Overview

The focused company of this report is an active participant in the fashion footwear industry, with a long reign of over 150 years. The company itself was founded in the United States, however grew rapidly in popularity and acquired multiple other fashion footwear branches, which are all governed according to the same structure and format.

Despite New Zealand’s multicultural, independent and overall diverse society, our interviewee expresses her struggles regarding cultural miscommunication, understanding and barriers both within immediate staff in the workplace environment along with interactions with customers. Thus, such limitations and conflicts are prevalent in such societies regardless of diverse cultures being the norm.

Additionally, our interviewee also expresses her gratitude and growth in understanding cultural differences, norms and communication. She states that although she faces challenges, a diverse team has educated her and widened her perspectives as well. Given how large such fashion companies are and the nature of the retail field, further analysis of the Hofstede dimensions, identification of cultural miscommunications and potential resolutions will be explored to mitigate such challenges. These aspects will be further explored below.

Hofstede Dimensions

Despite the fact that the company is a United States-owned firm, the female New Zealander works alongside people of other nationalities such as New Zealanders, Americans or Indians. Although she is used to diversity and multicultural atmospheres because of her country, she does encounter cultural limitations within the work environment, such as the language, dressing code or perception of rules.

Additionally, not only does she have issues with her partners, but also with the clients. For instance, there are many cultures where physical contact is inhibitive and not very common. In the case of our interviewee, when she is helping a customer to measure their size-foot, she ensures that she clearly asks if it is okay to be physically close to another person with the sole intention of helping them try on shoes. It would be prohibitive for her to make other people uncomfortable and dissatisfied with the service.

The interviewee stated to share the workforce with people from the United States and India. That is the reason why we will be comparing those cultures on the basis of the six Hofstede’s Dimensions. See below Figure 1.

There is a low Power Distance between the managers and the employees. Since New Zealand and the United States have a participative orientation, the regular workers still have the ability to voice their concerns without fear. Both managers and employees expect to be consulted and the information is shared very frequently. This situation surprises her Indian coworkers, because for them it should be the complete opposite. They are used to more Hierarchical distances and a top-down structure in society and organizations. In India, power is centralized and managers count on the obedience of their team members.

Also, despite the fact that all the three countries are considered to be Masculine, she states that in the workplace there is no competition, instead, they prefer to follow the Feminine values, and care for each other. ​​This is why they have an effective manager who is supportive to his/her people, and decision making is achieved through involvement of the group.

Moreover, as her Indian manager is more of a Collectivist person, the New Zealander sees it as an advantage as she was used to being Individualistic. The interviewee appreciates a lot that her manager takes into account what the coworkers express. In the American and New Zealand cultures, the superiors are accessible and managers rely on individual employees and teams for their expertise.

Lastly, Hofstede states that the higher a country scores in indulgence the higher the willingness of a society to follow their instincts and wants in terms of enjoying life and having fun. Therefore, while New Zealand and the United States share the top scores of Indulgence, our interviewees manager’s Indian culture is rather considered to be restrained, who has the perception that the employees’ actions are regulated by social norms.

Outcome

Cultural limitations have been identified from the interviewee perspective. It was noticeable how the understanding of the corporate rules differed from store to store. For instance, in stores where western ideals were governed people inferred the “smart-casual” as being “more casually”. On the other hand, the store where our employee works showed a more literal way of following the rules. This was influenced by the southern  Asian background of their manager showing a high uncertainty avoidance, meaning that the manager had an emotional feeling for rules, and precision.

Moreover, cultural miscommunication exists in the retail stores in New Zealand specially where they employ a diverse team and serve a broad range of customers. Therefore, the staff needs to sometimes adapt its approach to the customers. Since they are diverse they need to make use of verbal communication, and body language to fully understand customer wants. In other words,  diverse cultures mean different levels of communication. Therefore, some cultures need high context to understand the message. However, for others it is enough if it is said with confidence, or written somewhere (low context). When a problem arises the interviewee opted for verbal communication as their tool to solve possible misunderstandings. One of the current problems in retail is customers not obeying the national coronavirus restrictions. For instance, elderly do not like to be stopped from shopping because they are not using a face mask, when this scenario occurs the retail employees felt  inhibited in handling the matter by themselves and opted to contact their manager to solve this issue otherwise if the discussion between the customer and the employee were to escalate the store may lose its reputation, followed by possible clients.

Finally, since the company’s headquarters are located in the United States, the main values, and practices are implemented to its franchises. The interviewee explained that they feel “they are given opportunities to speak our mind and perspectives”. This could be due to the rather neutral score in power distance of its HQ in the United States combined with one of the lowest power distance cultures in New Zealand providing the employees a space where their concerns are heard without being belittled, and solving issues as they come.

Possible solutions

In a corporate environment, people from different backgrounds come together and each brings their own culture, which can vary. Employees have to keep this in mind and overcome it. Language barriers can lead to misunderstandings, so it is important to know the co-employees and be aware of their language and culture. This can happen through regular team meetings that take place informally. This ensures a personal exchange between the employees. There are also different understandings of norms between departments. These could be circumvented by strengthening cross-functional communication, creating departments containing employees from different departments and building a common vocabulary so that each department understands what the other department is talking about and what it values.

A uniform dress code with a company logo could help to overcome the hurdles of clothing, which is handled differently by each employee.

Of course, in a service company there are not only differences between employees, but also between employees and customers. For this purpose, regular training could be introduced where case studies are played out to train the best possible behaviour. A handbook could also be created that suggests the most appropriate behaviour for standard problems in all cultures.

The most important thing, however, is that problems are addressed openly within the company structure, because this is the only way to change a staff member and ensure smooth cooperation.

Authors

Gary S. Guadalupe M.
Amsterdam School of International Business, Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences
Block 2, Semester 1, 2021

Carlota Prieto Garcia
Amsterdam School of International Business, Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences
Block 2, Semester 1, 2021

Lisa Schreibweiß
Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
Semester 5, 2021

Tasfia Mahmood
Auckland University of Technology
Block 2, Semester 1, 2021