Lucian Ghinea, CEO of 112Hub: A strong and well-defined organizational culture can help bridge differences in work mindsets

Outsourcing Today, the business services industry’s community networking and news integrated platform, resumes the series of interviews dedicated to evolution, expectations and opportunities in business services and related industries.

We invite business leaders, managers of strategic departments of companies, key voices in their field to share with us their insights depicting the new beginning of this year in business, how it looks, how it is anticipated, what adjustments are included in 2025’s agenda and the perspective of growth.

Find the full series of interviews here

We spoke recently with Lucian Ghinea, CEO of 112Hub about the shift in the work mindset, the evolution of job market in IT industry and the role of the organizational culture, among others.

Find below the insights:

Strategic Vision and work mindset

What are the biggest challenges in different work styles and mindsets? How can they be adjusted and improved, and what practical tools and approaches have proven effective?

Work styles and mindsets vary across cultures, shaping how teams communicate, make decisions, take risks, and collaborate. While diversity in approach can be an asset, misalignment in expectations can lead to friction, inefficiency, or miscommunication. Understanding these differences and adapting accordingly is key to building productive teams.

One of the most fundamental divides is in communication. Northern Europeans and Americans tend to be direct, valuing clarity and efficiency, while many Asian and Latin American cultures lean toward a more indirect approach to preserve harmony. The level of formality and detail also varies. Some cultures prioritise brevity, while others emphasise context and nuance. Without an awareness of these differences, what one person sees as a straightforward exchange, another might perceive as blunt or even abrasive.

These contrasts in communication extend to how teams approach time and organization. Some cultures are highly structured, adhering strictly to deadlines and long-term planning, while others take a more flexible, adaptive approach. The growing reliance on Agile methodologies has added another layer of complexity, as its interpretation often shifts based on cultural work habits, sometimes diverging from its intended principles.

Decision-making structures further highlight these differences. In hierarchical cultures, decisions are made at the top and passed down with little debate, whereas in more egalitarian workplaces, feedback from multiple levels is expected before a course of action is set. In some environments, employees may hesitate to challenge authority or propose unconventional ideas, even when encouraged to do so, shaping how innovation and collaboration unfold.

This hesitation ties directly into attitudes toward risk and innovation. Some teams embrace uncertainty, seeing it as an opportunity to experiment and iterate quickly. Others are more methodical, preferring incremental changes backed by thorough validation. The contrast is particularly evident in German-American collaborations, where U.S. teams may push for rapid iteration, while their German counterparts favor a more meticulous, data-driven approach.

The way teams collaborate is also shaped by cultural norms. In relationship-oriented cultures, such as those in Asia and the Middle East, trust must be established before business can move forward. In task-focused cultures, results take priority over personal rapport. These differences are especially evident in feedback styles, some teams expect direct, frequent input, while others see criticism as a sensitive matter best handled privately and with diplomacy.

Bridging these gaps requires more than just cultural awareness, it demands intentional action. In-person interaction remains one of the most effective ways to align teams. When colleagues meet face-to-face, they naturally adjust to each other’s styles, making it easier to build trust and establish common ground. Virtual communication, while efficient, often strips away the subtle cues that help teams navigate cultural differences, making alignment more difficult.

Beyond in-person meetings, structured approaches can help teams adapt. Cultural mentors or advisors offer valuable insights into different work norms. Clear documentation of processes and role definitions reduces misunderstandings. Regular check-ins, whether daily stand-ups or weekly syncs, keep teams aligned, while structured mentoring and ongoing feedback foster continuous learning.

Ultimately, recognising and addressing these cultural differences allows teams to function more effectively, turning potential friction into a strength. When managed well, diverse work styles drive better decision-making, creativity, and long-term success.

What is the role of organizational culture in balancing these differences, and what defines a healthy organizational culture?

A strong and well-defined organizational culture can help bridge differences in mindset and work style that arise from cultural diversity within teams. It acts as a unifying force, providing employees with shared principles, values, and behaviors, regardless of their national or professional backgrounds.

A cohesive organization develops its own set of norms and ways of working, which over time form a distinct “language” that may be unfamiliar to outsiders. This internal culture becomes a universal framework, ensuring that employees, regardless of their origins, gradually adapt and integrate into a common way of operating.

Perhaps the most visible sign of a strong organizational culture is the sense of belonging and unity it fosters. When employees identify with the company’s values and purpose, cultural differences become less of a barrier and more of a source of strength, enabling teams to collaborate effectively despite diverse backgrounds.

What role do leaders and managers play in shaping a balanced culture, what values do they instill in employees, and what are the most sensitive aspects?

Leaders and managers play a critical role in shaping and maintaining an organisational culture that balances diverse perspectives. Through their behavior and decisions, they set the tone for the entire company, offering a model that employees naturally follow. In multicultural environments, whether in outsourcing, joint ventures, or mixed teams, the ability to bridge differences and create a safe space for collaboration is essential for long-term success.

One of the most delicate challenges is avoiding the trap of forced uniformity. To establish a cohesive culture, some leaders risk dismissing or downplaying the values and unique practices of external partners. This issue is particularly evident in mergers and acquisitions, where a larger organisation absorbs a smaller one, often imposing its own identity without fully integrating or respecting the acquired company’s culture.

Another critical aspect that requires constant attention is psychological safety. Effective leaders create an environment where employees feel comfortable making mistakes, asking questions, and proposing new ideas without fear of judgment. Without this, companies risk losing their most talented people, those who are often the first to leave when a culture stifles innovation and open dialogue.

The transition to developing and commercializing proprietary products in the IT sector

What types of products are analyzed as having greater competitive potential to external markets, what are the benefits, and what are the challenges?

Moving from IT services like outsourcing and body leasing to developing proprietary products is a bold move for companies aiming to increase value, financial independence, and global reach.

For years, many firms have invested in Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) solutions, and while these will remain relevant, demand in the B2B space is likely to decline. As AI-powered tools become more sophisticated and cost-effective, companies will turn to internally developed solutions rather than third-party SaaS products.

Instead, growth is expected in AI, machine learning, and big data-driven platforms, particularly in industries that rely on large-scale data analysis. Sectors such as healthcare (diagnostics and telemedicine), manufacturing (Industry 4.0), e-commerce (personalized recommendations), logistics (route optimization), and cybersecurity (anomaly detection) are poised to benefit the most.

Cybersecurity solutions and tech applications for traditionally under-digitized industries, such as agriculture and smart city infrastructure, also present emerging opportunities. These sectors are undergoing rapid transformation, creating new demand for specialized products.
The biggest advantage of this shift is higher margins and greater value creation. Companies that successfully build and scale their products can generate lasting economic impact. With demand for traditional outsourcing in decline, more professionals may see product development as a viable alternative to service-based revenue.

The challenges are considerable. Upfront investment in R&D and marketing remains a major barrier, but the bigger issue is the lack of an entrepreneurial ecosystem in many regions. There are too few experienced professionals who know how to position and sell tech products on the global stage. UiPath offers a telling example, despite its Romanian roots, just one Romanian remains in the company’s top leadership, underscoring the difficulty of retaining local talent in globally competitive firms.

What is the focus of investments in proprietary product development, how important is the R&D segment, and how do local companies approach the need for investment? What challenges does Romania face regarding product development, investments, and access to external markets?

Many successful online products didn’t start with groundbreaking R&D or even a novel idea. While cutting-edge research is crucial for innovations like ChatGPT, Facebook didn’t invent the concept of a social network. Sometimes, success comes from taking an existing idea, improving it, and marketing it more effectively.

Romania’s market is small and unsophisticated, making it difficult for a locally developed product to scale globally. A new product should be built with a global audience in mind rather than designed to solve a local problem. Companies that focus too narrowly on domestic needs risk limiting their growth potential from the outset.

A major challenge for Romanian startups is the country’s outsourcing legacy. For years, much of the local IT workforce has operated under a service-based model, executing directives from international clients rather than developing independent products. Shifting from that mindset, following instructions to owning and driving innovation, remains a hurdle.
Funding is another obstacle. Even with a highly efficient product, scaling requires significant capital, especially in the early stages when proving market demand is critical. Unlike in Western Europe or the U.S., Romania lacks the deep investment networks and growth-stage funding mechanisms that help startups expand beyond their home market.

Talent shortages further complicate the transition to a product-driven economy. Romania produces top-tier engineers but lags in experienced professionals for sales, marketing, and global business strategy. Many startups struggle to position and sell their products internationally, often forcing them to relocate key operations abroad or hire external talent.
Bureaucratic hurdles add to the difficulties. Administrative inefficiencies and slow regulatory processes create friction, delaying startups from moving quickly and scaling effectively.

Beyond structural challenges, Romania’s national branding presents another disadvantage. Many successful Romanian products have been rebranded as American or Western European companies to gain credibility in international markets. A product’s perceived origin can influence investment, partnerships, and customer trust, leading some companies to mask their Romanian roots in favor of a more globally recognized identity.
Without addressing these challenges, Romania’s ability to build and scale competitive global products remains limited. The local ecosystem must evolve beyond technical excellence to support the business expertise, financial backing, and strategic leadership necessary for long-term success.

The Impact of layoffs in the IT Sector and the evolution of the job market

Which fields or specialties have the highest demand for specialists in Romania, and which business segments and specializations have been most affected by layoffs?

It’s difficult to rank the most in-demand specializations with any real accuracy. Until about a year ago, anyone with a background in software development or related services had little trouble finding a job. Demand far outpaced supply, and virtually every specialization was sought after.

Today, layoffs are happening across all specialties, but two groups have been hit the hardest. The first is career switchers, those who transitioned into IT from other fields due to high demand and better salaries.

Many of them have a narrow skill set and limited flexibility, making it harder to adapt to changing market conditions. The second is junior employees and recent graduates. With hiring slowing down, companies naturally prefer experienced professionals over entry-level talent.

Can the IT market afford to lay off employees, and how is the need for upskilling and reskilling being addressed by both employers and employees?

The market demands it, and some companies have no choice but to lay off employees to survive. However, Romania’s labor laws make dismissals complicated, even when they are justified by declining sales.

Upskilling and reskilling have largely fallen off the priority list for companies. Shrinking profit margins and disappearing projects mean there’s little budget left for training. At the same time, with more professionals available in the job market, it’s often more cost-effective to let go of an employee and hire someone who already has the required skills, rather than investing in retraining.

How have salaries in the IT sector evolved in recent years, and what are the expectations for this year and the near future? What are the trends in external markets?

Wages will likely stagnate at the net average income level, I’m waiting for the official data from the National Institute of Statistics in March, and I’m genuinely curious about what they’ll report. Considering inflation and the fact that laid-off workers are beginning to accept lower salaries, we’ll probably see a decline soon.

Predicting external market trends is difficult, as geopolitical shifts will have a significant impact. If the U.S. were to impose a 20% tariff on services purchased from the EU, the effect on Romania’s IT sector would be substantial. On the other hand, a decoupling from China and potential tariffs on India could drive more projects toward Eastern Europe, creating new opportunities in the region.

---