Overview

For assignment C, our group interviewed the managing director of a subsidiary of an international company about their cultural diversity management. During the interview, numerous topics regarding diversity management were discussed with our interviewee, such as the cultural limitations in the work environment, what is seen as prohibitive and inhibitive within the company, Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, as well as intercultural communications.

The aim of this assignment is to identify and navigate the way culture influences people in an international work environment. Additionally, it also helps us attain a better understanding of the different cultural dimensions and how it applies to organizations, rather than just an individual.

Cultural limitation

The interviewee states that there are several limitations when working in a multicultural company. The first restriction is that workers from a higher management level tend to experience less problems due to cultural differences, while this occurs more between people at a lower management level. The reason why there are fewer problems in the higher management level is due to the employees’ level of training, work experience, their awareness of consequences of not following guidelines and their responsibility as a role model and a leader. The second limitation mentioned is that one can sometimes ‘be thrown into a drawer’. What the interviewee meant with this is that cultural differences and background may lead to people being judged and stereotyped, which might result in workers being heard less or even ignored. Thirdly, there are constraints that usually arise from individuals within a foreign culture, and not so much in an organizational setting within the same culture. This has often to do with how well those people adapt to the working culture, the dominant culture. Finally, the last limitation is the fact that it is up to the employer and his management to make cultural diversity become a competitive advantage.

Communication and interpretation

Especially in an international company, where most of the employees come from different countries, with different cultural backgrounds and languages, it is important to make use of interpretation and translation to avoid any possible cultural miscommunication. According to the interviewee, it is crucial to behave professionally in a work environment, private life and work life should be distinguished properly. Moreover, it is essential to obtain mastery of the English language, as that is the most spoken language in the world and the chances are big that all the employees will be able to speak English, despite their individual level of English.

Nevertheless, the interviewee also has the opinion that in some occasions, it is better when both sides don’t have a common language, because it makes them more dependent on the common themes that have to be resolved and it results in them having to use a translator or an interpreter. He mentioned this, because if one party has a lower language level it may occur that he misunderstands the one that speaks more sophisticated. In situations where there will still be a language barrier between the employees in the company, our interviewee suggests that it would be easiest to utilize online translators for virtual settings, and for offline situations to use an interpreter or translator. These mediators are very helpful to resolve communication problems in a work environment. On top of that, it is mentioned that communicating one-to-one is also a great way to avoid misunderstandings between people and to resolve misunderstandings that have already occured.

Prohibitive and inhibitive

Every Culture has prohibitive or inhibitive behaviors or actions. Our interviewee has the opinion that in the context of an international work environment it is hard to say what is prohibitive or inhibitive, because every culture has different aspects to it. He did say though that especially bigger organizations have certain guidelines or a code of conduct. These guidelines are usually open phrased. This means that especially management has different ways of interpreting it, in order to accomplish the inclusion of the cultural differences. One example of such a guideline may be “respect each other”. Respect may look very different in each culture, but since the wording is so basic and, in the roots, it applies to everyone in each situation.

Hofstede Dimensions

The interviewee comes from Poland, which is also reflected in some answers when observing it from Hofstede’s dimensions perspective. First of all, it can be said that Poland has a relatively high hierarchy orientation, namely 67. Secondly, Polish culture is seen more as an individualistic culture with a score of 60 on the scale of Hofstede. Thirdly, it can be said that the culture of the interviewee is highly achievement oriented, meaning that goal and work focus is more appreciated. Besides that, the score of 93 on certainty orientation is seen as a high degree to which people prefer rules, regulations and controls. Moreover, the Polish culture scores low on time orientation which means that the focus is more on fulfilling the present needs. Lastly, the score on indulgence is also relatively low, amounting to 29, meaning that the Polish culture leans more towards letting behavior to be regulated by social norms (Tcps, n.d.).

Outcome

When conducting the Interview, our interviewee said he did not know the Hofstede Dimensions, so we explained the model to him and showed him the results of two countries he knew the cultures of: Germany and Poland. We also asked questions to dig deeper on those dimensions where he did not know what to answer. We found out that on many occasions he agreed with what was said. On some other occasions, he disagreed. For example: He said he did not like hierarchy in a work environment as much, which is part of power distance. He also said that he prefers the emotional way of communication, which is part of a feminine culture. From one of his answers, “Either they have it, or they don’t” one could see that he is more power distant and more masculine.

Overall we were able to come to several conclusions. First, the Hofstede dimensions are not necessarily a hundred percent true in every situation. Second, the interviewee may perceive himself and his organization differently in these dimensions compared to the Hofstede values, due to a lack of understanding of the dimensions. And last, and most importantly, since it is an international company and the interviewee has worked in many different cultural settings and work environments, his perceptions might not necessarily represent the classical polish values. Thus, how much these dimensions apply always depends on the situation and the cultural experiences of those that are evaluated.

Possible solutions

The Best-Practice Example our interviewee described was one he experienced some time before he worked for his current organization. It also rather concerns action before something happens rather than reaction after something happened.

He joined a new team of managers which came from all around the world and gathered together in a seminar in preparation for the work. In groups they identified all prejudices and biases as well as positive aspects they could find about the others countries and cultures. Then they presented these to all and altogether they found ways of accepting and understanding one another. The time they spent together also helped them meet on a personal level and make friends.

He recalled that this way of going about such a cultural diversity influenced the work culture right from the beginning in such a way that it hardly happened that misunderstandings occurred since everyone knew what the thought about oneself, both positive and negative, and they knew where they could meet and understand each other. They always had a common ground. In all his career he only experienced this once and it was the Best Practice of going about cultural differences and improving, overcoming this hurdle.

Authors

Hiromi de Oliveira Ontani
Student: International Business Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences
Block 2, Semester 1, 2021

Linh Le
Student: International Business Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences
Block 2, Semester 1, 2021

Jens Tiebing
Student: Bachelor of Management Kozminski University
Semester 5, 2021