The company is a part of a global hospitality industry that delivers high-quality service and fosters a diverse and inclusive culture. The hotel located in The Netherlands is a destination for both business travelers, tourists and guests who come from a wide range of countries across Europe and from all around the world. Due to the diverse backgrounds, not all clients are fluent in English, which is mainly used in communication between the staff and guests. Many guests rely on basic English, gestures or support from multilingual staff to express their needs. As a result, cultural differences in communication styles and expectations of service vary depending on the customer, which creates challenges for the company.

The company’s vision is to be the first choice when it comes to guests who value genuine hospitality, and its mission is to provide an excellent service and create memorable experiences for guests from diverse cultural backgrounds. Additionally, the company has a clear hierarchical structure in which strategic decisions and cultural initiatives are led by senior management. Nevertheless, there are potential misunderstandings related to hierarchy and stress at work because both the individual personality and cultural background of the employees affect how they respond to stress and instructions.

Hofstede Dimensions

Cultural differences in the organization can be explained by Hofstede’s dimensions of value, given that employees of different cultures work in the organization. Cultural differences affect communication, organizational structure, responsibility, and handling stress at work. In a service-oriented context, differences will directly influence decisions and work performance, as well as how employees relate to their work personally.

Power Distance Index can be observed through how workers react to management and instructions. Some workers may want clear instructions from management, while others may want to be left alone to act on their own. Such differences may lead to how decisions are executed, especially when it is busy. On the other hand, it may lead to how workers are either empowered or limited by management.

Individualism versus Collectivism is reflected in the degree to which the team-working style is preferred over the individual working style. Whereas some workers would thrive on frequent communication, others would work better on their own. This directly influences task delegation and ownership. A blend of the two will help to ensure proper decision-making.

Uncertainty Avoidance is a factor in how workers react to pressure, to unforeseen changes and to stressful situations. While some workers are composed and methodical in their behavior in such situations, others may feel increased levels of stress or act on instinct. It is because of culture that workers behave in this way. To mitigate this effect, supervisors provide workers with clear instructions and systematic procedures, especially in handovers.

Differences related to Masculinity versus Femininity are found in the way people communicate. Some employees are very direct and task-oriented while others are very polite and indirect. Such differences can result in misunderstandings due to different styles of communication. Supervisors can be aware of these differences and change their own communication styles to facilitate respect and easy decision-making.

Long-term orientation is expressed through operational methods such as structured handovers, written lists of tasks, and documentation. Such methods prioritize continuity with a focus on long-term optimization instead of short-term problem-solving. This is very helpful for intercultural collaboration because it avoids reliance on implicit assumptions. Overall, Hofstede’s Value Dimensions are a good means of explaining how values affect behavior in an organization.

Figure 1: Hofstedes Dimenssions: https://cultureinworkplace.com/country-comparison-dashboard/

Outcome

In the Front Office team, the main intercultural communication issue is that the same message can be understood differently because of language level, communication style, and hidden cultural norms. English is the shared working language, but for most staff it is not their first language, which increases misunderstandings – especially when information is technical or must be transferred quickly. The interviewee explains that these differences become most visible during shift handovers, complaint handling, and emergency situations, because time pressure makes small misunderstandings more serious. Direct versus indirect communication adds another layer: some colleagues communicate very directly while others are more indirect, which can create confusion until people learn each other’s styles. Using Hall’s Iceberg Model, the visible part is the style (direct/indirect), but underneath are values about respect, hierarchy, and what is considered appropriate at work. Because of these hidden norms, communication can become inhibitive (people hesitate to clarify or speak up) and sometimes feel almost prohibitive (people feel they “cannot” question decisions due to cultural expectations).

Possible solutions

The solutions should reduce inhibitive silence and make shared meaning explicit. The interviewee already uses practical strategies like speaking slowly, using simple English, and showing examples. A stronger team-level approach is to standardize communication in critical moments: short confirmation loops, clear handover routines, and written checklists that everyone uses across shifts. This improves clarity and reduces uncertainty. Another solution is to agree on a shared feedback and escalation style, so directness is used for clarity but stays respectful, and indirectness is not interpreted as incompetence. Finally, inclusion improves when language support and development opportunities are transparent, because language barriers can otherwise indirectly limit access to certain roles and responsibilities.

Authors:

Students: International Business Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences
Block 2, Semester 1, 2026

Julia Szewczyk (https://www.linkedin.com)

João Pedro Lamas Paulino (https://www.linkedin.com/in/jo%C3%A3o-paulino-5976b6144/)

Quỳnh Nguyễn (http://linkedin.com/in/quỳnh-trâm-nguyễn-478ba8208)

Caesardo Diaz Afriansyah (https://www.linkedin.com)

Denys Shukhat (https://www.linkedin.com/in/denys-shukhat)

Mees Camoenie (https://www.linkedin.com/in/mees-camoeni%C3%A9-73a4a9386?trk=contact-info)

Excerpt

This case model examines how cultural differences influence communication and collaboration within a multicultural hospitality organisation, based on an interview with a staff member working in an international service environment. The case highlights how variations in directness, feedback styles, and expectations can lead to subtle misunderstandings between staff and guests. By applying intercultural communication theories, the analysis demonstrates how awareness of cultural norms can reduce inhibitive communication and support more effective teamwork and service quality in an international workplace

The organisation operates in a multicultural work environment, employing international staff and welcoming guests from Europe, North America, and the Caribbean. This makes it a suitable case for examining how cultural differences influence communication, teamwork, and decision-making in an international hospitality setting.

Interview Focus

Main question:

How do cultural differences affect communication and collaboration between staff and guests?

Key Interview Excerpt

“People interpret tone and feedback differently. I come from Curaçao, where communication is direct, but someone from Thailand may experience this as rude, even if that’s not the intention.”  Short Analysis

Communication is not forbidden, but direct feedback can make others uncomfortable, depending on cultural background.

Different communication styles reflect cultural values, supporting Weaver’s view that meaning depends on interpretation, not just words. 

Cultural Impact

• Misunderstandings can affect teamwork and feedback moments
• Guests from different cultures show different expectations and complaint styles
• Staff adapt communication through experience and awareness

Cultural problem 

The intercultural problem that emerges from the interview is a subtle issue that operates largely below the surface of everyday communication. Although employees use the same working language, they do not always share the same communication culture, which leads to misunderstandings. A central element of this problem is the difference between high-context and low-context communication. Some employees communicate directly, using a firm tone and explicit feedback. Others rely on more indirect communication, where meaning is conveyed through tone, body language, and the relationship, and where maintaining harmony is an important social norm. In this context, direct feedback can feel rude or personally confrontational, even when the intention is supportive. This results in inhibitive communication, where individuals withdraw, speak up less, or reduce participation in team discussions.

A similar pattern appears in interactions with guests. For some guests, openly expressing complaints is normal and seen as part of good service. For others, complaining feels socially inhibitive, as it may conflict with values related to politeness, gratitude, or avoiding confrontation.  

This issue is not prohibitive, as no formal rules restrict communication. Instead, it is shaped by unspoken norms and social values that define what feels appropriate or respectful. These norms lie below the waterline of the cultural iceberg and strongly influence daily interaction. At its core, the problem stems from the assumption that one’s own communication style is neutral and universal. In reality, communication is culturally situated, and mismatches in style can lead to misjudgement without any harmful intent. Rather than appearing as open conflict, the problem manifests in small misunderstandings and gradual withdrawal, which over time affect cooperation, trust, and effectiveness in the workplace.

Hofstede Dimensions

Within the organisation, cultural “programming” is evident in all interactions. The internal staff dynamic highlights a fascinating contrast between individualism and collectivism. “High-context” Thai employees prioritise group harmony and “saving face” through a softer communication style, whereas “low-context” Curaçaoan staff express themselves more directly and individually. To avoid causing friction, the resort employs a low Power Distance strategy: while the owner has final say, employees are encouraged to generate ideas. This is supported by their “English-only” best practice, which acts as a cultural equaliser, ensuring that no “in-groups” or “out-groups” form based on language, resulting in a “Feminine” organisational culture centred on inclusion and mutual respect.

Externally, the resort must deal with varying levels of uncertainty avoidance among its guests. American travelers frequently exhibit high urgency, a desire to control the             “unknowns” of their trip, whereas Dutch visitors exhibit lower uncertainty avoidance, often using humor to navigate service hiccups. The most difficult challenge, however, is the       “silent” Caribbean visitor. Their reluctance to

complain is typical of high-context, collectivist behavior, in which maintaining “social peace” is more important than individual dissatisfaction.

By proactively checking in with these guests and implementing a Long-Term Orientation, the resort protects its reputation and ensures guest loyalty. This strategic adaptation, replicated by global leaders such as Marriott, demonstrates that success in a multicultural environment    requires “shifting” one’s own dimensions to meet the cultural expectations of the guest.

Outcome

The outcome of this case study demonstrates that intercultural communication within the organisation is not primarily disrupted by open conflict, but by subtle mismatches in communication styles and unspoken cultural norms. Through the interview and analysis, it becomes clear that differences in directness, feedback styles, and expectations strongly influence how employees and guests interpret behavior. These differences often lead to inhibitive communication, where individuals withdraw, speak less openly, or hesitate to express concerns, rather than to visible confrontation.

By applying theoretical frameworks such as the cultural iceberg model, high and low. context communication, and Hofstede’s dimensions, the analysis shows that awareness is a key factor in reducing misunderstandings. When employees recognize that their own communication style is culturally shaped rather than universal, they become more capable of adjusting their behavior to different colleagues and guests. This awareness supports psychological safety within teams and improves service quality by ensuring that guest dissatisfaction is identified and addressed in time.

Overall, the case confirms that effective intercultural communication is not achieved through equal treatment alone, but through adaptive communication that takes cultural differences seriously. The main learning outcome is that small, everyday interactions have long-term effects on trust, teamwork, and guest satisfaction. By increasing cultural awareness and implementing reflective practices, the organisation can strengthen collaboration, prevent gradual withdrawal, and create a more inclusive and effective multicultural working environment.

Possible solutions

To address intercultural communication challenges, the organisation could implement structured intercultural communication training for all staff, focusing on differences in directness, tone, and feedback styles as explained by Hofstede’s value dimensions. This would help employees recognize how power distance, individualism–collectivism, and uncertainty avoidance influence daily interactions. By increasing theoretical awareness, staff would be better equipped to interpret behavior accurately and adjust their own communication accordingly.

Additionally, the organisation could organize team-building workshops in which employees learn more about each other’s cultural backgrounds and communication styles. During these workshops, staff could discuss real workplace situations and reflect on how different cultures interpret respect, urgency, and criticism. Such reflective dialogue would strengthen mutual understanding, reduce misinterpretations, and increase awareness of cultural differences within the team, which is essential for maintaining harmony in a multicultural team.

Furthermore, within the organisation a “cultural buddy” system could be introduced in which new or existing employees are paired with a colleague from a different cultural background. Through this informal shadowing and regular interactions, staff would learn directly from each other. This learning approach would help reduce uncertainty, supporting faster adaptation for newcomers and promoting long-term development of the team. 

Together, these solutions combine theoretical knowledge, reflective practice, and experiential learning, making them both culturally sensitive and practically effective in improving teamwork and guest satisfaction.

Authors

Student: Saffiya Moodliar,  www.linkedin.com/in/saffiya-moodliar

Block 2, Semester 1, 2026

Student: Sion Faneyte, www.linkedin.com/in/sion-faneyte.

Block2, Semester 1, 2026

Student: Isaline Gurné, www.linkedin.com/in/isaline-gurne

Block 2, Semester 1, 2026

Student: Ignacy Struzik, www.linkedin.com/in/ignacy-struzik

Block 2, Semester 1, 2026

Student: Minrada Kumarasinghe, https://www.linkedin.com/in/natharie-kumarasinghe

Block 2, Semester 1, 2026

Chakira Mosadik: www.linkedin.com/in/chakira-mosadik

Block 2, Semester 1, 2026

For this anonymous case model, interviews were conducted in the hospitality business sector, with two prestigious restaurant managers at a significant hotel in the Netherlands. Despite managing two different restaurants, both managers are employed within the same hotel. One manager is a Dutch manager and runs a restaurant with two Michelin stars, whilst the other is an Italian manager and runs an Italian restaurant. The interview’s most interesting aspect is how diverse their ancestries are. Due to the fact that the hotel employs workers with various origins and moreover promotes diversity, it is home to many people with diverse cultures.

The interviewing topics emphasized on how the individuals had faced issues and circumstances that were problematic and discouraging for the team members or organization’s members who were of various ethnicities. Both answered similar questions, for instance : what do you think is the key within the business to achieve a good harmony between the cultural clashes that may exist?; Are there any limitations working with different cultural backgrounds?; How is the power distance within the company and what values do you transmit through your position? Has there been a problem or a customer complaining about a staff member not being able to speak Dutch?

This synopsis aims to give a clear understanding of the interview. Each of these issues are covered in this discussion in order to enable us to comprehend how this organization effectively interacts with individuals from different ethnic backgrounds, heritages, and religious orientations.

The interview revealed, among other things, that both managers embrace cultural diversity. However, the two restaurants’ environments differ, and, as a result, they seek out different sorts of diversity. For instance, the Italian manager, as in charge of an Italian restaurant, looks for a “diversity” of Italians, better explained as people that are from different parts and backgrounds of Italy to be in line with the vibe of the place. On the other hand, the Dutch manager does not look for a specific culture or language speaker, as variety is exactly one of the objectives of his perspective of a team.

Both parties concur that a policy based on decency and meritocracy is necessary for both viewpoints. They claim that getting along with the rest of the group is the most crucial factor to consider when recruiting a new employee. This indicates that the choice of every worker is based not only on their performance, but on their adaptability and congruence in a team setting.

Cultural limitations are therefore mostly related to the customers, rather than the team members. Numerous people who do not understand English as well as others who only speak Dutch frequently come to dine. The managers explained that the ideal approach to handle these situations is to surround themselves with staff members who really can, first and foremost, handle pressure with sensitivity and common sense, as well as identify the appropriate channels of communication with clients. The Italian manager said, “I speak the language of love,” when asked how to cope with people who only spoke Dutch.

However, there are far too many prohibitive and inhibitive actions that apply to workplaces with such a diverse range of backgrounds and, consequently, a multitude of moral circles and social norms. The principal way to avoid issues due these differences is, before all, to acknowledge them. Hence, according to both managers, to make these differences something to learn from and respect everyday, not a barrier.

Hofstede Dimensions

Both restaurants deal with clients from all over the world and a diverse team of staff. The manager of the Italian restaurant is Italian and the restaurant with two Michelin stars has a Dutch manager. Therefore, the main focus lies with the Italian and Dutch perspective and their issues.

The Hofstede dimensions are a framework for understanding cultural differences between countries. According to Hofstede, there are six dimensions: power distance, individualism vs collectivism, masculinity vs femininity, uncertainty avoidance, long-term vs short-term orientation, and indulgence vs restraint.

In terms of power distance, the Netherlands has a relatively low score in this dimension, indicating that there is a strong belief in equality and a flat power structure. On the other hand, Italy has a relatively high score, meaning that there is a high degree of acceptance of unequal distribution of power in society. Throughout the interviews it became clear that there is a certain distance between the manager and others, especially in the restaurant with Michelin stars. However, both restaurant managers are very open to people’s opinions and they have daily briefings where everyone can share their thoughts, but they believe that in the end there has to be one person that has the final say.

Individualism vs collectivism is another dimension, Italy is more collectivistic, meaning that people tend to prioritize their in-groups and the well-being of their families and communities over their own individual needs and goals. The Netherlands is more individualistic, meaning that people tend to prioritize their own individual needs and goals over those of their in-groups. Since the manager and his staff are all Italian we can clearly see that they have created this family where they view the manager as a father figure, and likewise he feels the responsibility to teach them to take responsibility to grow within the company. This shows that they are more collectivistic. Even though there is not a big difference between Italy and the Netherlands according to Hoftstede, we can agree that there is a noticeable difference in the managing style of the two managers.

Regarding masculinity vs femininity, Italy scores relatively high, meaning that there is a strong emphasis on traditional gender roles and a competitive and assertive culture. The Netherlands scores relatively low on this dimension, indicating a more gender-equal culture and a more cooperative and modest culture. Even though the restaurants both want a more feminine environment, when it comes down to making actual decisions this comes from one person, the manager, who needs to be straightforward and make the decision. For both the Dutch and Italian managers’ perspective there needs to be a good balance between the two.

In terms of uncertainty avoidance, Italy scores relatively high, meaning that there is a high degree of anxiety and discomfort with uncertainty and ambiguity. On the other hand, The Netherlands scores relatively low, indicating a more relaxed attitude towards uncertainty and a greater willingness to take risks.

In the matter of long-term vs short-term orientation, the Netherlands scores relatively high, indicating a strong focus on planning for the future and long-term goals. Italy scores a little lower than the Netherlands. They also focus more on planning for the future and long-term goals, but not as much or as far as the Dutch. A good example is that the Italian manager thinks one year into the future whilst the Dutch manager focuses 3 to 5 years into the future.

Outcome

The cultural issues were able to be identified because of the analysis of the interview with the help of the Hofstede Dimensions. There were three main factors discovered that could cause cultural issues: language barriers, high uncertainty avoidance and dress codes.

At first we noticed that a lot of the issues that occur within both restaurants is due to language barriers mostly with customers. The staff are very diverse and many waiters do not speak Dutch, mostly the waiters of the Italian restaurant do not speak the Dutch language. The staff is encouraged to speak English to one another as this is more inclusive. But also when communicating to the customers the staff who do not speak Dutch must speak English. Or if the customer speaks the same language as the waiter then of course they may communicate in that language. Sometimes the staff have issues communicating to the customers because the customers are from all over the world and some do not speak English. It is noticeable to the managers that many customers do speak French or Spanish and therefore have picked up on some words. But if nobody is able to communicate with the customer then it can be a real problem.

The Italian manager has said that he has difficulty speaking English. He mostly recognizes this when trying to explain something quickly to the staff, he starts trembling over the words when speaking at a high pace. He noticed that this is a problem at times, especially when being in stressful situations which need quick responses.

Another language barrier staff complained about in the past was that the system they used was completely in Dutch so the staff had to learn the names of the dishes in Dutch. This issue had been resolved after they renewed the whole system for serving in English.

The second factor that can cause issues is the high uncertainty avoidance. The Italian manager is not a risk-taker and is uncomfortable when something unexpected happens. He tries to prevent any surprises. A good example is when they are hiring a new

employee, this is a risk. Therefore the Italian manager usually likes to hire people who he knows or someone he knows has referenced the new employee. This way he can prevent the risk of having a bad employee. Of course it is not possible to prevent every risk, but it does cause stress for the manager. Unlike the Italian manager, the Dutch manager will take the risk of hiring a new person he does not know.

An issue that could arise between the customer and the restaurants is the dress code for the staff, such as a suite. In both of the restaurants all the staff is matching, hair is tied into a bun and there are no visible tattoos or piercings. But recently the rules have changed within the restaurants, which is that you may wear a piercing on your face even if you are serving the customer. Before this was absolutely prohibitive but as the work environment including management and staff changed it is not prohibitive anymore. However this could be prohibitive to some customers because in most prestigious restaurants this is not allowed and not part of the scene. The customer might feel as if he is not dining in an esteemed restaurant but in some average restaurant. Hence, this could be an issue.

Possible Solutions

A potential solution to the first problem which is the language barrier may be providing extra courses and language training for staff who may have struggles with communicating with customers in English, or who don’t speak Dutch. Additionally, some language tools could be provided in restaurants, like apps translating the menu and facilitating contact with customers.

The manager can also emphasize the “language of love” and patience to overcome the issue of people feeling as if they are not respected because they do not speak the language.

Regarding high uncertainty avoidance, a possible solution may be a different mindset that would open new options for the manager and better facilitate his options, embracing new technologies and innovations. Moreover, he could think of hiring skilled individuals with expertise in the areas in which he considers his weaknesses to help him with risk management.

Finally, the solution for the last issue could be training the employees with visible identification marks such as piercing or tattoos to work in the kitchen during the most sensitive hours. Moreover, the manager would advise the employees to hide their marks if possible and to behave more discreetly in front of customers.

Authors

Student: Anna Spinola (LinkedIn)
Block 2, Semester 1

Student: Manal Boukhamsaoui (LinkedIn)
Block 2, Semester 1

Student: Michelle Tickton (LinkedIn)
Block 2, Semester 1

Student: Aleksandra Frąckiewicz (LinkedIn)
Block 2, Semester 1

Student: Farisha Castro Alarcon (LinkedIn)
Block 2, Semester 6

The hospitality and tourism industry is highly internationalized and global. Employees in the industry often interact with customers from different cultural backgrounds. Intercultural communication can help employees communicate effectively with these customers by allowing them to identify and adapt to cultural differences. ICC helps employees respect the norms of people from other backgrounds and establish effective communication and interaction (Just a moment. . ., z.d.).

The manager of a hotel in Utrecht has been interviewed to write this case.

The hotel is located on the outskirts surrounded by nature and close to the city centre of Utrecht. Most employees in the hotel communicate in Dutch, but there are different nationalities in the hotel. This results in situations where cultural miscommunication can appear.

This case is written by students from the University of Applied Sciences in Amsterdam, Kozminski, Poland & Tecnológico de Monterrey, Mexico.

In this case we will analyze how cultural miscommunications can be managed between Dutch culture and other cultures. The hotel is located in Utrecht and has visitors from all over the world. Therefore, cultural miscommunication can appear. Two situations are explained in more detail.

Cultural Miscommunications

1. One time there were guests visiting the hotel from the east. They asked the employees of the hotel to do a lot of work for them. For example, these guests wanted to go to a soccer game. They expected the employees to arrange and buy the best and most expensive tickets for them. And they also wanted the hotel to pay for the tickets in advance. For this hotel, but probably for most hotels in the Netherlands, their service stops here. In this case the employee of the hotel gave the guests a website where they could buy the soccer game tickets themselves. The hotel wants to give their guests the best possible service, but within limits. Providing this much help is usually not common in the Netherlands.
   
   The guests expected the employees to take care of everything for them. They are used to the fact that an employee is there to help you with whatever you need, that includes arranging tickets for a soccer game. It is inhibitive for them to experience an employee who is not able to help them with things that are actually out of their jurisdiction. But it is also the other way around, which means that it is inhibitive for Dutch hotel employees to provide this much help. They are not used to guests demanding this much service.
   
   The difference between these is probably for the most part the difference in hierarchy. Which means that the hierarchy between employee and guests in the East differs from the hierarchy in the Netherlands. At which the hierarchy in the eastern countries is that customers come first and that the employees provide all the services and help the guest needs. So there is a big hierarchy difference between guest and employee. While in the Netherlands the hierarchy difference between guest and employee is much smaller, and therefore also the amount of services the employees are willing or able to provide.
   
2. Another example was when there were guests visiting the hotel from Israel and they wanted a room with a balcony. Unfortunately this wasn’t possible because but the hotel was completely full, there was only one room and it had no balcony. They wanted this problem solved immediately, but in their hotel that was not possible since they wanted them to move other guests from their room just to give them the room with a balcony.
   
   It might be normal for them that in the place where they arrived all their problems would be solved by the simple fact of being from Israel, but that couldn’t be done there since all the guests have the same value for them and that is something that they don’t understand or don’t have in their culture. They believe that they have the power to send anyone to fulfill the things they want, and with this act they intimidate others, becoming somewhat afraid of what might happen.
   
   In the Netherlands it isn’t so common that they help them as much as they wanted, which is why there was this culture clash between the Israelis and them. In Mexico, on the other hand, it is very common that if you treat the people at the hotel very well, they offer or lend themselves to do you the favors they deem necessary so that you have an excellent experience in the place you are, it depends a lot on how they see you arrive. It’s how they’re going to treat you. At the end of all the Israelis had to take the room without a balcony but they are very upset.

Hofstede Dimensions

Kuwait is an Eastern country. In Kuwait the Power Distance is very high. They have a high score of 90 (out of 100) on this dimension, meaning that it is a society where the less powerful members accept the unequal distribution of power, i.e. the hierarchical order of the society is acknowledged and expected. Their power distance is way higher than in the Netherlands. In the Netherlands the power distance scores 38 out of 100. They have high independence, equal rights and the hierarchy is also low, which means that they don’t strictly follow order because superiors are accessible (Hofstede Insights, No Date). In this case the guests from Kuwait showed that their power distance is high, they are used to the fact that they’re guests, and by that they should be higher in the hierarchy. But because of the low hierarchy and power distance in the Netherlands, the employees were not willing to provide the service the guest wanted.

Kuwait scores low in individualism which means they value long term relationships and family. They have a close group of people around, they help each other and are very loyal. The individualism in the Netherlands is very high. Individuals are expected to take care of themselves (Hofstede Insights, No Date). In this case the guests from Kuwait were expecting the employees of the hotel to help them no matter what. This is a result of the low individualism. But the Dutch employees did not provide this help because they are used to people taking care of their own things.

Lastly, masculinity is higher in Kuwait than in the Netherlands. In the Netherlands not everything is about work. There is a good work/life balance and equality is very important, also at work. In Kuwait there is a little more masculinity which results in the fact that it is important to work hard and be serious about your job (Hofstede Insights, No Date). In this case guests of the hotel expected the Dutch employees to just do what they said, because that’s how it works in their eyes. The employees did not provide that service, because they don’t see that as their job and they don’t see themselves as only help due to equality.

Looking at individualism Israel is a blend of individualism and collectivistic cultures. It’s a culture that values individualism, self-expression, and personal growth. People in this culture may prioritize their own needs and goals, and may not place as much emphasis on group loyalty or tradition. Communication is likely to be open and honest, with people expressing themselves clearly and directly (Hofstede Insights, 2021). This we can see in the miscommunication, the guest prioritized their own needs and goals above the needs and goals from in this case the receptionist and other guests in the hotel. Israel has a blend of masculine and feminine values. It values performance and assertiveness, which are typically associated with masculine cultures. However, it also suggests that showing status through material possessions is also important, which is more characteristic of feminine cultures.

Overall, it can be said that Israel may not fit neatly into either category, and it may be more accurate to describe it as a “balanced” culture (Hofstede Insights, 2021). Although due to the high masculinity the Communication Style Is also very masculine: Israelis tend to communicate in an expressive manner, accompanied with many hand gestures. They often speak quite loudly and at a fast pace, which can give an impression that they are yelling or irritated. However, it is most likely their usual tone of communicating. The last explanation describes the way the guests talked to the receptionist.

Outcome

Every unique situation has a unique outcome, and it is impossible to be trained for each scenario no matter how much experience one might have. Following basic protocol without making anyone uncomfortable is the safest option.

The outcome leads to understanding that one needs to study and understand their surroundings and people’s preferences before making a certain move. Things can only be noticed by observing and learning the differences compared to what one might be used to. Presumptions are harmful and leads to confusing expectations.

The outcome for hierarchy is to understand that not each country or cooperation works the same way and has different ideas of respect. It’s best and safest to respect everyone equally ignoring their post or job title.

The outcome of guest expectations is also quite similar to understanding that customer service is different everywhere and just because you might be used to one doesn’t mean that it is provided everywhere.

Mainly understanding that the outcome of exceeding expectations is undesirable and makes one uncomfortable.

In the end the service is provided and it’s main goal being customer satisfaction but it comes with its limits and boundaries which need to be respected by both sides of the party.

Unfortunately sometimes even after best efforts the outcome might not be favorable and leave a customer upset, but again these differences are on both sides making this experience upsetting for both ends of the party.

Possible Solutions

Understand if what you are demanding is exceeding what is normally expected and in other cases learn and respect the different systems to avoid making one uncomfortable.

What the guests are asking the establishment if it is too much for them, since in The Netherlands it is not customary to do so many things for the guest, you should not always do what the client says and that is fine, but it is difficult to explain it to someone who believes that he is always right and what they says should be done.

With flatter hierarchy an average employee has more responsibilities and engagement in decision-making due to the flatter hierarchy. For management, this has multiple benefits:

1. A greater level of coordination and communication, which can lead to better creativity and innovation.

Listening actively:
Listen closely to what the customer is saying instead of paying attention to the anger behind their words. If you listen actively to the words they say, you can easily determine what’s making them so upset and how to resolve the problem. For example, a customer could walk into the store and say, “Your product stopped working three days after I bought it. I’m really shocked by the poor design.”

Staying calm:
When customers express their emotions, aim to stay calm and manage your own emotions. It helps to take a practical approach to problem-solving rather than a personal one. Typically, a customer’s comments and criticisms are about the product or experience rather than about you as a customer service representative. Allow the customer to voice their concerns without interrupting to show you respect their feelings. When you respond, choose neutral language and validate their feelings if it’s appropriate.

Offering solutions:
Once you understand why the customer feels the way they do, you can offer a solution. If the customer denies your proposed solution, review your internal policies to learn if you can offer something additional to satisfy them. It’s important to meet the customer’s expectations if you can do so within reason. Here are some examples of statements to introduce solutions:

“I know this isn’t how you want to start your day, and I can offer you this solution.”
“There are several ways to resolve this. We can find the one that best suits you.”

“In my experience, this solution is the best way to approach this. Does that seem alright to you?” “I understand your problem, but I’ve handled the same cases before. I can help you.”

If you deliver a message that may be disappointing to the customer, try to counter it with a positive message that still addresses their feelings. For example, you can say, “While I’m unable to issue a full refund, I can give you store credit or make an exchange for a new product.” This may help the customer focus on the positive aspects of the solution and how the organization can help them resolve the issue.

Demonstrate active listening by using the same language your customer is using. You can say something like, “That’s definitely surprising. Let’s check why the product stopped working unexpectedly.” This response recognizes the feelings of the customer without escalating their emotions.

A greater level of coordination and communication, which can lead to better creativity and innovation.

Authors

University of Applied Sciences Amsterdam
Student: Caitlin Thöne (LinkedIn)
Block 2., Semester 1

University of Applied Sciences Amsterdam
Student: Zara Salim (LinkedIn)
Block 2., Semester 1

Kozminski University
Student: Yashwinj Vanjani (LinkedIn)

Tecnologico de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey
Student: Julissa Montijo Quintero (LinkedIn)

The hospitality sector is prone to intercultural challenges, due to the daily interactions with people from all around the world. In this case, we will analyze how intercultural challenges in a Brazilian hotel are managed. The hotel is located in the São Paulo area and is owned by a Brazilian couple. The woman has a lot of contact with the guests, while the husband takes care of the reservations and finances. The hotel once was the couple’s entire house. Now, with some renovations, the couple shares the facilities with their guests. The hotel possesses six rooms to rent and one room for the couple. Furthermore, there is no major division between the hotel and the couple’s personal space, thus sharing and understanding is necessary for it to work.

Throughout the time the hotel has been open, hundreds of guests have checked in and checked out, each with an individual story. This results in different situations in which intercultural challenges appear. Two situations are explained in more detail.

1 – The hotel once received a couple from a state in Brazil called Rio de Janeiro. The guests booked a room for two nights and were expecting to spend a commemorative date there. The owner of the hotel, the woman, made sure to introduce the space and give some touristic advice for the guests to enjoy the town as much as possible, in a very polite and friendly way.

In Brazil, a typical stereotype of people coming from Rio de Janeiro (Cariocas) is that they are very lazy and impertinent. With that in mind, the owner of the hotel experienced actions that exactly matched their stereotype. The guests were unfriendly and demanding, even in off working hours, as explained by the owner. They expected extra services during the night when the kitchen was already closed and was always impolite. With that in mind, it was highly prohibitive for the guests to be that demanding, however, at the same time, it was inhibitive for the owner to deny their requests, since the hotel is small and more informal, and the owner wants to cause the best impression on their guests.

After the two nights, the guests had left and the hotel was able to receive new people with new experiences and stories. Furthermore, on a different occasion explained by the owner, the hotel received another couple from the same state, Rio de Janeiro, and the owners automatically linked their previous experience with the other guests from the same state and were expecting to have a harder time. Surprisingly, the new carioca guests were extremely friendly and understanding, respecting the service hours from the kitchen and the other employees, as well as good communicators with the owners, providing them an entirely different experience.

2 – Around a year ago, the hotel hosted a couple with their 6-year-old kid from Portugal. The owners of the hotel were considering a challenging experience with their potential guests from Europe, because the fact that the owners and visitors share the same language (Portuguese), does not lead to the fact they share the same culture. For this reason, the Brazilian owners looked closely on the situation to recognize potential misunderstandings early on.

For example, these two cultures have different perspectives on what is considered polite. Brazilians are very diverse, but, for the most part, they associate politeness with being friendly and loving, with sharing smiles everywhere. Brazilian social interactions are not direct. They’re not a straight “go from point A to point B”, meaning they possess a high context culture. Generally,  avoid being openly rude, even when it’s necessary, and they often say “yes” when the implied meaning is “no”.  The Portuguese, on the other hand, seems to be much more direct, possessing a low context culture. They’re not afraid to say what you can and cannot do, and they do so with a straight, serious face. They don’t seem to favor putting on a smiling mask to be friendly. Therefore, for Brazilians, those things can come across as very rude.

However, when the Portuguese guests finally arrived, no misunderstandings with politeness whatsoever occurred. All the negative stereotypes from the Portuguese culture were shown untrue. The family spent a wonderful week in São Paulo, treated everyone as their friends, left respectable tips and the kid even prepared a drawing of the hotel with owners portrayed there, therefore, obviously, the owners were pleased and happy. So it appears that stereotypes do not usually meet reality and that individuals do not necessarily behave in the same way, even if they have similar culture.

OUTCOME

In many situations, although coming from the same place and having theoretically the same culture and backgrounds, guests have acted differently and unexpectedly, making it not possible to expect a certain pattern of actions from people coming from the same culture. The managers of the hotel therefore have a few strategies they use to limit cultural misunderstandings and clashes, this is also linked to the underlying value of avoiding uncertainty according to Hofstede. Firstly, learning more about languages and understanding the culture of the guests including stereotype awareness. Secondly, when miscommunication occurs, recognize it early on and communicate openly with the guests to limit negative effects. And most importantly, be open-minded and do not expect the person to act based on their culture, stereotypes of that culture or based on personal previous experiences, because anyone is different and possesses their values and beliefs.

Hofstede Dimensions

https://tcps.institute/cultural_bridges_tool.html

AUTHORS

Raya Schrauwen (LinkedIn)
Dutch Student
Block 2, Semester 1, 2020/2021

Fabio Setti (LinkedIn)
Brazilian Student
Block 2, Semester 1, 2020/2021

Daniil Kravtsov (LinkedIn)
Ukrainian Student
Block 2, Semester 1, 2020/2021

Matthieu Hervé
French student
Block 2, Semester 1, 2020/2021