Multicultural Team Effectiveness - Essay Example

Running Head: MULTICULTURAL TEAM EFFECTIVENESS Topic: Multicultural Team Effectiveness Lecturer: Presentation: IntroductionContemporary organizations tend to operate in multicultural environments as a result of increased mix up of cultures due to globalization. Increased movement of people beyond political boundaries in search for employment as well as the establishment of companies in foreign countries has increased diversity in the labor force and organizations have realized the significance of cultural diversity in organizational performance. This paper presents a critique of multicultural team effectiveness. It discusses the dynamics of multicultural organizations highlighting the different developmental stages of a multicultural organization, the Impact of multicultural environment on team effectiveness, impact of the language factor (native, foreign peeking) on team effectiveness, the Impact of voice level in team discussions on team member relationships, the essence of developing an organizational culture context that each team member in a multicultural organization has to adapt to, building trust between multicultural team members as well as the impact of culture in response to the fear factor, evaluating whether team members would be open to discussions or whether they would close up. Dynamics of multicultural organizations The dynamics of multicultural organizations can be understood through evaluating the progression from single culture to multicultural association. This progression has been found to work in various levels which comprise a number of stages. The organization begins as a monoculture association. The first stage is the relationship whereby some members are excluded from the mainstream. The excluded groups are regarded as inferior while some of the members are superior by virtue of their belonging to the dominant group that upholds its mission to dominate the other members. The organizational structure comprises of the dominant group and the organization is conservative in its way of operation. It is difficult to change the structure due to the fact that any changes would be against the organization’s mission (Mariann and Jeanne, 2005). Dissatisfaction is usually experienced by the minority group and they feel disrespected and sidelined in the group’s activities. On the other hand, the dominant group derives satisfaction from its actions especially when the minorities are completely un-represented in the organization. The next stage is the “white male club” that is characterized by stereotyping the minorities even though they actively participate in the organization’s activities. The group remains stable as long as the minorities adhere to the values of the dominant group. Nevertheless, the dominant group does not necessarily fight for supremacy in the organization (Gratton et al. 2007). The third stage is the non-discriminating association that advocates for diversity that allows flexibility in the organization. Gender, race and disability among other differences that occur in the community are regarded as the building blocks of the organization. Recruitment in the organization is mainly focused on increasing numbers that are a sign of strength. The minorities are expected to play supportive roles and in case they are involved in management positions, they have to possess the desired qualifications as well as team building skills. The organization maintains a diverse workforce through equal representation of all members of the society (Klein et al. 2006). The fourth stage is the practice of affirmative action in the organization that enhances diversity through encouraging the minority groups to actively participate in the group’s activities. The leaders of the organization ensure that actions of prejudice against the minorities are suppressed and that they are motivated to utilize their talents and potential maximally for the benefit of the organization. For example, different races are encouraged to contribute their strengths to support the accomplishment of the organization’s objectives. Managers are trained to uphold diversity in the organization, which is an indication of a shift from monoculture to multicultural association (Gratton et al. 2007). In the fifth stage, aspects of a multicultural organization are definite. There are strong shifts that are characterized by elimination of the limitations associated with the single culture perspective. Clinton and Kohlmeye (2005) observe that the organization is redefined to become a multicultural association. The existing norms change and all cultures are included in the organizational processes such as planning, crisis interventions and visioning with all the efforts geared towards the accomplishment of the goals of a multicultural organization. The sixth stage is the establishment of a multicultural organization that is characterized by the model vision. Halverson and Tirmizi (2008) argues that the multicultural organization reveals the offerings and well-being of various cultural and social groups that form part of its undertakings, operations as well as the delivery of services to the community in general. The organization is formed on the basis of the principles of dedication towards the abolishment of social oppression of all types and all activities that might violate the interests of the diverse groups in the organization in terms of culture or social status are closely monitored. According to Klein et al. (2006), an organization becomes multicultural if all cultures and social groups are equitably represented in all levels of the organizational structure, mainly in the decision making processes. Social responsibility is a key facet in the success of the organization, with the focus being increasing the notion of multiculturalism. Impact of multicultural environment on team effectiveness Team effectiveness is highly dependent on the organizational values and respect for diversity. In particular, maintenance of cultural diversity has been found to be a significant step towards establishing a successful team (Gratton et al. 2007). The tasks that are undertaken by teams require different approaches to enhance problem solving as well as meeting the diverse needs of clients. Operating in a multicultural environment allows creativity and combination of talents from different cultures. Development and implementation of business projects is also accomplished when ideas are pooled from different cultures, especially when the organization deals with service delivery in diverse communities. Each culture is represented in the decision making process thereby enhancing the team’s success in meeting the organization’s objectives. Innovativeness is accomplished in the team as diverse ideas originate from the different cultural backgrounds (Mariann and Jeanne, 2005). People acquire the capacity to cope with unforeseen occurrences by sharing experiences with others from different cultures. Their perception on various issues becomes broad thereby approaching issues with sophistication. The team develops a significant characteristic of tolerating and accepting the differences between them and others when members appreciate cultural diversity. This enhances problem solving and harmonious relations that enhance team success. Flexibility is maintained in the team and members easily accept the ideas of others. Inter-personal relationships are enhanced even beyond the team as members learn different approaches to communicate and interact with people from different cultures (Klein et al. 2006). Nevertheless, teams encounter various challenges when working in a multicultural environment. Adler (2002) associated these challenges with ineffectiveness in accomplishing the organizational goals. The challenges are mainly associated with the day to day workplace relations. There is a high possibility of teams becoming ineffective in spite of the benefits of cultural diversity especially when interaction among people becomes complex as a result of greater differences. In essence, bonding among people from diverse cultural background usually takes a longer time than when operating in a monoculture environment. It takes longer to recognize and appreciate the differences thereby slowing down the team development process. Language barriers also present challenges in communication especially if there is no common language for team members. The different cultures have different expectations and may be a source of disagreements, confusion and unconstructive assessment of each other thereby affecting the team’s success. It might take long and more efforts to bring the team members to a common understanding in a multicultural environment. These inefficiencies have an impact on organization’s performance due to decreased capacity for establishing effective teams and maintaining satisfaction among employees (Klein et al. 2006). Impact of the language factor (native, foreign speaking) on team effectiveness Communication is significant for the accomplishment of team objectives especially if the core function of the team is coordinated activity. The organization requires effective communication for its processes to be accomplished. Lewis (2005) observes that effective communication within teams in organizations allows teams to understand and cope with the existing differences. Language is a significant tool for effective communication and teams may encounter challenges especially if members speak diverse languages. In many situations, teams in a multicultural environment usually adopt a language that is not native to all members. Those whom the language is native to them will be articulate in discussions and communicating their ideas than the members to whom the language applied is foreign. Lack of understanding for certain expressions may hamper the accomplishment of team objectives (Frisch, 2008). In some situations, teams may agree to use a language that is foreign to all of them, for purposes of relating to other work teams. For example, English is one of the languages that are accepted internationally, and most organizations operating in multicultural environments tend to use it to harmonize communication between people with different native languages. Some teams may require translators especially if they are engaged in global operations. Under such circumstances, the team’s effectiveness might be affected by the subjective opinion of the translator regarding the meaning of certain expressions. Further more, the team incurs additional costs to hire interpreters. In essence, it is difficult to hold an effective discussion when members of the team can not read and write the language being used. People usually fail to pay attention to information written in a language that they can not understand. In other cases, when people are not competent in the use of a foreign language, they tend to shun from actively participating in discussions (Klein et al. 2006). Sometimes the language used by the team might be native to all members of the team, but differences may be evident in terms of the origin of the speaker. For example, the spelling and pronunciation of English in the US is different from the UK. A team comprising native English speakers from the different regions may lead to misinterpretation of terms even though the differences have not been found to cause any serious problem in team effectiveness. The problems emanating from language differences among teams can be dealt with through training programs (Gratton et al. 2007). Impact of voice level in team discussions on team member relationships  The voice level significantly influences the success of discussions and the capacity of team members to express their ideas. Inaudible voices discourage concentration as listeners struggle to make out the meaning of phrases that they scantily heard. The speaker can not be in a position to convince others regarding his/her point. It is usually a sign of lack of confidence and may lead to poor team member relationships. In most cases, when a team member who has consistently been inaudible to the audience speaks, members tend to call for him/her to speak up, which sometimes might be interpreted as disrespect. Lewis (2005) observes that it hurts the speaker when comments such as “we can not hear you” and “speak up” come from the audience, which may affect the team relationship. Moreover, a significant point may be missed if the orator does not make it clear, especially when the listeners do not want to upset him/her by demanding a repetition. Phrases not heard correctly by listeners may be interpreted wrongly thereby causing problems in the team’s accomplishment of tasks. The outcome is usually accompanied by blames whereby people complain that they acted the way they did according to what they heard from the orator. Inaudible voice generates uncertainty regarding issues and may affect the team’s performance (Frisch, 2008). The voice level sets the mood for discussion, which is significant in regard to the expected outcome. It needs to be varied depending on the nature of discussion as well as the diverse characteristics of team members. For example, if the team is discussing secret issues that need not be heard by outsiders, the orators need to be audible but calm while on the other hand the celebration mood in case of discussions of triumph should be characterized by a strong sound that generates excitement among the listeners. The pitch should be in such a way that it is neither offensive nor discouraging. Team members need to avoid voice levels that may create a reflection of quarreling rather than constructive discussion (Morris, 2005). Who would adapt to whom?  Organizations need to uphold values that enhance satisfaction and competitiveness among the employees. The organizational culture should be in such a manner that promotes shared values in the organization, which promotes the pursuance of shared objectives. Even though organizations need to promote cultural diversity to enhance effectiveness, they need to harmonize the diverse characteristics by establishing a strong organizational culture that equitably represents the values and norms of all cultures involved among the team members (Clinton and Kohlmeye, 2005). In other words, it is important to ensure that some of the team members do not feel belittled when they are compelled to adapt to a different culture. It might be a sign of suppression of some cultures in the organization and may not contribute to the establishment of effective teams. The organization’s leaders need to develop an inventory on the different cultures among the work teams. This would help in coming up with a list of characteristics that are exhibited by different cultures as well as the strengths that need to be combined to form strong work teams. The best characteristics representing all cultures should then be entrenched in the organizational culture and the team members motivated to adapt to them. This would enhance inter-personal relationships and respect for each other among team members (Coutu and Beschloss, 2009). Building trust between multicultural team members Coutu and Beschloss (2009) defines mutual trust as a common belief by people that they may rely on each other to accomplish a shared purpose. Developing mutual trust among team members motivates them to be willing to open up for the actions of fellow team members with the expectation that all have shared values and that none would perform such an action that could hurt the rest in spite of minimum control or monitoring. The team members are made to understand that others can judge how they feel about them and vise versa, which ensures that if an individual in the team wants others to perceive him/her positively, then he/she has to change his/her own attitude towards them. Each member is encouraged to raise the expectations of others by demonstrating to them that he/she is reliable and that he/she sticks to his/her word regardless of the prevailing circumstances. Building trust takes time since people must understand each other. It can be accomplished through intermediaries who act as referees who build confidence in the individual whose trust is to be won (Morris, 2005). Generally, building trust among people can not be accomplished when they feel vulnerable or fearful. Such feelings have to be dealt with first before trust can develop. A positive attitude must prevail among the team members for trust to develop. After building trust, it is important to maintain it in the team. Temporary relationships may not help the organization to realize its goals. Reaffirmation of mutual trust needs to be carried out on a regular basis to ensure that it is not lost over time and that the team remains steadfast in efforts to realize a shared goal. Emotional bonding is significant and can be accomplished through regular face-to-face meetings in friendly social settings. The team members need enlightenment regarding the manner in which cultural diversity enhances business performance so that they can relate the concept of multicultural organizations with their combined characteristics. Constant evaluation of trust allows the identification of problems and taking the necessary actions before they escalate (Rao et al. 2005).  Impact of culture in response to the fear factor Morris (2005) defines culture as a tool that the mind applies to guide a person’s day to day activities and interactions with others. He believes that culture is a collective aspect of a population that has occupied a particular social environment where individuals learn unique norms and also develop standards that guide their behavior. These behaviors make a distinction between cultures since all individuals in a particular culture share norms and customs. Team members from different cultural backgrounds may be filled with uncertainty because of the fretfulness resulting from the differences in recognizable symbols of social interactions in their culture. Such reminders comprise the many ways in which people acquaint themselves with the day to day life. Nevertheless, when the team members get used to each other over time, they begin appreciating the differences between them and also find out that they have different strengths that can complement each other’s weaknesses. A positive work environment is established when the team members open up to learn new ways of doing things. They get encouragement as they learn and eventually engage in discussions in which they too contribute their experiences to enlighten others (Green, 2005). Conclusion Multicultural team dynamics comprise six stages in beginning from the single culture organization. Recognition of cultural diversity is evident in the progressive stages to the sixth stage when the multicultural organization pursues a model vision. Cultural diversity has been found to be significant in establishing successful teams in organizations. However, there are challenges that affect team effectiveness such as language barriers and other greater differences that may hamper relations among team members. The use of foreign language in multicultural teams affects the communication process and may discourage some team members from active participation. Even native language that is used differently by team members may present challenges in communication. Voice level significantly affects communication in teams. It sets the mood for discussion. A shared organizational culture should be developed for all team members to adapt to. Mutual trust can be developed by engaging practices that help in developing confidence among team members. When they get used to each other multicultural team members open up to discussions. References Bonabeau, E. 2009. Decisions 2.0: The power of collective intelligence. MIT Sloan Management Review, pp 45-52 Brett, J., K. Behfar and M. C. Kern. 2006. Managing multicultural teams. Harvard Business Review pp 84-9 Clinton, B. D. and Kohlmeye, J. M. (2005). The effects of group quizzes on performance and motivation to learn: Two experiments in cooperative learning. Journal of Accounting Education 23(2): 96-116. Coutu, D. and M. Beschloss. (2009). Why teams dont work. Harvard Business Review, pp 98 105 Frisch, B. (2008). When teams cant decide. Harvard Business Review, pp 121-126. Green, M. Z. (2005). Addressing Race Discrimination Under Title VII After Forty Years: The promise of ADR As Interest-Convergence. Harvard Law Journal, Vol. 7, pp 23-36 Mariann J., and Jeanne W. (2005), Macro Influences on Multicultural Teams: A Multi-Level View, in Timothy Devinney, Torben Pedersen and Laszlo Tihanyi (ed.) Managing Multinational Teams: Global Perspectives Advances in International Management, Vol. 18, pp.209-231 Morris, M. (2005). “When Culture Counts--and When It Doesnt”. Negotiation, 3-5 Rao, A., Southard, S. & Bates, C. (2005) Cross-cultural Conflict and Expatriate Manager Exploratory Study. Technical Communication, 52 (1), 106-103. Lewis, R. D. (2005). When Cultures Collide: Leading Across Cultures, 3rd ed., Nicholas Brealey Publishing Gratton, L., Voigt, A. and T. Erickson. 2007. Bridging faultlines in diverse teams. MIT Sloan Management Review pp 22-29 Klein, K. J., Ziegert, J. C. Knight, A. P. and Xiao, Y. (2006). Dynamic delegation: Shared, hierarchical, and deindividualized leadership in extreme action teams.Administrative Science Quarterly 51(4): 590-621 Halverson, C. B. and Tirmizi, S. A. (2008). Effective Multicultural Teams: Theory and Practice Advances in Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer Read More