My life partner and I recently visited Stockholm for a week or so, with the goal in mind to explore Swedish culture and see how much of a fit it could be for us. This article is the result of our research, observations, and conversations with locals and expats alike in that time span. Which means that the data points mentioned are real, but that the dataset was small, and the search far from being exhaustive. Some of the patterns I have seen might just have been misleading. Please do not source this as a study :D!

Lagom: Apparent paradoxes, or subtle balance?

Now to get into it: there are quite a few things about swedish culture that can appear strange and paradoxical. Maybe they could be explained in the end by the “lagom” concept. It could be roughly described as “not too much, not too little, but just right”. And those paradoxes potentially could indeed be a series of well balanced, just right, set of values and implementations.

Individualist or Socially Supportive?

On one hand, it looks like Sweden is extremely supportive. They have a strong social system, healthcare, free education until 65, etc. On the other they also have an individual responsibility culture, and expect people to be self sufficient and behave like adults. A great example is a Covid times story. An expat had a Swedish colleague that was super excited for a weekend in the bush with a couple of friends (small numbers, very isolated). Friday the day before, the government advised that covid numbers were going up, and that it would be better to avoid contacts. The expat was surprised to see the colleague in the office at 4pm, and learned that they cancelled their weekend plans, even though the trip was reasonably safe. It is a system that trust people to be adults (government wasn’t forcing people into a lockdown, but asking them to), and in return people do behave more responsibly. Side note, I would venture a guess that some issues with culture shocks in Sweden might be linked to this aspect, as in other cultures, it can be considered fair to get an advantage where possible, or it can be baseline to have a high level of distrust of authority.

I wonder if the way to explain the apparent contradiction between the support and the expectations of independence is not the time dimension. The Swedish system will support you when you need to learn (as a child, e.g.) or when you fail, but it does expect you to do learn and grow, recover, and become yet again an independent agent.

Innovative and individualistic or Consensual?

When many Swedes told us they had an individualistic culture, we thought at first they meant self-centered, but as seen in the last point, that’s not exactly the case. So we pondered if it might be individualistic as “more individual, different, less consensual”. But yet again this is a bit complex.

On one hand, Sweden has a very strong innovation culture, lots of entrepreneur, and the highest number of unicorns per capita, seemingly promoting to think differently. On the other, almost every Swedes we talked to also told us about corridor thinking, and social exclusion, which are concepts that are very far from an individualist culture. If you don’t conform, or if you stray too far from the pack, you will get shunned harshly. Interestingly the corridor are Z-shaped, as eventually they shift, and then everyone has to adapt. And it has to happen as a group, as swedish culture does not like aggressiveness and conflicts.

From our short observation, I think the nuance here is in the context. Corridor seem to happen at political (e.g. opinions on immigration) and cultural levels (how you dress, how you talk), while innovation seem to happen at a technological level. This is but an hypothesis, as historically, there has been quite a few cultural changes in the last 50/70 years in Sweden.

Egalitarianism or Meritocratic?

One of the things Swedish people seemed less aware of is their balance on egalitarianism. The official version is that Sweden is extremely egalitarian. And indeed, it works hard to give everyone chances, salary ranges are more condensed, there are many anti discrimination laws, and they even have the Jante laws, which is a fictional set of 10 laws from a book about a (seemingly representative) nordic village. One of the key Jante law would be “You’re not to imagine yourself better than we are.”

However, and having lived in New-Zealand, which has the anglicized “tall poppy syndrom” version (if you’re above the rest of the poppy field, you get cut), I found Sweden much more meritocratic and stratified in comparison. It has an history of European empire, and consequently, a social class with norms and codes that are reminiscent of nobility. It has a culture of rewarding merits (e.g. Nobel prizes). Yes you can get second chances after high school to get good enough grades for the best universities, but you do have to get a certain level of grades to get in them. There is still a little bit of keeping up with the joneses, not through flagrant bragging right, a more american method, but with more subtleties. People dresses in black, but expensive brands. They don’t show off their car, but they do show off their kitchen.

One of the key difference for me is the right to heroes. In New-Zealand, there are practically none, as anyone become anything like a hero or a role model get slandered, simply for having been in the spotlight for too long, even unvolatirily. You should know better, and stay simple. In my many years in NZ, one of the only hero that I became aware of was Edmund Hilary, because he was a pure kiwi. Humble to a fault, brave, strong, and dedicated his life and success to improve the lives of people worse than him. Peter jackson is basically incognito. Practically no one mention him as kiwi hero even in the Weta factory which is basically his fanbase, and Jacinda Adern started losing voters the moment she became famous on the world stage. I personally deplore this lack of heroes, and I like it in Sweden. I think it’s important to have role models, people to admire and want to emulate.

Key things we loved

Trust levels

There are some very high levels of trust between the state and people, people and the state, and between people. The Covid story earlier was but one example. Another story we heard, is an expat journalist coming late into the office, going to his boss. “Hey, the tram was late this morning, we should investigate”. The boss promptly answers “If it was, it’s because it was probably more needed somewhere else”. That first hand anecdote reveal how much the individual trusts the system. There is so much good will. Many are the swedes that, when asked about worries about the future (climate change, economic, etc), told us “oh I am sure the government will take care of it”. Some of my French roots cannot help but tingle, as trust might work better when not blind. But I also see how a society can move forward more efficiently if it doesn’t have to fight their own constituents at every corner.

Squashed salaries, and Automation,

I just loved this concept because of its positive ramifications. First of all, it gives the vast majority of people access to an average but solid level of living. Yes nothing is “cheap”, but most people can have access to a decent lifestyle. We heard of unemployed people having enough to go to the theater. A concept very foreign in many parts of the world to be able to afford such a cultural luxury without a job. Furthermore, it means that experienced labour is relatively cheaper (think doctors, experts, etc). Which means it could costs less to the government to subsidise healthcare, e.g. On the other hand, usually “cheap” labor is more expensive, incentivizing automation, of which I am a big fan. If a machine can do a job, leave it to the machine. Let the human spend their time in a more rewarding and self fulfilling way (there is a whole issue about how to implement this, but this is my stance at a conceptual level). Talking of implementation, at least in the short term, one of the consequences of automation is short term unemployment. However, in Sweden education is free, giving people a chance for upskilling, which coupled with the social benefits, reduce the probabilities of people being in distress. It just all works together. Furthermore, it also contributes to a low Gini Index coefficient, less wealth inequalities, and thus less criminality.

Value the parental journey.

This is pretty well known, so I will be short, the extended parental benefits (240 working days, per parent) is an insane outlier in our world. But I believe it to be incredibly valuable. From an economic perspective, our way to form families are not so efficient. There is a conflict between biology and levels of maturity regarding timing, and as most people have kids, most people have to learn one of the most difficult job on the spot. The result: I think everyone need therapy from their progenitors mistakes, at a level or another. And there is so much friction, pain, and conflicts in this world that arise from negativity that came from parental upbringin. I sometimes ponder if children being significantly better loved and raised at scale would not be one of the single most potent root cause to a lot of the issues in this world. The Swedish system shows it appreciate he value for the child, the parents, and society at large to hand the complex task while not being sleep deprived, hungry, and overworked.

I always welcome your thoughts and insights, connect with me on Linkedin!