English as the Lingua Franca of the Business World - Essay Example

English as the Lingua Franca of the Business World: Implications for Management, and Native and Non-Native English Speakers Introduction Nowadays, it is generally recognised that English is the lingua franca of global business. Many businesses prefer English as their official language. Most international companies conduct their businesses in English. Even though only a small number of people across the globe use English as their official language, English is widely recognised as the lingua franca of the business world due to its broad business-related terminologies (Dudley-Evans & St. John, 1998, p. 5). Because of the ever intensifying forces of globalisation, the value of communication is powerfully driving the development of a single business language that would be easy and understandable to all. For companies based in English-speaking societies, using English to coordinate and control business activities across the globe is less problematic. Yet, implementing a global language for the whole company is difficult for companies based in Asian or Latin Europe societies; however, even in these companies, requiring a language besides English as the international business lingua franca remains problematic (Garzone & Llie, 2007, p. 28). This essay discusses the implications of English as the lingua franca of the business world for the management, and native and non-native speakers of English. The chosen business genre is negotiation. English as the Lingua Franca of the Business World Lingua franca is a language or expression that non-native speakers can use to effectively transfer information or exchange ideas with other non-native speakers. English as a lingua franca is defined by Firth (1996 as cited in Koester, 2010, p. 123) as: ... a ‘contact language’ between persons who share neither a common native tongue nor a common (national) culture, and for whom English is the chosen foreign language of communication (p. 123). In order to explain business communications in the context of lingua franca, the concept of Business English as a Lingua Franca (BELF) was developed (Koester, 2010, p. 123). The increasing significance of English as Lingua Franca (EFL) is caused by a variety of occurrences. These involve the broader application of English as a global business language, English becoming a leading Internet language, the growing population of international students, and the continuous development of information and communication technologies (ICTs) (Bargiela-Chiappini, 2000, p. 311). Nowadays, EFL is the prevailing linguistic system that fulfils a need for communication. Even though workforce diversity is essential to businesses across the globe, international employees have to openly, clearly, and effectively communicate with one another. In order to cope with the intensifying global competition, an increasing number of European companies are implementing English as their official corporate language. Thus, culturally and linguistically diverse employees can communicate with one another. Similarly, in numerous Asian societies, English is generally accepted as the official language of business (Bargiela-Chiappini, 2000, p. 458). According to Kranich (2011), a particular explanation for the dominance of English as a business language in many societies is that the language rules of English is easier to follow/learn or less complicated than that of other languages. Generally, ICTs and the Internet, with their intense and powerful stress on English, is another reason for the eventual emergence of English as the global business language. The connection between business and the English language have been strong even in the past. The implementation of a uniform business language in multinational corporations (MNCs) nowadays has been defended in different ways: to build an environment of belongingness and commonality within the organisation, to eliminate tedious translations, to reduce costs, and to enable effective internal communication system between foreign subsidiaries (Bargiela-Chiappini, 2009, pp. 269-270). Corporate lingua franca is defined by Piekkari and colleagues (2005 as cited in Bargiela-Chiappini, 2009, p. 270) as an “administrative managerial tool” (p. 270) that is based on the necessity of managing and coordinating business activities globally. However, this does not suggest that communication or exchange of information between businesses and people is uncomplicated. Even though there is an official language used by everyone, it does not automatically imply that the language is similarly understood by everyone, especially by those who belong to different linguistic contexts. Expressions and terminologies in a particular language vary from culture to culture. For instance, English UK is different from American English, particularly with regard to colloquial terminologies. The situation becomes even more difficult when people come from different cultural and linguistic backgrounds. Therefore, it is essential that analysis of EFL is performed on both spoken and written interactions to find out which genres are present, in order to identify important dissimilarities and certain communicative intentions. For instance, there could be particular communication elements shared by all business letters such as the opening and closing remarks, but they have different communicative intentions. On the contrary, negotiations and meetings are usually classified under one genre. It would seem that a meeting in an organisation may have different intentions like group/individual presentation, brainstorming, reporting, or decision making (Dudley-Evans & St. John, 1999, p. 63). On the other hand, when a meeting is conducted between delegates of two or more different organisations the meeting will most likely be a negotiation. The meeting could function as a round-table for anticipating or predicting the standpoint of the other party and going over or evaluating the occurrences that are essential to the corporate relationship between the two parties. Negotiations nowadays are no longer the ‘cut-and-thrust’ type—aggressive and competitive—but more of a cooperative communication (Dudley-Evans & St. John, 1999, p. 63). According to Firth (1995), negotiations occur in numerous settings, like “offices, committee rooms, marketplaces, consultancy rooms, shops, used car lots” (p. 6). According to Dudley-Evans and St. John (1999), sales negotiation or bargaining in business does have definite and apparent intentions and could be regarded a genre. Several studies support the capacity of language alternation or code switching in assisting communication in business negotiations. The findings of these studies demonstrate that code switching in spoken communications facilitates effective multicultural communications in business negotiations. For instance, Charles (2002 as cited in Garzone & Llie, 2007, p. 290) reviews a study on the negotiation process between Swedes and Finns. According to the study, language choice is very practical and situation-oriented. Charles (2002 as cited in Garzone & Llie, 2007) shows that the business negotiations examined “seem to be a mixture of Swedish and English” (p. 290). Other researchers report that the application of various languages in business negotiations nowadays may strengthen communication. Also, Poncini (2003 as cited in Garzone & Llie, 2007, pp. 290-291) studied the use of various languages during intercultural negotiations performed mostly in English, demonstrating how this technique can fulfil practical reasons and more commonly enables the formation of commonalities. Mitchell (2000) reported that most studies on language have been focused on written texts, but spoken communications are important to business. Furthermore, only few of these studies have taken into account communication between two non-native speakers, even though this is the interaction that prevails globally. Hence there are, up to now, no specific basic expressions, vocabulary, and grammar for business English. Implications of English as Lingua Franca (EFL) for Management, and Native and Non-Native Speakers With the global expansion of Anglo-American businesses and the growth of EFL it is to be predicted that the rules of business English will have an effect on other linguistic groups. Since the global expansion of EFL has not yet broken down cultural borders, it is crucial to use the ‘cultural filter’—explains all the aspects that influence how individuals view things and how they respond to the behaviours or actions of other people—if a genre is to play an identical role in different cultural situations (Kranich, 2011, pp. 209-210). Communication approaches that are effective in one language community may be viewed as doubtful or weak in another. This is illustrated by Bottger (2007 as cited in Kranich, 2011, p. 210) in his example of a manager’s statement for a culturally and linguistically diverse British-Dutch firm (Kranich, 2011, p. 210): [...] We need to formulate a corporate vision to communicate to everyone involved where the journey is leading. When we formulate these texts in English, they need to convey a lot of emotions, they must be easy to remember, and they must reflect how everything in a company is tied up with values. Yet when we translate them into German, the people in our company who speak tend to be highly sceptical of emotionally charged texts as these [...] This example shows that even strongly related language cultures such as English and German have maintained their own unique language choices. Therefore, one of the most important issues that have to be addressed here is the implications of EFL for management, and native and non-native speakers. Similar to the issues of cultural diversity, issues of language diversity also influences international management. Although English has become the global business language, with nearly all major MNCs conducting their management activities in English across the globe, it is still imperative for international managers to have a practical understanding of the language of the host societies. International managers have to learn the languages of their colleagues and customers if they want their business relationships to thrive. However, in spite of its establishment as a global business language, there are wide-ranging disparities in the manner English is used across the globe. Quite massive are the disparities that they may be regarded as different ‘dialects’ of a language. For instance, a particular management consulting company in Hong Kong has found out multiple different dialects of English (e.g. Hong Kong English, Chinese English, American English, etc) (Mitchell, 2000, p. 69). Therefore, even though English is now the global business language, international managers are still confronted with differences in language, and they have to manage these diversities efficiently. The core composition of a language influences business negotiations. For example, in English the verb normally appears next to the subsequent position in a statement. On the contrary, in German a speaker has the option of putting the primary verb at the last part of the statement if a previous helping verb is placed. This difference in grammar structure raises a huge problem for the parties in business negotiations (Silkenat, Aresty, & Klosek, 2009, p. 145). The negotiation approach of native speakers of English is usually defensive and interruptive. Non-native English speakers’ negotiation style is different. This issue is apparent when adopting the language itself. For example, negotiators who are native German speakers do not want to be interrupted when they speak English for they are used to the German negotiation style (Silkenat et al., 2009, p. 145). Therefore, English as a lingua franca of the business world does not only affect management, but also native and non-native speakers. Language is obviously a huge challenge for global businesses. Almost all of them adopt English as their official corporate language; but language may also cause conflicts in communication. A non-native speaker of English who speaks English in business settings is regarded as communicating with its proficiency in the language; nevertheless, the fact that individuals’ diverse cultural backgrounds influence the language is usually overlooked. Workers of one multinational company revealed the problems encountered in understanding the English of each other in spoken interactions (Bargiela-Chiappini, 2009, p. 272). A number of studies found out that the difficulties were generated by non-native and native speakers. The complex language of the native speaker may be difficult to understand for a non-native speaker and may result in misinterpreted nonverbal actions in multicultural business negotiations. A different issue was discovered in a merger of a Finnish and Swedish firm where the common language used was Swedish. Numerous Finnish workers thought they were denied of any authority. Surprisingly, some of these workers were pleased when the official corporate language was replaced by English, making both Swedish and Finnish employees non-native speakers (Bargiela-Chiappini, 2009, p. 272). As an increasing number of businesses begin to expand globally, numerous business negotiations occur in neither the mother tongue of the party and English is usually the preferred the language. Furthermore, the number of non-native English-speaking negotiators currently surpasses the population of native speakers. For global firms, the language proficiency of their non-native speakers is of substantial value to guarantee effective negotiation with their business associates (Silkenat et al., 2009, p. 148). Business negotiation between non-native English speakers is important to applied linguists who focus on the functioning and mechanism of language in actual settings. Because of the value of language, it can be useful for an international manager to learn the language of his/her colleagues and subordinates. Learning to speak a language proficiently is not easy and not always achievable, but managers handling a culturally diverse workforce should learn the fundamental features of the language of other cultural communities. The emergence of English as the lingua franca of the business world creates a particular advantage for native English speakers, but this is also accompanied by setbacks. Non-native English speakers usually learn different languages, including English, and this can offer them communication leverage since they can communicate quite effectively with others from a different linguistic background. On the contrary, native English speakers could be confined to the English language that non-native speakers use and hence may have to depend mostly on interpreters and translators (Mitchell, 2000, p. 75). Native English speakers may also think that they can survive, manage, or get along well only with English and hence have less motivation to strive to be proficient in other languages. Conclusions In the business world, spoken communication is very important, especially in negotiations. The emergence of English as the global business language or the lingua franca of business settings has several implications for management, and native and non-native English speakers. First of all, English is the preferred language in business negotiations. However, several problems arise when the differences between the Englishes of different cultures come into the picture. Therefore, it is still important for participants in a business negotiation to learn the nuances of the form of English used in other linguistic communities. Second, an international manager still has to learn other languages in order to communicate effectively with people from different cultures. Effective internal communications with non-native English speakers in an organisation cannot be attained through translators or interpreters. Lastly, and most importantly, the use of English as a global business language does not necessarily imply comparative advantage to native speakers over non-native speakers. In fact, non-native speakers know more languages than native English speakers. References Bargiela-Chiappini, F., 2009. The Handbook of Business Discourse. London: Edinburgh University Press. Dudley-Evans, T. & St. John, M., 1998. Developments in English for Specific Purposes: A Multi-Disciplinary Approach. New York: Cambridge University Press. Firth, A., 1995. The discourse of negotiation: studies of language in the workplace. New York: Pergamon. Garzone, G. & Llie, C., 2007. The Use of English in Institutional and Business Settings: An Intercultural Perspective. London: Peter Lang. Koester, A., 2010. Workplace Discourse. London: Continuum International Publishing Group. Kranich, S., 2011. Multilingual Discourse Production: Diachronic and Synchronic Perspectives. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Mitchell, C., 2000. A Short Course in International Business Culture. Novato, CA: World Trade Press. Silkenat, J., Aresty, J., & Klosek, J., 2009. The ABA Guide to International Business Negotiations: A Comparison of Cross-Cultural Issues and Successful Approaches. New York: American Bar Association. Read More