Communication in International Management - Assignment Example

Communication in International Management Communication in International Management Question 3 As European banks and organisationsexpand their national boundaries and go international, a majority of them are making English their official business language. Seven years ago, in 2005, when Germany, France and Spain, merged their aerospace firms into one firm, they not only assigned it an English name – EADS, meaning European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company, but they made English its official language, as well (Blommaert, 2010). In Germany, the government-owned postal service, Deutsche Post World Net, gradually utilises English as its official language. Much smaller firms are doing the same. The elevator maker, in Finland, known as Kone, assumed English in the 70s; Merloni Elettrodomestici, a midsized home appliance producer, in Italy, did so in the mid-90s (Blommaert, 2010). Management meetings at big banks like Credit Suisse in Switzerland, as well as Deutsche Bank, in Germany, are normally in English. Whereas there are many reasons why English has spread so fast globally and within Europe, a majority of these reasons are found on what critics term as econcultural grounds, that is, they are the consequence of the development of a world market, as well as global development in the fields of culture, science and technology and the media (Blommaert, 2010). A number of languages have been utilised all across the world as contact lingos for global trade and communication. In Europe itself, there have been a number of lingua francas as from the Roman times such as Greek, French, Latin, English and German. English, German and French are still widely used in parts of Europe and constitute what scholars refer to as the big languages of Europe (Tietze, 2008). For sure, in its strictest sense, the phrase ‘lingua franca’ appears to be compared to a pidgin in that it is a language with no native speakers. The phrase, English as a Lingua Franca (ELF), is mainly applied in this manner exclusively to refer the use of English between people whose mother tongue is not English. Scholars have added ‘B’ to ELF when it comes to using English in business contexts – Business English Lingua France (BELF) (Tietze, 2008). On to the thesis, this paper focuses on question 3, “implications of using English as a business lingua franca for businesses and native, as well as non-native English speakers.” The use of English The complication of the application of English, as a mother tongue, international language in non-English speaking parts of the world and also as a second language, has been acknowledged by Blommaert (2010), Brannen (2004) and Joseph (2004) and suggestions for transforming Crystal’s (2003) concentric circles structure of world English use to contain this complication have been proposed by Seidlhofer (2005) and more lately by Blommaert (2010) to consider the various, active roles of English in diverse parts of the world. For example, Tietze (2008) argues that in Germany, the Netherlands and Luxembourg, even though English is not the official language, it serves a number of commercial, social, educational and traditional functions, which rationalise classifying these nations as belonging to both Braj Kachru’s ‘outer’ and ‘expanding’ circles. It could likewise be claimed that Denmark and Sweden could gradually be seen as spanning these circles. In addition, the latest succession of 10 more nations to the European Union, in 2004, increased the nations in the ‘expanding circle’. This mobility of Europe’s borders and individuals within them, coupled with rising chances for regional trade, adds to the difficulty of language use across Europe and, without a doubt, provokes the development of a global language or languages. Global firms and international business commerce mainly imply a main need for individuals to converse across the globe, at least at a universally written and verbal level (Seidlhofer, 2005). Multilingual communication and translation are vital, but unless there is a universal language, which everybody conducting global business can converse, the difficulty makes it awkward for cross-border commerce to work. Multilingual organisations, as well those which use something except the de facto international language, will always find it hard to rival with those that utilise a universal cross-border language (Brannen, 2004). They will incur greater transactions costs than firms that use a universal language of communication (Maclean, 2006). Even though, people argue concerning the advantages and disadvantages of the situation, English already is the universal language, the universal language of international commerce. Also, this is not expected to transform any time soon. The matter might not be most favourable, particularly if English is not an executive’s or investor’s strongest language (Blommaert, 2010). Only people born in native English speaking states can consider themselves lucky because they can converse with anyone from any region of the world (Blommaert, 2010). It was a misfortune of timing that English became the leading language in the financial world power when globalisation achieved a vital growth point. Even though, a more enhanced solution exists, it could, by no means, be put into effect at this time, in a practical way, devoid of any world war or a fresh dominant power (Crystal, 2003). For its part, nations such as China have shown more interest in educating hundreds of millions of its citizens to converse in English than in advancing in their native language as a global language (Blommaert, 2010). The diffusion of English is normally perceived as a language problem threatening to overwhelm and substitute European languages, as echoed in policy statements like, if democratic citizenship in Europe is to be globally based, then it is vital to guarantee diversification in language education so that people, in Europe, can communicate in their own languages instead of English. However, what they fail to consider is that it will be a challenge to conduct business with other organizations outside the home country, which do not use their language. On the other hand, Seidlhofer (2005) and other scholars such as Joseph (2004), Branne (2004) and Blommaert (2010) are questioning the notion that English is causing a ‘language problem’ in Europe, as well as the assumption that Europeans have to decide between English and their own native language. As Tietze (2008) claims, someone can talk in German as his or her national language and still use English as his or her European language. Tietze (2008) proposes that people can learn from the nations of Kachru’s ‘Outer Circle’ to incorporate English for their own European aims. Tietze claims that the plurilingualism of the European Union states bears some connections with ex-colonial nations such as Nigeria and India, where English was preserved not due to postcolonial imperialism, but since it would accomplish a useful purpose. Seidlhofer (2005) elaborates on this realistic motivation for utilising English as a global language, seeing it both as effective for global business and idealistic for cross-border communication, as well as mutual understanding. This perception of the appropriation of English for global communication and commerce instead of as a symbol of national preeminence is endorsed more and more not only by North American and European scholars, such as Seidlhofer (2005) and Blommaert (2010) but by scholars in ‘Outer Circle’ nations, such as Brannen (2004) Crystal (2003), Joseph (2004) and Tietze (2008), as well. Seidlhofer (2005) claims that this change signals a new era in research of the international functions of English where the notion of functional realism gradually more appears to be substituting the previous era of ‘linguistic imperialism’. This pragmatic viewpoint is normally echoed in business and management. For example, remarking on the option to use English, as a business lingua franca in the global engineering and telecoms organisation, Siemens AG, based in Germany, Bernhard Welschke, who is charged with heading European Policies, claimed that German firms are extremely pragmatic/practical in that they value a unique language for business, even though it might not be their own. Likewise, they endorse the perception that the use of English by organisations is mainly practical instead of ideological. The importance of English in non-English speaking states and in global business has long been acknowledged in the business field. This is evident in the size and cost of business English language, as well as cultural training. The significance of successful international communication is stressed in much of the sources used in the article. It is maybe much better to have average technical knowledge and outstanding global business communication skills compared to having brilliant technical knowledge and meager global business communication skills (Blommaert, 2010). Proper communication establishes good relationships, high morale, profit and increased productivity. Poor communication, on the other hand, can cause disorganisation, loss of profit and waste of raw materials (Blommaert, 2010). In the area of business language teaching, there have been efforts, although limited, to explain and teach some kind of ‘international English’ for commerce learners. One instance of this is ‘Offshore English,’ a phrase coined by the Canning Training Organisation to explain the kind of English that they propose native English speakers should use in order to be more readily comprehensible by non-native English speakers. Likewise, Joseph (2004) writes how the Swedish telecoms heavy weight, Ericsson, attempted to create its own account of global English, known as ‘Ericsson English’, which wanted to offer a limited range of language structures and vocabulary devoid of any loss of accuracy. There are, for sure, other cases of limited varieties of English that have been developed for very specific global aims, such as ‘Airspeak’, which means Air Traffic Control, as well as ‘Policespeak,’ which means binational emergency and police service assistance at the Channel Tunnel (Tietze, 2008). However, these were formed to serve extremely few communicative purposes not like the flexibility and breadth of functions needed of an international language or business lingua franca (Tietze, 2008). In linguistics, there has been growing interest in the role of culture and language in global business communication and particularly in European business. Nevertheless, in spite of the wide variety of uses of English all over Europe and its unquestionable spread, particularly for global business purposes, there appears, as Seidlhofer (2005) argues, little corpus-based study of how English is normally utilised for global business communication in the whole of Europe. Nor is there much literature on how European businesspeople feel about its application. It is with these problems in mind that the latest research study is aimed at shading further light on the application of English as a widespread language of global business (Tietze, 2008). To further classify this matter, English works best in even nations that are not native English speakers (Crystal, 2003). Even if it might be as throbbing sometimes to nonspeakers native speakers as it is hard to native speakers, the easy global version of English normally works. It has limited punctuation, no apostrophes, interchangeable homophone spellings, limited vocabulary, which is normally misused, less feeling and a little color (Crystal, 2003). It is essential and serviceable. For almost all international organisations, anywhere they are headquartered – and even for tourists, anywhere they tour – English is the lingo of international relations (Tietze, 2008). It might be a crude method of bringing the commercial world together, but it is a start. In the corporate world, firms seeking to grow multinationally have to locate ways to speak across such distinction in cost-effective techniques. Many organisations have transformed their business languages to the universal tongue of English in attempts to rationalise communication and also avoid leaving firm affiliates out of the loop (Tietze, 2008). Responding to this matter, almost a billion people globally are learning the language, many of them in anticipation that their lingual skills will enhance their income or land them a much better job (Joseph, 2004). States also comprehend that an English-speaking labour force can make their economies integrate, as well as become more aggressive on the global marketplace; in increasing numbers, a number of states are diverting funds into government-funded lingual education curriculums from nursery school onwards (Crystal, 2003). Nations such as India, with their call centers the most passé cases of rising world achievement through English, as well as other English-speaking countries, have gained from their English speaking labour forces, granting them a clear-cut edge in the global marketplace for the provision of services (Crystal, 2003). The English language is spoken and taught all round the world, persuading many to support the idea of English as a Lingua Franca, a relatively global language, which can be utilised as a means of communication among individuals of diverse linguistic backgrounds. The urge for some kind of global lingua franca is more imperative now than ever before, thanks to globalisation. The magnitude and rate of global cross-cultural interaction has gone up in every realm, from politics to pop culture. Eventually, people now should be able to interact on a wider scale, with a broad variety of individuals. The ready dominance of English all over the world has provoked a lot of people to propose the notion that English is a lingua franca. Even though, there are surely other alternatives available, an English lingua franca appears like the sensible option for two main reasons (Tietze, 2008). First, English is the most popular language, used by people of diverse backgrounds all over the world. English is also, at the moment, ranked as the most applied internet language, even though this might change in the future. A second stance is the notion that native English-speakers, particularly Americans and Britons, are far less expected than others to learn a second language. It was about a decade ago that the United States and Britain, at last, began to accept its ineffectiveness in foreign language instruction. Moreover, English-language schooling systems have been implemented all over the globe, making an English lingua franca the finest bet for a future international communication system. Therefore, non-native English speakers or organisations, which linger in endorsing English as their universal language today, stand to lose in the global marketplace as they can only relate well to people who speak their native language (Joseph, 2004). Using other language for communication apart from English makes a firm seem traditional (Crystal, 2003). This is thanks to the American and European pop cultures. According to these cultures, English has been recognised as a feeling of “hipness,” defining a global, alluring elite tradition (Tietze, 2008). When requested to clarify the common use of English in adverts outside of English-speaking nations, a majority of my informers classified these fashionable traits as more vital compared to the wide addressees of English (Joseph, 2004). Today’s business adverts are centered, not on sponsoring the quality of the good, but on communicating a lifestyle, attitude, or experience, which are appealing to their target audience. Numerous advertising firms make the most of lingual imagery, utilising English when they wish to communicate modernism, progressivism and globality (Crystal, 2003). Clothing giant such as Esprit are notable in this department, with some of their latest tagline such as “The World is our Culture”. Esprit’s adverts have splashed across ads all across the globe in the English language (Joseph, 2004). Therefore, what this means is that a majority of the world’s market will turn into individuals or business that they can use the elite language while communicating with them. Hence, non-native English speakers will have it rough if they opt to continue conducting business in their native language (Joseph, 2004). Non-native English speakers and businesses are going to a further develop websites in English languages in order to attract more clients, native and non-native English speakers. Examples of such websites can be seen from Russian- and Chinese-based nations (Crystal, 2003). This might raise the running cost of a firm, but it will also go a long way to attract more clients to the firm. References Blommaert, J 2010, The sociolinguistics of globalization, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Brannen, M, 2004, When Mickey loses face: recontextualisation, semantic fit, and the semiotics of foreignness, Academy of Management Review vol. 29, no. 4, pp 593-616. Crystal, D, 2003, English as a global language, 2nd edn, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Joseph, J 2004, Language and identity: national, ethnic, religious, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke. Seidlhofer, B 2005, English as a lingua franca ELT Journal vol. 59, no. 4, pp 339-341. Tietze, S 2008, International management and language, Routledge, London. Read More