People have spent decades writing about cultural psychology and global leadership.
Psychologist Thomas Talhelm looked at all the Eastern vs Western thinking debates and said, ‘It’s the farming.’
Why? Because farming doesn’t just feed societies. It trains them.
Rice: The original group chat
Successful rice cultivation requires a legendary team and not a team of legends. Shared irrigation. Shared timing. Shared risk. If Barry upstream decides he’s ‘not vibing with the schedule’, your crop will tank. Rice says: ‘You’re not an individual. You’re a committee. Do yourself a favour and……’
- track relationships
- think in context
- maintain harmony
- solve problems together
- don’t be Barry
Institutions in countries such as Japan, South Korea and Vietnam prioritise coordination, consensus, relational trust, and tight norms. Perfect for rice problems.
Wheat: The strong silent type
Wheat is agricultural introversion. You can plant, spray and harvest solo. Your neighbour’s bad decisions are… their problem. Wheat quietly insists: ‘This is my paddock.’
Over time, this produces useful instincts like:
- Make your own call
- Analyse first
- Set boundaries
- Own the outcome
If rice is a publicly shared Google doc, wheat is an AES 256-bit encrypted Excel spreadsheet.
Australia, North America and much of Europe run institutions that reward individual autonomy, rule based fairness, competition, and personal accountability. Perfect for wheat problems.
If you think that deduction is far too blunt, then consider cultural differences within China itself. Beijing thinks like wheat i.e., more direct, rule‑driven, and individualistic. Shanghai thinks like rice i.e., more coordinated, relational, and norm‑tight. Two cities, one country, shaped by two very different agricultural pasts.
The awkward bit
The problems we now face are… rice problems. Namely, climate change, biosecurity, water scarcity and supply chain instability. They require coordination, trust and shared risk. However, Western institutions were designed for wheat problems. When collaboration fails, we often blame stubbornness or resistance. Talhelm suggests something quieter: we’re asking people to override centuries of cognitive muscle memory.
Designing for wheat minds
If wheat cultures default to independence, ‘let’s all work together!’ won’t cut it. Cooperation needs scaffolding with such features as clear personal benefit, defined rules, lower coordination costs and concrete actions
Rice cultures rely on norms. Wheat cultures rely on structure. It’s not moral. It’s architectural.
So, the next decade needs leaders who can:
- build systems that make cooperation worthwhile
- translate shared risk into individual relevance
- create trust without demanding a sameness spiral
Not ‘be more Eastern’. Just add relational intelligence to analytical strength.
The hopeful bit
We don’t have to choose between:
- pure wheat: “Leave me alone, I’ve got my own paddock.”
- pure rice: “Barry, FFS, follow the irrigation schedule.”
What we need is a hybrid. A cognitive triticale with:
- the coordination and adaptability of rice
- the clarity and system building of wheat
A mindset that can collaborate, innovate, and still produce a military grade pivot table on a spreadsheet when required.
Words by Sarah Hyland