost effectiveness too!

Finally, we moved to sharing of ideas and strategies for delivering learning and development on a global scale.

At Global Edge, our model for success (iLearn) draws together best practice under six key areas of activity: Innovate (creating leading edge tools and resources to increase accessibility and choice); Localise (integrating local L&D people into the design and delivery process); Engage (getting people on the ground connected with the programme); Align (aligning local learning activity to global framework and guidelines); Recruit (recruiting internal and external resource that have local credibility and capability); Network (using international network to research best practice in different markets)

Yes, we need to deliver learning solutions which are aligned globally but which can also be properly embedded and work locally. Above all, when delivering a global learning strategy we need to 'think global and act local'.

Whether you are a large corporate or a fast growing SME there is a strong likelihood you will be involved in some international activity. You may be running operations, serving global clients, managing suppliers, or growing business in other international markets and this will therefore have a direct impact on how you recruit, manage and develop individuals and teams.

Many say that internationalising L&D is all about innovation, effective knowledge sharing and communication. I personally continue to be fascinated by how organisations manage what is technically called the 'global local dilemma'.

They want to create efficiencies internationally in how they develop people, but yet they want to fit into the local environment and serve the local market. Whatever way you look at it, there are enormous challenges of L&D 'going global'.

Programmes and interventions need to be cost effective, work across different cultures and involve virtual teams, often separated by vast geographical distances. Do we outsource design, delivery or administration or retain in-house? How do we find external providers who have the right expertise, cultural fit and genuine global reach? It doesn't end there….We also need to build our own L&D team and engage them in the necessary changes to work internationally.

In November 2011, Global Edge will be carrying out a unique survey on the globalisation of learning and development. We will be asking those in leading L&D roles to share their views, perspectives and experiences on the key challenges they face in delivering learning and development globally as well as the opportunities and ideas for addressing them.

The survey results will be published in a future issue of HR magazine.

All those completing the survey will be entitled to receive the full survey report and conclusions. To take part in the survey, please email jeff@theglobaledge.com with your name, role and email address.

On a domestic level, the management and nurturing of talent is the driving force for most industries and therefore the primary driver of HRM policies is its human resource needs. However on a global level, there are more complex drivers at play.

The internationalisation of operations involves locating, sourcing, managing and developing talent in different parts of the world. This is a tough job, considering the different needs of the organisation in often very diverse cultural settings or business environments. Indeed, many international organisations still struggle to effectively globalise HRM and thus develop effective capabilities to find, select and manage people across diverse teams, business unit and territories. Despite the benefits of internationalising, some global businesses still retain the concentration of workforce and assets in their home countries or region.

Effectively internationalising HRM policies involves understanding and investigating of the drivers of international HRM before integrating and implementing them as part of our everyday HR activities.

So what are the key drivers of HRM policy within this international context?

There's the obvious challenge of balancing the standardisation of HR policies across the entire organisation with the customisation of HR functions in different business units located across different countries. Schuler and Tarique (2007) describe the factors that drive international HRM under two key headings - functional realignment and global capabilities.

In terms of functional realignment there are five specific factors that drive the HRM strategy of multinational companies - 1) efficiency; 2) information exchange or organisational learning; 3) international provisions; 4) convergence of key business processes; and 5) localisation of HRM policies.

With regard to the progressive development of global capabilities, there are factors to consider such as: 1) focusing on collective service structures; 2) enabling of different HR processes on both a regional and global scale; and 3) pursuing global venues of excellence.

Organisations need to have a better understanding of these drivers and how they influence HRM policy. This would ensure that HRM policy is able to offer standard functions and practices whilst allowing enough room for the customised alignment of these policies between HR functions across the world.

Jeff Benveniste is a partner at sourcing and recruitment company Global Edge

These include acquiring and retaining key talent, building leadership capability, driving cultural change and forming effective virtual teams. Despite this many of us have a strong sensitivity to cultural and environmental differences which can drive a divergence in HR practices.

We know that organisations are globalising and this means HR is too. I continue to be fascinated by how we manage what is technically called the 'global local dilemma'? We want to create efficiencies internationally, but yet we want to fit into the local environment and serve the local market.

Research actually shows that people's personalities are much the same around the world and culture is often used as an excuse to 'do things differently around here'. The key outcome from a Facet5 study (www.facet5.com) found that there were very little variations in the personality profiles of different cultures.

Yes, of course cultural differences exist and this does have implications for how we best build the most efficient organisational structures, consistent HR processes, integrated training and development programmes and effective performance management systems. 'However we should not lose sight of the fact that the difference between individuals is much bigger than the difference between countries. A shy Chinese person is still shy even though he's Chinese and switching the norms doesn't make him less so'. For multi‐cultural groups it is how they compare to each other that matters, not how they compare to the people in their village, town or country.

You could also argue that the cultural differences between companies are often bigger than those between countries or regions. When you look at the cultural differences between Microsoft and Yahoo, you don't need to look much further than a floor plan. Microsoft has been a company of offices, where workers toil individually at their piece of a collective project. Yahoo, by contrast is a Silicon Valley archetype where workers sit in cubicles and tend to work collaboratively.

Clearly the issue with having one consistent global HR policy is won't always align with local employment laws in different territories. However, the real challenge for international HR is increasingly about innovation, effective knowledge sharing and communication. So maybe we should focus more on 'organisational' similarities rather than 'perceived' cultural differences when setting our HR strategies?

Jeff Benveniste is a partner at sourcing and recruitment company Global Edge