Barriers in International Communication at Workplace - Research Paper Example

? Barriers in International Communication at Workplace Outline Introduction Barriers in Intercultural Communication at Workplace and Its Impacts The Field of Social Intelligence and Leadership and the Findings of Relevant Research Recommended Strategic Approaches to Remedy the Challenge of Intercultural Language at the Workplace Introduction In every part of the world, people’s ability to communicate has played a very significant role to each and every one among us. Nonetheless, communication is not considerably effective for there is a missing element as integral to communication, that is, the ability of the receiver of the message to understand what that communicated message is all about. This is rather simple if the sender and receiver of the message speak and understand the same language. However, in this day and age of globalization, people from different regions of the world have become so integrated and interconnected in which in the case of workplace, intercultural diversity has flourished. This poses a challenge in the realm of workplace because of language diversity. In the field of social intelligence and leadership, without a doubt, having a multilingual workplace has its very own advantages, for the reason that according to Goleman (2006), social intelligence is the capacity to understand people in order to manage them effectively and act wisely in human relations. However, such also poses a challenge in effective communication since Backman, Baldwin and Cross (2009), decoding a message can come at to a point that it would entirely break. In this regard, the focus of this paper shall delve at exploring the barriers in intercultural communication in the workplace. Specifically, this aims at exploring the impacts of interpersonal challenges it presents. This would shed light on the recommended strategies in order to remedy the challenges of intercultural communication at the workplace. On the one hand, this paper is of significance especially that diversity of culture, language and others has thrived in our society, especially in the workplace. Moreover, effective communication in this diverse society is challenged especially for the parts of those coming from different country of origin like in my case, I come from Saudi Arabia and work in Ministry of Defense with employees with different nationalities and speak different languages other than English. Given this overview, this phenomenon must be understood. Barriers in Intercultural Communication at Workplace and Its Impacts Ethnocentricity results to some people assuming that language, for instance, English is a universal language (Dyers and Wankah, 2001). However, this assumption can be considered as a barrier to effective communication in every part of the world, especially in the institution of workplace, because not all people can speak and understand English smoothly and may need time to process one’s thought first before being able to interpret the meanings of the message correctly. On the one hand, Peltokorpi (2009) suggested that apart from ethnocentricity, jargon and slang serve as barriers as well to effective communication because the members of a particular culture may have developed their distinctive jargon and slang. While it is the case that the members feel at ease using their jargon and slang, the newcomers may possibly not understand the communicated meanings accurately. Such interpersonal challenges to effective communication at the workplace affect not only the individual having difficulty understanding what the conveyed message is all about and the one who speak the message as well, but most especially, these challenges affect the entire institution itself. In the study, “The attitudes toward the culturally different: the role of intercultural communication barriers, affective responses, consensual stereotypes and perceived threat,” Rodgers and McGovern (2002) claimed that the current and most immediate impact to the individuals belonging to a different culture is that they may feel alienated from the rest of the group. Such psychological impact is indeed the most instant impact but is deep – seated as well that could possibly be a major source of demotivation to that individual resulting to poor quality of output at the workplace (Rodgers and McGovern, 2002). On the one hand, as Jandit (2012) suggested, the long term consequences of the interpersonal challenge associated with intercultural communication originate from the individual being victims as they enter the organization. Meanwhile, Tajfel and Turner (1986) stated the case of intergroup categorization, even if trivial, would lead to favoritism of the in – group while discrimination against the out – group. Nonetheless, together with the current conflicts as well as the past conflicts existing between the groups, such strong attachment shown towards the in – group would intensify the behavior. On the one hand, it is the case that when these social identities, the in – group and the out – group, have become prominent, Gallois and Callan (1995) stated that to be expected, these groups will interact with each other mainly on the basis of stereotypes. In addition to that, the tolerance to the mistakes or violations of their social rules would be just less probable (Gallois and Callan, 1995). Apart from that, it is suggested by Rodgers and McGovern (2002) that it is not only the poor quality of work that can be expected from such intercommunication at the workplace but also the non – performance at work. As such, the entire organization would be affected. Instead of maximizing the potential of having a diverse culture and language, the disadvantages are unfortunately optimized and such language diversity will not help in achieving the objective of a certain institution. Social Intelligence and Leadership and Findings of Relevant Research Social intelligence is the capacity to understand people in order to manage them effectively and act wisely in human relations (Goleman, 2006). This also indicates the ability to negotiate complicated social relationships and atmosphere. Hence, the workplace itself must also initially have a trouble – free environment without complex social relationships before dealing with society at large. What the field of social intelligence is all about must basically address the challenges posed by intercultural language barriers. A number of relevant researches suggested that intercultural communication barriers produce conflict at the workplace at both individual and institutional levels. Based on the Gudykunst’s Anxiety and Uncertainty Management theory (1995), language competence will be associated inversely with the level of uncertainty in any interpersonal interaction. As such, this will intensify the tendency of over – estimation of the significance of group membership based on behavior. This uncertainty would lead to lack of trust as well as increased anxiety. As a result, the others would avoid interaction with the members belonging from different groups. Likewise, less interaction of the members of a particular organization affects the company’s performance. As such, good quality work output generally decreases. Hence, it is important to take into consideration the management of communication barriers in any organization. Evidently, the discussed barriers of intercultural communication such as ethnocentricity, jargon, slang, as well as stereotypes, results to negative consequences at the workplace. In a study by Ablonczy-Mih?alyka (no date), it was claimed by 8 out of 10 respondents that cultural differences cause problems in the internal communication at a multi – culture workplace. As a matter of fact, 8 out 10 respondents agree that people with different cultural backgrounds can communicate with difficulties. It is the case that according to Feely and Harzing (2004), the language barriers, hence, do play a significant role in any multilingual group relationship because what they lead to is the problem of miscommunication. Nonetheless, imaginably, the most noticeable manifestation of the language barrier at the workplace can be perceived in the affiliation between the multinational company and its networks. It is often the case that in this sort of relationship, the language competency is a feature (Feely and Harzing, 2004). It will have some proficiency but not enough to be completely relaxed as well as not enough to be totally effective in the communication (Feely and Harzing, 2004). According to Lehman and DuFrene (2010), the senior managers and employees must learn to appreciate a variety of cultures. This means that one must learn to remove his or her own bias towards his or her own culture. Instead of putting one’s judgement towards the different culture, the senior employees and manages must set aside such stereotypes they have in mind. As a result, the other employees would see such as an example for them to follow. Recommended Strategic Approaches to Remedy the Challenge of Intercultural Language at the Workplace In exploring the barriers in intercultural communication of the workplace, ethnocentricity, jargon and slang indeed, work as an obstacle to have an effective communication. Likewise, stereotypes towards the individual members of different culture also function as a hindrance to effective communication. On the one hand, the impacts of these identified language barriers of having a diverse workplace are damaging, not only to the involved member but to the entire institution as well. Such impacts are likewise detrimental in attaining the company’s objectives. In this case, the first recommended approach is that every organization must take into consideration that English is not the universal language. By this means, it should not be assumed that the employees belonging to different cultures and speak different language other than English do initially understand what the communicated message is all about, especially, when the message contains more jargons and slangs. The degree of understanding is not the same for the members of that host country and the members from other countries. Learn to ask if everything is clear so understanding must be improved. While for the members of the different country of origin, it is important to ask for more explanations if things are not clearly understood. Such effective communication needs cooperation too. The second recommendation is for the organization to hold, cultural consciousness training. In this case, the tension of having intercultural language at the workplace can be lessened. The third recommendation is learning to respect the differences of individuals (Kotthoff, 2007) and learn to appreciate a variety of cultures (Lehman and DuFrene, 2010). This means, the stereotypes must be set aside because one must take into consideration that people are not the same. They do not have the same culture. Learning to respect one’s culture will also lead to effective communication at the workplace. References: Ablonczy-Mih?alyka, L. (no date). Workplace discourse between people with different cultural backgrounds. Retrieved on 14th June, 2012 from http://heja.szif.hu/LIN/LIN-081029-A/lin081029a.pdf Backman, K., Baldwin, D., and Cross, C. (2009). The effect of the language barrier on intercultural communication: A case study of educational travel in Italy. Retrieved on 9th June, 2012 from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15313220903042004. Dyers, C. and Wankah, F. (2001). Uncovering and negotiating barriers to intercultural communication at Greenmarket Square, Cape Town’s ‘world in miniature’: An insider’s perspective. Retrieved on 9th June, 2012 from http://perlinguam.journals.ac.za/pub/article/view/10. Feely, A.J. and Harzing, A. (2004). The language barrier and its implication for HQ-subsidiary relationships. 2004 AoM Conference, New Orleans. Gallois, C., and Callan, V. Communication and culture: a guide for practice. Chicester: Wiley, 1995. Goleman, Daniel (2006). Social intelligence: The new science of human relationships. Bantam Books. ISBN 0-553-80352-2. Gudykunst, W. B. “Anxiety/Uncertainty Management (AUM) Theory: Current Status.” In R.L. Wiseman (ed.) Intercultural Communication Theory. Thousand Oaks CA, Sage, 1995, 8-58. Jandit, F. (2012). Intercultural communication. Retrieved on 9th June, 2012 from http://www.sagepub.com/jandt7e/main.htm. Kotthoff, H. (2007). Handbook of intercultural communication. New York. Walter de Gruyter. Lehman, C. and DuFrene, D. (2010). Business communication. New York: Cengage Learning. Peltokorpi, V. (2010). Intercultural communication in foreign subsidiaries: The influence of expatriates’ language and cultural competencies. Retrieved on 9th June, 2012 from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0956522110000254. Rodgers, J. and McGovern. T. (2002). Attitudes toward the culturally different: the role of intercultural communication barriers, affective responses, consensual stereotypes, and perceived threat. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 26(2): 609-631. Retrieved on 9th June, 2012 from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014717670200038X. Tajfel, H., and Turner, J.C. “The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior.” In S. Worchel and W.G. Austin (eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations. Chicago: Nelson-Hall Publishers, 1986, 7-24. Read More