Diversity of Culture in the Workplace - Literature review Example

Running Head: Reflective Journal Reflective Journal: Diversity [Client’s Name] [Affiliation] The world has changed much in the last 50 years than it did in the last five centuries. Age-old barriers were broken down, beliefs that have long been considered the truth were revealed to be untruthful, technologies that were once considered fictions turning into realities, and business possibilities that were once non-existent can now be managed. Indeed the world has changed. One of the most noticeable changes that happened in the business world is how organizations became more diverse. As the market became more diverse, organizations became more compelled to take advantage of a diverse workforce to achieve their goals and objectives (Fink, Pastore & Riemer, 2003). Business organizations everywhere are becoming more integrated in terms of gender, race, and expertise. In fact, workplace homogeneity becomes very rare to find nowadays. Workplace diversity is not only prompted by the rapid technological advances of communication and transportation, search for economic stability, or the prevalence of globalization but also through various sociopolitical changes that prompted governments to implement policies that allow diversity to penetrate business organizations (Kochan et al, 2002). For example, Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act eliminates discrimination in the workplace; Executive Order 11246 allows affirmative actions to take place in government contracts; building of railroads, fast trains, and better airports brings people to economically prosperous places to find work or to tourist spots. The growing need of businesses to expand its market has also paved way for cultural diversity. Big corporations started operating on an international scale, bringing workforce with different expertise and cultural background to a location (or setting) where they have to integrate to achieve the goals. Not only that, interaction with the equally diverse market has also become as frequent as ever. All these factors have helped changed the business environment and eventually the world. While the positive changes are undeniable, there are also negative long-term changes that have surfaced eventually. This paper details the observation as well as my reflection towards the positive and negative consequences of diversity of culture. Business and Diversity The transition of businesses from a homogenous workplace to a workplace that caters a workforce coming from a very diverse background did not come very fast or very easy. Workers find it very difficult to work along with people they do not usually associate with. Adapting to the culture, perspective, work ethics, and the views of the people that do not belong to their own race, gender, or society is very difficult for individuals (Marx, 1999). Some may even find working with people apart from their social classes unacceptable which often results in workplace conflicts and management concerns. In most cases, these conflicts lead to unproductive and counter-productive behaviors that bar the organization from achieving its goals and objectives. Race Racial discrimination and racial preference are among the most common source of workplace conflict. Even with the massive attempt of workplace management to quell race-related issues, sparks can turn into flames when dealing with highly diverse workforces. Individuals with different views, perspectives, and origins typically polarize. This polarity has strong, usually negative effects, towards how individuals perceive and react to the organization and its goals (Mowday & Sutton, 1993). As individuals polarize and separate into in-groups and out-groups, achieving the goals and objectives of the organization became dependent on this polarity as well, prompting management to strategically deal with the issue of workplace diversity to bring out the best in people despite the differences (Child, 1975). Racial differences are often exhibited in workplace in-groups and out-groups. Conflicting sociocultural perspectives almost always lead to non-cooperative behavior which in turn affects organizational processes. Individuals who do not understand each other and those who do not find common grounds to start from may rub each other in the wrong way, creating discord and chaos in the workplace, and eventually slowing down the organization from efficiently and effectively attaining its goals. Gender Society regards gender as the prototype of the expression of essence an individual makes for himself or herself defined by gender roles and gender displays (West & Zimmerman, 2008) which is gained through constant and repetitive interaction with other people and the society in general (Hollander, 2001). The more an individual interacts with a society that differentiates one gender from the other, the more likely the individual will mold himself or herself to the roles that the society insist they follow which in turn makes social definition of gender true in every sense of the word. Societies have various reasons why societies held their views towards gender and gender roles – political struggle, social hierarchies, etc – and all of these reasons have been valid enough to cause strong pressure to conform to the gender roles defined by the society. The more an individual departs from these definitions through the establishment of his or her identity not necessarily that detailed by the society, the more he or she will find it hard to get acceptance and even respect from the society (Hollander, 2001). For example, Japanese males are generally not comfortable working with female superiors because their culture gives strong emphasis on the subjective role of women. American women on the other hand may find this notion offensive and may perceive this as an insult to her competence. On the other hand, conforming to the socially-defined gender roles can lead an individual to uneventful ending as he or she becomes just like everybody else that needs to follow the socially-defined strictures and formalities required of their gender. In other words, individuals are trapped within the system created and honed by societies for generations and there is no way for them to successfully elude the pressure exerted by such dogma than to play their roles and play it right. Otherwise, members of their societies can easily mark them and pay close attention to their mistakes, putting more pressure on appropriate points until one has to give in and begin conforming to the gender roles defined by the respective societies they revolve. Personal Reflections There were times in the organization I was working with that racial prejudice is very apparent, even if the management discourages its employees from holding such biases. I remembered the times where White people do not want to be involved in workplace projects where Blacks and Hispanics are involved. Whites do not consider the competence of their colored workmates and the Colored individuals on the other hand treat the Whites with hostility. These scenarios were counter-productive to the organization as a whole since no work is completed and the people involved in certain projects do not see each other eye to eye. Even neutral parties such as me are forced to take sides, especially if the conflict involves workplace principles like those pertaining to salaries and benefits. In the end, the company was forced to replace its workers in order to achieve its goals without racial issues. The company thought that its operations can be maximized if it would be able to take away conflicting parties apart from each other. This is an example of an un-strategic approach to resolving diversity-related workplace issue (Johns, 2006). Gender roles in the workplace are not easily accepted as well. Men gossip everytime a woman gets promoted for some positions, even if these women are competent enough to manage the whole organization. I have had experienced men talking about how they think the newly promoted Engineering Supervisor was able to achieve her position without giving due credit to her achievements as well as her credentials. They thought that the woman was able to get the position by using her charm and beauty to influence the decision of the Board to raise her position. Because of this wrong perception, they give the woman superior a hard time doing her job because they do not think she is competent. On the other hand, the woman superior found it hard to implement her plans for the organization because some of her manpower does not respect her position. However, not all organizations I worked with share the same fate. There are also organizations that were able to deftly, if not perfectly, deal with their diversity issues and took advantage of its highly diverse workforce to meet its goals. Working with a multinational organization has changed my perspective on workplace diversity as the organization walked me through the process of how they manage their people. The organization employs people from the various countries where they operate and make use of the cultural and social perspective of these workers to gain a better understanding of the market. The knowledge and information these organizations get from its workers are then applied to the market. A more specific example is on how Nissan is able to understand the different needs of its various markets. Giant corporations operating in various countries – and thus various cultures – are very careful in addressing issues on cultural differences. Companies like Nissan who have training and manufacturing facilities in various countries worldwide juggle with diversity issues within its domain every now and then. They are confronted with cultural differences that exist in its daily processes particularly when the methods employed in Japan is being transmitted and implemented in America. One of the many aspects of Nissan that experience diversity-related problems, or at least diversity-related tensions, is the training department. Nissan understands the fact that customers around the globe have varying expectations of the Nissan name and service according to their various needs (Nissan, 2008). In the end, the need to succeed with a culturally diverse workforce lies in the ability of the organization to facilitate effective communication within its domains; to encourage understanding and respect of individual culture and practices; and to be able to motivate the workers to work together to achieve a common good, transcending barriers such as race and gender. I believe that the ability to understand culturally diverse background lies in one’s exposure to these cultural backgrounds, their lack of subjectivity and biases towards certain, albeit bizarre, cultural practices and the patience to understand and learn about certain cultures are essential in achieving cultural harmony. The more objectively I assess other cultures, the more likely it is that I get along with people from this culture. Part of the successful integration process is the knowledge I obtain from these cultures whether by experience or by reading about them. For example, cultures which I am familiar with through Hofstede’s cultural dimensions are relatively easy to get along with because I know how people from this culture act and behave in particular situations. Consequently, I also know how to position my cultural profile beside theirs to achieve the lowest level of conflict possible. Diversity and Communication Communication plays a big part in human lives as humans interact with fellow humans and express themselves in various ways. The significant contributions of communication in the human society are made apparent by the highly developed societies man has created and maintained for many centuries. However, as advances in technology and communication became pronounced and the progress of globalization and immigration became apparent, the communication process is threatened to be altered as diversity gets into the picture. Diversity is defined as the mosaic of people who bring a variety of background, styles, perspectives, values and beliefs as assets to the society with which they interact (JIC, 2008). In the last few decades, the global community has become more culturally integrated due to the increasing importance of demographic, legislative, and economic factors that bring people together to achieve a higher plane of integration. Global communities are no longer made up of single unified group of people as modern societies are composed of people from broad range of cultural, national, ethnic, and religious beliefs that the simplistic view of achieving a unified society has become difficult to attain. As cultural diversity penetrated the various aspects of the human societies, new types of issues and challenges began to emerge and take form. Most people, including me, avoid conflict in a culturally diverse setting by keeping silent about their thoughts and playing nice to the people he meets. Unknowingly though, tension is build up inside us that awaits the right trigger, and all hell breaks lose. Most of the diversity-related conflicts in any organization stems from the fact that one group does not, fails to, and have prejudices with the communication styles of people from other cultures, ethnicity, and race (Chow & Crawford, 2004). For example, Americans may find it okay to address older persons in the office but on the same positional level by their first name while Japanese may find it impolite. Another example is Japanese could be tolerant to the lateness of fellow Japanese during meetings but Americans and other Europeans may find the delay offensive. Because of the lack of information about how other cultures in the organization communicate conflicts can easily arise. In the absence of conflict, culture shock occurs. One particular situation where I am in a deep culture shock was the moment I met my first Chinese man. I have seen a lot of Chinese on television and I thought they are the cool type who would easily punch my nose and make me bleed at a wrong glance. Apart from their martial arts expertise, I believed that Chinese people are very similar to me. I feel shocked when a conversation with an international Chinese student revealed that they do not believe in God; that they believe that they make things happen on their own. I did not expect this kind of perception in life, not with the Chinese and so it took me a while to process everything inside my head. In retrospect, I could say that in order for me to accept the reality about the theological belief of every Chinese, I went through the various stages identified by Bennett. I realized that I told them I respect their views and proceed to deny the difference of perspectives in order to avoid conflict. Almost instantaneously, I have to defend my belief against their belief. When I can not resolve the difference, I came to a point where I denied any connection with Chinese people, branding everyone of them as atheist. Knowing that my attempt to internalize the big difference in our views, I realized that I just have to mute the difference in cultural perspective and focus on the good sides of being friends with Chinese people in order to lessen the strain in our communal relationship. However, this attempt is very hard to do and takes a lengthy process. In order to deal with this problem and move forward to more important matters to resolve in the organization, it is imperative that learning the various communication styles of each ethnic/racial groups must be put forward. Getting everyone acquainted with various communication styles that exist in the organization would make them more aware of the negative (or positive) impacts their communication style has on the individual in particular (Kerr, 1975) and on the organization in general resulting to a more sensitive communication process from both parties (Johns, 2006). Hall’s Proximity Theory Why do people have a hard time getting through the different culture even if they are intellectually open for possibilities of integration? Why is it that there are always outsiders to any culture and regardless of their efforts to fit in, they just can’t? The concept of High-Low Context explains this very problem. Edward Hall has classified the complexities one associates with the society by High and Low contexts (Brown, 2007). High Cultural Contexts are situations where people from the same culture have interacted with each other for over a long period of time that most social norms and civil conventions are no longer explained because of the deeply-rooted familiarity with the practice (Hall, 1966). A very good example of a high-context environment is when carrying firearms are considered a norm. Low Cultural Context on the other hand refers to the many connections between and among people but on shorter durations, making people observe social rules, norms, and conventions. More often than not, people not behaving according to the low context may be frowned upon (Hall, 1966). For example, one is not expected to fart loudly on a busy airport. Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions The presence of various social and organizational issues associated with the interracial interaction has become more pronounced recently and there are various social movements that aimed to solve these even before things get worse. However, Geert Hofstede argued that there is no universal method to address the issues of cultural diversity across the globe because things are just so relative. Instead of proposing a clean-cut solution for cultural diversity, Hofstede presented dimensions by which cultural differences are classified. The five categories are: small vs. large power distance index, individualism vs. collectivism, masculinity vs. femininity, uncertainty avoidance, and long vs. short term orientation. These cultural dimensions serve as a demonstration that cultural groupings affect the behavior of societies and organizations across time and space (Hofstede, 1997). Power distance is the degree of inequality among the people in a certain racial community that they perceive normal; Individualism vs. collectivism is the degree by which people feel they have to take care for, or be taken cared of, by their immediate relatives; masculinity vs. femininity is the degree by which gender dominates in a particular culture; uncertainty avoidance is the degree by which the people in a country prefer structured or unstructured situations; and long vs. short term orientation is the degree by which the people of a certain country promotes values that have long term or short term effects on their lives. A diverse community can be categorized into the five Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions according to which responses and reactions they are inclined to take in certain circumstances. Some examples are: China has the highest tendency to group invest for the future (long vs. short term orientation) with US on the 17th place; USA, Australia, and UK ranks the highest (in order) in individualism signifying a more individualistic approach and loose bonds of the society; and East Africa has scored relatively high on its power distribution index, which means that East Africans give high emphasis on respecting people with power compared to the rest of its scores on cultural dimensions. Conclusion Effective and successful organizations are organizations that are able to achieve their goals and objectives despite issues that may have presented critical challenges. The success and effectiveness of an organization is gauged in various ways, some of these ways being financial growth, diversity of investments, longevity, reputation, and stock performance (Child, 1975). From a sociological perspective, an organization’s success and effectiveness is measured by how well it handles social issues within the framework of the organization – be they self-generated or prompted by external factors - that threatens the stability of the organization. Handling issues on an individual level can be an easy feat for organizations as precepts have usually been established due as these issues arose in the past. Dealing with issues involving social networks within the organization is another matter, however, particularly if such issues can have dire consequences for the company in the long run. This makes understanding how social networks affect organizational behavior and effectiveness necessary. Hall’s theory coupled with Hofstede’s assertion of the five cultural dimensions bring forth a better and thorough understanding of how the intercultural society operates, invariably showing plausible solutions to the communication issues associated with intercultural communication processes. Hall’s High-Low context demands that one has to know about his own place in an intercultural society and act appropriately towards it in accordance to the existing/practiced norms while Hofstede’s cultural dimension asserts that one needs to know how the society he is currently in operates in order to avoid serious conflicts. With a culturally diverse society, tensions that root from biases, discrimination, and prejudices is common. Under these circumstances, a leader or manager should be beyond the trivial issues and should be an epitome of the kind of employee he wants to have in his organization. To effectively do so, an individual must be able to be the role model and effectively impart his values and virtues to the rest of his immediate community through the aid of the two theories provided. Brown, N. (2007). Edward Hall: Proxemic Theory. Center for Spatially Integrated Social Science. Accessed from http://www.csiss.org/classics/content/13 Child, J. (1975 ). "Managerial and organizational factors associated with company performance--part II: A contingency analysis." Journal of Management Studies, 12: 12-27. Chow, I.H.S, Crawford, R. (2004). Gender, Ethnic Diversity, and Career Advancement in the Workplace: A Social Identity Perspective. Society for the Advancement of Management. SAM Advance Management Journal. Retrieved online from http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-13453854_ITM on August 7, 2009 Fink, J., Pastore, D. & Riemar, H. (2003). Managing Employee Diversity: Perceived Practices and Organizational Outcomes in NCAA Dvision III Athletic Departments. Sports Management Review. Number 6, 147-168. Hall, E. (1966). The Hidden Dimension. Garden City, New York. Doubleday. Hollander, J.A. (2001). Doing “Studs”: The performance of gender and sexuality on late-night television. In M.S. Kimmel & M.A. Messner (Eds.), Men’s lives (pp. 477-493). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon Hofstede, G (1997) Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, Retrieved online from http://www.geert-hofstede.com/ on August 7, 2009 Johns, G. 2006. The essential impact of context on OB. Academy of Management Review, 31, 386-408. Journal of Intercultural Communication. (October 2008). Retrieved online from http://www.immi.se/intercultural on August 7, 2009 Kerr, S. 1975. On the folly of rewarding A, while hoping for B. Academy of Management Journal, 18, 4, 769-783. Kochan, T., Bezrukova, K., Ely, R., Jackson, S., Joshi, A., Jehn, K., Leonard, J., Levine, D., Thomas, D. (2002). The Effects of Diversity on Business Performance: Report of the Diversity Research Network. Lorber, J. (2007). “Night to his day”: The social construction of gender. In V. Taylor, N. Whittier, & L.J. Rupp (Eds.), Feminist frontiers (7th ed., pp. 41-56). Boston; McGraw-Hill.  Martin, E. (2009) The egg and the sperm: How science has constructed a romance based on stereotypical male-female roles.  In A.L. Ferber, K. Holcomb & T. Wentling (Eds.),Sex, gender, and sexuality (pp. 248-254). NY: Oxford. (Reprinted from Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 16, 1991, pp. 485-501)  Marx, E. (1999). Breaking through Culture Shock: What you Need to Succeed in International Business. Nicholas Brealy, London. Pp 2-19. Mowday, R.T., And Sutton, R.I. 1993. Organizational behavior: Linking individuals and groups to organizational contexts. Annual Review of Psychology, 44, 195-229. Nissan Corporation. 2008. Making the Most of Cultural Diversity. Retrieved online from http://www.nissan-global.com/EN/COMPANY/DIVERSITY/CULTURE/index.html on August 7, 2009 West, C., & Zimmerman, D.H. (2008). Doing gender. In M.S. Kimmel & A. Aronson (Eds.), The gendered society reader (3rd ed., pp. 147-164). NY: Oxford. (Reprinted from Gender and Society, 1,1987, pp.125-151)   Read More