The Scent of Difference: Reception and Responsibility - Essay Example

­­­The Scent of Difference: Reception and Responsibility 1. Statement of the problem The decision of leaders in Source One, a distribution company, to fire part of the staff, all Americans, and to hire younger, Indian, employees with lower salary has resulted to strong tensions across the organization. The social identity issues related to the case need to be reviewed in order to identify the strategies that would help towards the elimination of these tensions. 2. Causes as related to literature The tensions developed in Source One have certain causes. These causes can be made clear using the literature that has been published in the specific field. Reference should be made primarily to the self-efficacy theory of Bandura (Steers et al. 2010, p.295). The above theory is based on the view that ‘motives are meaningful only if they are given to individuals who believe that they are able to succeed’ (Steers et al. 2010, p.295). In the specific case, Indian workers believe that they can respond to the demands of the work, as much as their American counterparts but their salary is too low so that there is no incentive for Indian workers to keep their performance at high levels. In other words, Indian workers believe to their capacities in regard to the tasks assigned to them but they are not treated fairly. If Indian workers would not feel confident for their skills they would have no problem with the highest rewarding of American workers. Therefore, self-efficacy in the particular case leads to the development of tensions between the two social groups, Americans and Indians. Another theory that would help to understand the tensions appeared in Source One would be the theory of Reasoned Action, as developed by Fishbein and Azjen in 1980 (Larson 2009). The particular theory promotes the idea that the actions of each individual are highly influenced by the plans he had made in advance but also by his beliefs in regard to the action involved (Larson 2009). The above condition is commonly known as behavioral intention, showing the interaction between the human behavior and the intentions/ attitudes of each individual (Larson 2009). In the specific case, the managers of the organization have fired the American workers because they were old and were compensated with high salary. Therefore, the particular decision has been resulted by the plans of the firm to reduce its costs without taking into consideration the risks involved with the appearance of a new culture in the workplace. In this context, the theory of Reasoned Action can be used for highlighting the emphasis by the firm’s leaders on the achievement of a particular target, the reduction of costs, and the lack of any concern for the potential cultural conflicts in the workplace. At this point, reference should be made to the social identity theory which states that in order for a social group ‘to achieve a positive social identity a group must be distinguished from other groups in regard to certain positive values’ (Tajfel 2010, p.209). If there are no such values, then tensions will appear between the particular group and the other social groups in its environment. It should be noted that conflicts among social groups are most likely to be caused because of the following two reasons: a) differences in culture and traditions, b) conflicting interests (Tajfel 2010, 302). In other words, because of the important differences in regard to the social identities of the two social groups, of Americans and Indians, tensions in Source One can be characterized as unavoidable, unless appropriate actions would have been taken by the firm’s managers and leaders The Intergroup Contact theory of Allport (1954) could be also used for explaining tensions in the workplace. The specific theory proposes the idea that ‘there can be no harmony within a group if the intergroup contact is low’ (Chin 2009, p.39). In Source One the communication between the two social groups is quite poor, especially since Indian workers use their native language to communicate in the workplace. Expanding the Intergroup Contact theory so that the two groups of workers are considered as just one group, the group of employees, the following explanation could be given for the tensions in Source One: these tensions are the result of the lack of effective communication between workers of different social identity. The introduction of measures for enhancing communication among employees in Source One would result to the limitation of tensions, even if the differences in regard to the social identity of employees are significant. 3. Recommendations Tensions in Source One could be controlled only through developing appropriately customized strategies. These strategies can vary, according to the issues on which the firm’s leaders would wish to focus. More specifically, depending on the cause of tension that the firm’s leaders would target, relevant plans would be introduced. Referring primarily to the self-efficacy theory, as explained above, the following initiative would be suggested: the firm’s leaders would increase the salary of Indian workers, as possible, or they could offer to Indian workers alternative benefits so that their rewarding for their work is fair. In this way, inequality and unfairness in regard to employees’ rewarding would be eliminated. As a result, Indian workers would no longer feel that their capabilities are not recognized, a fact that would motivate them to increase their performance. At the next level, the firm’s leaders could make clear to employees that their decision to fire part of the staff has been unavoidable because of the firm’s financial status. Only in this way the concerns of both groups in regard to the reasons that led to leaders to introduce this practice in the workplace would be controlled. American workers would understand that this decision was necessary so that they firm could survive while Indian workers would understand why their employer has not been able to offer to them higher compensation. Particular emphasis should be given on the elimination of discrimination in the workplace, as this discrimination would be possible related to the social identity differences of the two groups. At this point, the introduction of changes on the firm’s existing decision making process would help to eliminate tensions related to social identity differences. The normative decision model, as developed by Vroom and Yetton, explains the methods used in modern firms for the development of decisions (Steers et al. 2010, p.140). In the context of this model, the decision making process used in a particular organization can be either ‘participative and inclusive or autocratic and exclusive’ (Steers et al. 2010, p.140). Leaders in Source One seem to prefer rather the autocratic and exclusive decision making style not paying attention on employees’ problems and needs, as related to the workplace. Leaders in Source One would introduce the collaborative decision making process, which is based on the collaboration between managers and workers for the identification of problems in the workplace (Steers et al. 2010, p.145). Through the specific theory, the firm’s leaders would be able to resolve another problem: the poor communication between the two social groups involved. As explained earlier, the Intergroup Contact theory states that there can be no harmony within a group if the communication between the members of the group is poor (Chin 2009, p.39). In the context of the collaborative decision making model, employees have to communicate and collaborate for covering their needs in the workplace; in this way, communication in the workplace is, necessarily, improved. 4. Relation to the UAE context In UAE, as in most Eastern countries, ‘emotional displays can be characterized as impolite or even bizarre’ (Steers et al. 2010, p.94), since Eastern culture is highly differentiated from Western culture as of the level and the form of communication which is socially and ethically acceptable. In this context, the responses of Indian workers to the leaders’ plans for improving communication and promoting collaboration in the workplace cannot be clearly defined in advance. If the firm was based in UAE no such problem would appear since the concerns of Indian workers in regard to communication in the workplace would be understood. On the other hand, the need of the firm’s leaders to keep a strict schedule in regard to the elimination of discrimination and the promotion of fairness in the workplace could possibly cause the oppositions of American workers who might feel as having more rights on high salary because of their work experience and of their contribution in the organizational growth. If the firm was based in UAE a different approach would be used. Fairness would be promoted but only under the terms that local culture and ethics are not threatened. References Chin, J. (2009). The Psychology of Prejudice and Discrimination: A Revised and Condensed Edition. London: ABC-CLIO. Larson, C. (2009) Persuasion: Reception and Responsibility. 12th ed. Belmont: Cengage Learning. Steers, R., Sanchez-Runde, C. and Nardon, L. (2010). Management across cultures; challenges and strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Tajfel, H. (2010). Social Identity and Intergroup Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Read More