1
TITLE: WHAT IS THE MANAGERIAL PERSPECTIVE ON
LINGUISTIC DIVERSITY IN THE WORKPLACE AT
DUBLIN AIRPORT?
Dissertation submitted in part fulfilment of the requirements
for the degree of
Master of Business Administration in Human Resource Management
Marianna Buja
Student No: 10154859
Word Count: 20, 000
Master of Business Administration
August 2016
2
CONTENTS
List of Tables and Figures……………………………………………………..5
Declaration…………………………………………………………………..…6
Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………….7
Abstract…………………………………………………………………………8
Chapter 1
1.1
Introduction…………………………………………………………………9
1.2
Background…………………………………………………………………10
1.3
Aims and Objectives…………………………………………………….…11
1.4
Approach and the Structure of the Dissertation…………………………….12
1.5
Personal Interest…………………………………………………………….12
1.6
Limitations…………………………………………………………………13
1.7
Contributions of the Study…………………………………………………13
Chapter 2
Literature Review………………………………………………………….…15
2.1 Linguistic Diversity in the Corporate Setting and the Corporate Language
Issue……………………………………………………………………………16
2.2 Linguistic Diversity and Team’s Dynamics and Language Management
Training Issue………………………………………………………………….21
2.3 Linguistic Diversity and Perceived Competence and Procedural Justice….26
3
Chapter 3
Methodology………………………………………………………………….30
3.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………..30
3.2 Research Design……………………………………………………………31
3.2.1. Research Philosophy……………………………………………………31
3.2.2 Research Approach………………………………………………………32
3.2.3 Research Strategy and Time Horizon……………………………………33
3.2.4 Research Population…………………………………………………….35
3.3 Data Collection Instruments and Analysis Methods………………………36
3.4 Research Ethics…………………………………………………………….38
3.5 Limitation of the Methodology…………………………………………….39
Chapter 4
Findings…….…………………………………………………………………41
4.1 Linguistic Diversity in the Corporate Setting and the Corporate Language
Issue……………………………………………………………………………42
4.2 Linguistic Diversity and Team’s Dynamics and Language Management
Training Issue………………………………………………………………….47
4.3 Linguistic Diversity and Perceived Competence and Procedural Justice….52
Chapter 5
Discussion…………………………………………………………………..…55
5.1 Linguistic Diversity in the Corporate Setting and the Corporate Language
Issue……………………………………………………………………………55
5.2 Linguistic Diversity and Team’s Dynamics and Language Management
Training Issue………………………………………………………………….58
5.3 Linguistic Diversity and Perceived Competence and Procedural Justice….61
4
Chapter 6
Conclusion and Recommendations…………………………………………63
Bibliography………………………………………………………………….67
Appendix 1 ……………………………………………………………………71
Appendix 2 ………………………………………………………………………………………….73
Appendix 3…………………………………………………………………….74
5
List of Tables and Figures
Figure 1, The Research ‘Onion’……………………………………………..30
Figure 2, Components of Qualitative Data Analysis: Interactive Model….37
Figure 3, Interviewee Background…………………………………………..41
6
Declaration
I hereby declare that this material, which I now submit for assessment on the programme of
study leading to the reward of Masters of Business Administration at Dublin Business
School, is entirely my own work unless referenced in the text as a specific source and
included in the bibliography. Furthermore, no part of this work has been submitted for
assessment for any other academic purpose other than in partial fulfilment of that stated
above.
Signed
Date
Marianna Buja
22nd August 2016
7
Acknowledgements
The completion of this research paper was not possible without guidance and support of
many people to whom I would like to thank greatly.
Firstly, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude to my supervisor PJ Paul for his
valuable advice throughout the entire process of preparing the document and for setting my
work in the right direction each time I turned the corner. His instructions were always acute
and pertinent and his support invaluable.
Secondly, I would like to voice my gratefulness to all my interviewees who dedicated their
time to enable me to acquire a very comprehensive material. They shared with me their
experiences regarding multinational employees within the teams they manage which I found
very thought-provoking, engaging and rewarding at the same time.
I would also like to thank my family and my partner for their incredible support and
encouragement throughout the entire college time, and particularly for their patience while
completing this dissertation.
Lastly, I would also like to thank David Wallace and Peter Purcell for their engaging and
insightful lectures during the college time.
8
ABSTRACT
This research paper presents a managerial outlook on the complex matter of multilingual
employees in the workplace at Dublin Airport. The current global diaspora largely
contributes to the broad scope of linguistic variations within an organisation, albeit the
academic resources examining the scale and the impact of the aspect are quite limited.
According to numerous researchers, such diverse workforce presents the management with a
particular challenge in order to achieve consistency in communication processes (Lauring,
Selmer, 2011, pp. 324-343).
Considering the continuous growth of cultural diversity in the workplace, it is of high
importance that the organisational leadership undergoes a major transformation towards a
better understanding, recognition and engagement with different languages among its
members, encourages openness towards the peculiarity and development of linguistically
diverse skills (Thomas, Ely, 1996). Accordingly, the above supports the choice of managerial
level of interviewees for this document.
The research therefore, conducted among numerous Human Resource Managers and Line
Managers based at Dublin Airport, explores the impact of linguistically diverse employees on
social interactions within the organisation, examines the issue of adequate policies and
procedures and delivers a complex viewpoint on the phenomenon of linguistically versatile
workforce.
9
Chapter 1
1.1 Introduction
The globalisation is flourishing, particularly within the business sphere, and the world is
more cosmopolitan than ever, thus the boarders for cultural expansion become rapidly more
and more indefinite. On the grounds of these continuous multicultural dynamics, the
language diversity becomes the distinct feature on the new territory.
This research paper delivers a managerial perspective on the phenomenon of linguistic
diversity within a multinational organisation, such as Dublin Airport. Moreover, it addresses
several issues affiliated with the matter of linguistically diverse workforce, such as the
existence of language policies and procedures and possible occurrence of animosities
stemming from the linguistically imposed misunderstandings. Furthermore, it examines the
impact of multilingualism on social interactions amongst the employees and analyses the
aspect of perceived competency and intelligence of the bilingual speaker.
The researcher set a leading question for this document and an array of detailed sub
questions. By obtaining thorough answers to those, from numerous Human Resource and
Line Managers based at Dublin Airport, this paper will open a constructive discussion on the
subject of linguistic diversity in a very multicultural Ireland. Furthermore, the document will
contribute to a constricted source of academic literature available on the matter and provide
an interesting insight for future managers.
The main research question is:
“What is the managerial perspective on linguistic diversity in the workplace
at Dublin Airport?”
The sub questions for this research are:
What are the policies and procedures regarding the language and multilingual employees at
Dublin Airport? The corporate language aspect.
Does linguistic diversity have impact on social interactions and communication within the
organisation?
10
Do language differences create foundation for misunderstanding and exclusion?
Can multilingual employees’ communication induce ostracism of those, whose English is a
first language?
Is multilingualism considered as an asset for the company’s performance?
What is the perception of multilingual employee’s competence and intelligence in the process
of professional development?
1.2 Background
Language diversity can be defined as a number of different languages prevalent within one
organisation and it can create a challenging ambience for the management and co-workers to
achieve consistency in the daily communication processes. Furthermore, as numerous
academics proclaim working, living and communicating in a second or third language may
broadly affect the speakers’ self esteem and ultimately alter the outcome of the conversation
(Thompson, 2006, pp.30-36). Considering the above, it is essential for the modern
organisations to understand the significance of linguistically diverse workforce and the
importance of effective engagement in diversity management activities. The fundamental step
to do so, involves a major transformation of the mind-set of the organizational leadership.
The management is confronted with a significant issue of how to recognise and understand
the opportunities and the challenges in relation to linguistically versatile employees,
encourage openness towards it, connect and engage in the development of the alternatives
provided and value those linguistic skills. Moreover, according to Managing Diversity
(Arvey, et al, 1996, pp. 51-71), diverse culture of the organisation improves its competitive
advantage, and the citation from the Financial Times (Hill, 2013) “Hire more multilingual
employees, because these employees can communicate better, have better intercultural
sensitivity, are better at co-operating, negotiating, compromising. But they can also think
more efficiently.” portrays multilingual employees as being a valuable addition to the
company’s structure with the different perspectives and approaches they present. Dublin
Airport is a highly multicultural environment and parallel to English there are numerous
languages being spoken amongst its employees.
11
Whilst the airport operates partially under the scrutiny of the Irish Government, and English
and Irish are its two official languages appointed by the legislation, its global business
activity reveals the great demand for re-evaluation of its practices and procedures regarding
the issue and implementation of a comprehensive language management strategy. This
research delivers a managerial perspective on the current situation within the organisation.
1.3 Aims and Objectives
The purpose of this research is to examine a managerial perspective on linguistic diversity in
the workplace at Dublin Airport campus and its significance to the employee integrity.
In the light of an ongoing economic and social expansion in Ireland it is vital to determine the
effects of the multilingual array within the organisation on its communication processes,
performance of the group and the social interactions among those groups and the concern of
language policies and procedures within the company.
Furthermore, the imperative of this document is to establish the impact of the linguistic
diversity on the career progress within the organisation and its affiliation with the
competency and intelligence of the multilingual speaker. Additionally, it is essential to
determine a managerial outlook on the employees’ openness to language varieties in the
workplace and analyse the diversity climate of the organisation.
According to the article in the Irish Times (2015) there are currently182 different languages
present in the Irish homes and the Central Statistics Office (CSO, 2013) report from 2011
published that, there are over 250, 000 multinationals employed in Ireland.
Dublin Airport Authority, an Irish state-owned airport management company, employs over
2,500_ staff (DAA, 2013). The airport’s campus extensive operations are established through
functioning of various departments, such as a major travel retail subsidiary Aer Rianta
International (ARI) and other significant companies such as Dublin Airport Authority (daa),
Aer Lingus and more.
This immense workforce represents a great range of cultures and nationalities, however there
is no actual data on the number of different nationalities employed on the premises of the
airport. On the grounds of such multinational environment the communication and an
inclusive and equal opportunities climate are the key elements of the company’s successful
performance.
12
1.4 Approach and the Structure of the Dissertation
This research paper delivers an outlook on the topic of linguistic diversity in the workplace
from a Human Resource and Line Managers angle. The primary data will be collected
through semi-structured interviews with numerous managers from different companies based
at Dublin Airport, such as ARI, daa, Aer Lingus. The dissertation comprises six chapters:
Chapter 1 presents an introduction to the topic of linguistically diverse employees and the
reasoning for engaging in the matter, Chapter 2 delivers an academic outlook on the subject
and identifies the issues and challenges for the multilingual organisations, Chapter 3
communicates the methodology and approach undertaken to complete the research, Chapter
4 analyses the data and publishes the findings, Chapter 5 presents the conclusion and
discussion on the results of the research, Chapter 6 delivers recommendations for future
development of HR strategy within multilingual organisations. Finally, the chapters are
followed by Bibliography and the document is concluded by researcher’s reflection of the
entire study experience under Appendix 3.
1.5 Personal Interest
The researcher has completed a Masters Degree at University of Gdansk in Polish Philology
with the specialisation in Linguistics. Moreover, her continuous employment at Dublin
Airport uncovered various aspects of linguistic diversity in the workplace. Correspondingly,
both factors initiated an interest in diversity issues within the organisation, the impact of
linguistic proficiency and cultural differences on career development, communication
processes, group’s openness and social interactions and perceived competency and
intelligence of the non-native English speakers. Furthermore, the writer aspires to pursue her
career in the Human Resource area and the findings of this document will be of great interest
and value for the professionals in the HR departments at Dublin Airport and for future
development of the strategy of international management. Additionally, the thorough
research of the literature available on the topic of linguistic diversity in the workplace in
Ireland exposed the magnitude of the unexplored area regarding the issue. The research
within such vast linguistically diversified environment as the Dublin Airport will create an
insight on the issue and possibly a base for any future study of diversity issues in other
multicultural organisations in Ireland.
13
1.6 Limitations
Applied by the researcher qualitative method of data collection, gathered through several
interviews at the managerial level of the organisation, delivers only fragmentary outlook on
the broad matter of linguistic diversity in the workplace. Hence, it leaves an open door for
further analysis of the issue by quantitative method throughout the remaining parts of the
corporation.
Albeit, the character of the research was partially dictated by the nature of the business
environment of the airport, which in principle is formed by various opinions and views, in
contrast with a perceptible world and partially by the time constraints imposed on the process
of the research and delivery of the document. In this way the interpretivism philosophy
emerged to be the most suitable.
The findings drawn in as a result of several interviews with HR professionals and Line
Managers at the Dublin Airport are comprehensive, however they encourage further
examination.
1.7 Contributions of the Study
The matter of diverse workforce within the organisations opens up a new and unexplored
area regarding various language proficiencies, speaker’s competencies and those being
ostracised by the different language.
The situation creates a major concern for all the parties involved in the operations of the
organisation. The employers, the leaders, the Human Resource Management and the
employees themselves stand the challenge to form their company’s culture that recognises
diversity, manages its force with relevant and innovative strategies and develops it to the
company’s advantage.
Moreover, one needs to acknowledge, that diverse culture of the organisation improves its
competitive advantage, as according to Managing Diversity (Arvey, et al, 1996, pp. 51-71),
the employees emerging from the same background as their consumers can provide a
valuable insight on their clientele’s background and behaviour in order to provide better
service.
Furthermore, an article in HBR (Tannen, 1995) describes, how the ways of speaking, learned
in childhood, affect judgements of person’s capability, proficiency and qualifications.
14
According to the article, minute differences in the conversational style, the choice of words
and the process of formulating and asking questions have significant impact on the
judgements about people and their competencies.
It is therefore critical for the managers and the leaders to have the ability to listen closely to
their employees conversing manners. It is also crucial for them to be aware of the power of
linguistic diversity among their employees to be able to hear the valuable opinions and
refrain from misjudgements.
Over and above, linguistic diversity despite its broad appearance in a contemporary
organisation is a very understudied theme (Lauring, Selmer, 2011, pp.81-93). The thorough
research of the area of multilingual diversity exposed a major gap in data available on the
impact of linguistic diversity within the company on its employees’ communication
processes, the coherence of the group, its productivity in fulfilling the company’s strategic
plans and the procedural policies in organisations in Ireland. Moreover, the significant
researches available occurred mostly in Denmark, India and USA, but none in Ireland.
J.Lauring/J.Selmer (2012, pp.156-172) report that, linguistic diversity is one of the key
dimensions representing group’s heterogeneity, yet it has received the least attention from the
academics. Other authors also stress, that despite the importance of the issues emerging
among linguistically diverse employees, they are largely missed themes from the
organisational diversity researches (Kulkarni, Sommer, 2014, pp.637-652).
15
Chapter 2
Literature Review
The imperative of the literature review is to present a thorough and critical analysis of
existing academic papers in regards to the issue of linguistic diversity in the workplace.
The area emerges as a relatively new and unexplored theme in a very culturally diverse
Ireland, thus the demand for theoretical and practical support appears to grow rapidly.
On the one hand the extensive shift of human capital around the globe endorses the presence
of multiple languages in people’s daily encounters, while on the other hand in many
situations it can be observed that one common language, frequently English, is adapted
during the conversations (Grin, et al, 2010, pp. 17-27). Hence, the aspect of linguistic
diversity in the workplace is indicated to be of significant value for the organisations to tailor
their strategy to accommodate the communication processes amongst its employees and
management (Grin, et al, 2010, pp.17-27).
In such manner various academic sources deliver that linguistic differences create a major
challenge for multicultural organisations in relation to knowledge sharing and
communication, social interactions amongst the employees and performance of the group.
Accordingly, those language variations may enhance group’s creativity and broaden its
perspective regarding problem solving and information processing, however at the same time
they also may create communication issues and affect the group’s unity (Lauring, Selmer,
2011, pp.81-93).
Furthermore, numerous academics indicate the shortfall of the literature regarding the impact
of multilingualism on the communication processes and social interactions within the
corporate environment. Resultantly, whilst the role of the language within the organisations
appears to be a largely omitted issue, it is recognised to have potentially significant
implications on the company’s performance and it ought to be considered as an
interconnected aspect of international management strategy (Lauring, 2007, pp.255-266).
16
2.1 Linguistic Diversity in the Corporate Setting and the Corporate
Language Issue
English language unsurprisingly has taken a meaningful position as one of the most regularly
used languages in the world, with over 300 million people for whom the English is their first
language, with over 1 billion people who use English as their second language and with
another near 1 billion of people having some level of English (Hurn, 2009, pp.299-304).
Despite the facts, there are two suggestions emerging from the current documents on
language issues in the work environment: One is that, for international operations purposes
English language requires major simplification of terms and idioms in order to reduce
misinterpretation; Two is that, it is widely recommended that organisations embrace foreign
language training amongst its employees of all levels and also encourage communication in
other languages existent in the company in order to facilitate continual information exchange
(HRM International Digest, 2007, pp.16-17). On the other hand, unregulated language
subject within the organisation is broadly recognised as one of the key factors for creating
destructive boundaries within the company and preventing it from achieving a constructive
harmony. Failing to overcome those barriers can have detrimental effects on the business
operations of the organisation, such as decrease in interaction and diminished engagement
with buyers/sellers, interrupted foreign market expansion and joint ventures and personnel
management issues (Feely, 2003, pp.37-52). Feely (2003, pp.37-52) describes several
potential concepts in pursuance of organisational compatibility in regards to the language
diversity and some of them consider: 1. Adopting English as a common corporate
language/lingua franca however, it is presented to have certain downsides in relation to
international dealings where the negotiations or legal documents often happen in the local
language. 2. Pursuing practical multilingualism in business proceedings, which is presented
to have similar results as the option of adopting lingua franca, as it may alter the essence of
the communication process. 3. Employing additional resources, such as translators, is
reported to create financial strains and pose the risk of incompetency for detailed business
dealings. 4. Exercising the language training amongst employees which continuance is noted
to be fundamental in order to serve the purpose. Finally, 5. Executing controlled and
simplified organisational language which, apart from being time consuming and expensive, is
described to create inadequate limits for transferring information.
17
Over and above, despite the numerous options considered by Feely (2003, pp.37-52), the
author acknowledges that there is no “one size fits all” option therefore, flexibility and
adopting parts of various approaches that, will comply with the type of the business and
culture that the organisation is, seems as the most sensible direction.
The discussion on the matter of linguistic diversity and its position in relation to the culture
of the organisation continues.
It is confirmed by Lo Bianco (2010, pp.37-67) that, fair, clear and of mutual understanding
and direction interchange is undoubtedly the primary goal of every organisation, and
preserving and cultivating the multilingual diversity ought to be the key objective of every
corporation’s practice.
However, despite such dominance of English in the workplace, it isn’t the only language
prevailing in the business environment therefore, organisations tend to introduce one shared
language throughout its domain (HRM International Digest, 2007, pp.16-17).
For all that, the debate on linguistic diversity and the role of the corporate language, often
being it English, continues to challenge the academics and the leaders of multinational
organisations. At present it is a recurring situation that the company’s personnel vary in
regards to the different languages they speak therefore, one common language is being
adapted and executed for professional exchanges in order to diminish misunderstandings,
reduce costs of translations and improve efficiency in networking (HRM International Digest,
2007, pp.16-17). Per contra, on an example of an international organisation such as Siemens,
a German-based company hiring 434,000 employees who communicate in German, English,
French and Spanish, one can observe that such exercise is not always easy to accomplish. For
this reason, in pursuance of harmony and emotional stability Siemens operates as an approved
multilingual company and the aspect of language choice remains to be decided by the
employees (HRM International Digest, 2007, pp.16-17).
While it is undoubtedly a great challenge for the multinational organisations to achieve
symbiosis of operations within its unit, the aspect of language policies remains at a very
rudimentary level of research.
It is documented that the organisations, which evolve around different cultures, hence
different languages, in order to procure homogeneity in communication and pursue shared
goals, more than formal interchange, incline to approve of rather informal channels of
communication and focus on the interpersonal connections (Dhir, Goke-Pariola, 2002,
pp.241-251).
18
This tendency has been examined by numerous academics however, it prompts a profound
discussion on its impact on the social interactions and knowledge sharing within the
organisation, the aspect which will be considered in the following section of this document.
In conjunction with the social element of linguistic diversity and communication processes it
is therefore important to address the issue of linguistic identity (Bordia, Bordia, 2015,
pp.415-428) which, according to authors has received very little attention in an international
business literature. Linguistic identity, as addressed by Bordia and Bordia (2015, pp.415-428)
plays an integral part in one’s social identity and it defines one’s approach and openness to
accepting different languages/ pronunciations for social interactions.
Furthermore, Tange and Lauring (2009, pp.218-232) add to such perspective that, language
can represent one’s willingness to engage in communication however, it can also distinguish
one’s power.
The authors communicate that the responsibility of ensuring inclusion of linguistically
diverse employees is in the hands of management and it can only be achieved through
provision of grounds for informal exchanges to eradicate the linguistic boundaries.
Moreover, language variety, according to numerous professionals, is the sought after
contingency beneficial to the company’s competitive advantage and a powerful means to
obtain global designation, as opposed to be interpreted as an obstruction for organisational
communication (Feely, Harzing, 2003, pp.37-52).
The discussion on the value of language as an advantageous asset towards organisation’s
effective functioning in the global markets continues and requires further research. However,
it is presented by many professionals that, language in the modern business and social setting
appears to carry value of great importance, not only as a mechanism for sharing information,
learning and development but, also adds greatly to the company’s culture, its ethics and
practices which are then successively communicated to the company’s stakeholders.
Moreover, Dhir and Goke-Pariola (2002, pp.241-251) deepen the discussion by concluding
that, today’s multinational companies in order to secure new global markets and expand their
network of business operations will have to use the linguistic diversities within their teams to
gain advantage over their competitors, in other words to reinforce their strength and enhance
their competitiveness in the global trade.
In the light of the above, language can be considered as a type of currency in exchanging
relevant and useful knowledge in-between parties involved in the dialogue (Dhir, 2005,
pp.358-382).
19
Over and above, it is suggested by the authors that organisations formulate adequate policies
and procedures to utilise various languages as their assets however, the exercise appears to be
quite intricate and complex to achieve and pursue (Dhir, 2005, pp.358-382).
The supremacy of English as a common business language is largely recognised and accepted
worldwide, however the reality of daily operations in multilingual organisations appears to be
frankly different than it is perceived by the top management.
While the purpose for adapting a shared language, often English, within the organisation is to
promote consistency in information sharing and to overcome nuances stemming from
misinterpretation, and also to decrease costly and prolonged translations, it is communicated
by academics that, the practice not necessarily prevails throughout the entire corporation
(Fredriksson, et al, 2006, pp.406-423). Much as the management’s fluency in the use of
English is generally facilitated by the business courses they attended, the presumption of
everybody’s good understanding of English may be deceiving and ought to be scrutinised
(Fredriksson, et al, 2006, pp.406-423). The language competency amongst the entire
personnel structure is therefore an important issue to consider and implementation of a
common corporate language does not automatically improve the language proficiency of all
employees.
Furthermore, seeing that language is one of the most significant factors defining the group’s
unity (Lauring, Selmer, 2012, pp.156-166) the matter of corporate language has been
challenged by numerous academics. Lauring and Selmer (2012, pp.156-166) support the
rationale presented by Tange and Lauring (2009, pp.218-232) for endorsing a corporate
common language as a practice towards achieving mutual and consistent ground for inclusion
and communication. It is concluded by them that linguistic diversity within one organisation
can have disruptive effects on the cohesion of the team and the communication processes and
therefore, the authors suggest to implement a shared corporate language in order to promote
trust, commitment and a common goal.
However, such decision may be perceived as an induction of domination and restriction over
employees’ interactions.
Hence the issue of common corporate language frequently appears to be left opened for
interpretations within multinational companies (Fredriksson, et al, 2006, pp.406-423).
Furthermore, a new emerging approach of multilingual franca, as opposed to a focused lingua
franca, appears to deliver a more compatible outlook on the matter of corporate language
(Janssens, Steyaert, 2014, pp.623-639). The multilingual franca approach endorses the use of
various languages in a very flexible and adaptable manner.
20
Furthermore, such practice embraces the elaborate character of global organisations, puts the
diversity at the focal place of its operations and subsequently moves away from a single
language norm towards more unconstrained language interchange (Janssens, Steyaert, 2014,
pp.623-639).
Notwithstanding, the question of assigning one major language within an organisation is still
a very current and debateable topic. Teboul and Speicher (2007, pp.169-180) develop the
issue through multiple channels by publishing that, conforming to one dominant language
may produce quite contrary results.
Firstly, it is delivered by the authors that such regulations can appear to be insensitive
towards language minorities and may prompt the feeling of inequity and prejudice and
subsequently negatively affect team’s morale. Secondly, it is advised that steps should be
taken to invest in the strategy which promotes improving bilingual/multilingual skills of the
managers and supervisors, as opposed to executing monolingualism within the organisation.
The exercise of language training suggested, will result in enhanced motivation, commitment
and satisfaction. Furthermore, in contradiction to the general opinion of the common
language proficiency enabling professional development of the employees, it is reported that
the majority language proficiency is an unlikely factor predestining the career progression.
Moreover, language training is repeatedly concluded by the authors to be the essentiality of
cross cultural management. Lastly, Teboul and Speicher (2007, pp.169-180) communicate
that alternatively to advocating one mutual language in the organisation as a means for
greater knowledge sharing and improved performance it is recommended to support the
employees to confer in their native languages as it encourages, simplifies and speeds up the
communication processes and sharing the information.
The aspect of adopting a common corporate language carries a significant amount of
responsibility directed towards the management, the structure of the organisational strategy
and the Human Resource practices functioning in the company.
Over and above the appearance of the social characteristic surrounding the linguistic
variations amongst the employees is a recurring factor throughout the entire academic
literature as an inseparable aspect of human discourse. It is widely declared by numerous
authors that language, adjacent to its communicational purposes, is also a significant
apparatus for developing relationships which quite frankly are the fundamentals for
employees’ engagement, motivation, commitment, work satisfaction and consequently better
performance.
21
The rationale for implementing a common majority language within one organisation such as
maintaining harmonious environment, enhanced supervision, career progression and effective
operations appear to be justifiable, however there is little evidence to support the necessity of
common language existence towards organisational functioning (Teboul, Speicher, 2007,
pp.169-180). On the grounds of the above, further research regarding the linguistic diversity
and the issue of the corporate language is recommended throughout the entire academic
literature.
2.2 Linguistic Diversity and Team’s Dynamics and Language Management
Training Issue
The role of language, while it is recognised as the prime means for communication, and the
implications of diverse languages existent in an international organisation on its teams’
performance, despite such insufficient examination by the scholarly circle, is prominent and
poses significant concerns (Chen, 2006, pp.679-695).
As it is explained by the academics, language, in conjunction with its communicative
purpose, is largely recognised as a fundamental mechanism in the process of relationship
building (Andersen, 2004, pp.231-242). Moreover, Andersen (2004, pp.231-431) addresses
that those informal relations are critical for staff engagement and their routine operations, and
certain language incompetence may constrain staff unity and decelerate sharing of the
information. Furthermore, the author stresses that employees with linguistically desired skills
will eventually leave the organisation, where such matter isn’t taken into adequate
consideration.
Academics such as Lauring and Selmer (2012, pp.156-172) and Lauring (2007, pp.255-266)
emphasise another emerging problem stemming from low team’s coherence of the
organisations where linguistic diversity isn’t accordingly addressed. Clustering of people of
the same mother tongue, is resultantly reported by those authors to affect greatly people’s
collaboration, induce ostracism and exclusion of employees with inept linguistic skills.
Moreover, the occurrence of such adversity may affect one’s confidence, motivation and
willingness to progress, as developed by Kulkarni and Sommer (2014, pp.637-652).
The authors add to the discussion that such isolation of employees depreciates the
individual’s creativity and progression efforts and subsequently negatively affects team’s
performance.
22
For this reason, the impact of linguistically diverse workforce on the coherence of the team
and the communication processes is a prevalent aspect throughout the academic literature.
The scholars agree that communication is fundamental for the performance of the
organisation and the significance of the language in international and multicultural
corporations is recognised as the essence of their entity, albeit it is a highly challenging and
demanding subject (Lauring, Selmer, 2012, pp.156-172).
In detail it is reported that, as a consequence of imperfect comprehension of language and
little knowledge on socio-cultural aspects of it, the communication processes amongst
employees may suffer greatly. Those misunderstandings may cause destructive behaviours of
grouping of employees and stereotypical judgments (Lauring, Selmer, 2012, pp.156-172).
However, it has been explored that, regular contact with different languages and
pronunciations may result in greater acceptance of dissimilarities, also that, such supportive
and tolerant environment may consequently drive the use of one common language as a
means for communication (Lauring, Selmer, 2012, pp.156-172).
Nonetheless, while numerous academics address the language as the main facilitator of the
information transfer (Tange, Lauring, 2009, pp.218-232), Tange and Lauring (2009, pp.218-
232) add to the discussion and refer to the uncertainty surrounding the aspect of corporate
language as a mediator of harmonious networking. The authors communicate that, while
variety of languages dispersed within one organisation instigate the emergence of linguistic
clusters amongst the employees, decrease the depth of conversing, and imply the feeling of
incompetence and exclusion, they note that those issues are not necessarily rectified by
adopting a common corporate language. Moreover, Tange and Lauring (2009, pp.218-232)
elaborate on the importance of recognising and accepting the social aspect of language. It is
addressed that, the objective of language is far more complex than its functioning for
knowledge sharing and communication purposes only.
Language, as previously mentioned in this paragraph, is an integral aspect of social activity
within the organisation and at the same time it is the key determinant regarding authority,
identification and acceptance, and the decisive factor in promoting and developing
relationships amongst the employees.
The aspect of ostracism by language therefore becomes another critical factor frequently
exposed within the academic documents. It is revealed that social exclusion has highly
detrimental effects on employees’ self-esteem, behaviour and their commitment. It may lead
to one’s complete detachment and withdrawal from further collaboration and escalate
animosity, injustice and preconception of another’s intention (Hitlan, et al, 2006, pp.56-70).
23
In the paper by Hitlan (et al, 2006, pp.56-70) employees, for whom English is their first
language, acknowledged feeling apprehensive and rejected when their co-workers spoke in
another, foreign language, which prompted a notion of prejudice towards the immigrants.
This is confirmed with the results of previous research by Lauring and Selmer (2012, pp.156-
172) and Kulkarni and Sommer (2014, pp.637-652). Kulkarni and Sommer (2014, pp.637-
652) explain that varying languages, pronunciations and accents, prompt cultural or ethnic
stereotypes which therefore, may insinuate one’s superiority over another, undervaluing
another’s self-esteem and intelligence and induce segregation. Moreover, the ostracised party,
according to the paper, is less likely to actively engage with the other team members or
support the team, which subsequently may negatively affect the team’s performance.
Accordingly, it is concluded that language can create highly expulsive consequences.
Hence the aforementioned, the dual nature of language is exposed. It can correspondingly act
as a medium for exclusion or inclusion (Lauring, 2007, pp.255-266).
Cross-cultural teamwork and the significance of its coherence and engagement are the
principals of effective operations of any organisation. It is largely recognised that common
objectives, direction and commitment are the factors that cement people into a strong unit
(Agrawal, 2012, pp.384-400).
Promoting the climate of openness to diversified employees arises to be of high importance
for management of multicultural organisations. Previously mentioned shared corporate
language is communicated to have a moderating effect on group’s openness to language
diversity in the workplace, however it is concluded by many authors, that the common
language is not enough. The ambience of encouragement and raising awareness of language
varieties amongst personnel are those confirmable pointers recommended. Furthermore,
providing training to improve language skills remains the significant direction for
multilingual environments. The language training is another increasingly important feature
for the operations and strategy of an international organisation, which the management, at
previously mentioned Siemens, highly recommends in favour of raised awareness and
enhanced performance (HRM International Digest, 2007, pp.16-17). As confirmed by
numerous academics, language training and increased management’s awareness of the
linguistic diversity within their teams is essential to overcoming the social boundaries and
negative implications imposed by those (Chen, 2006, pp.679-695).
24
Furthermore, the academics advise the international companies that in order to maintain their
competitiveness on the global arena it is highly advantageous to speak the language of their
customers (Hurn, 2009, pp.299-304). In this way, as Hurn (2009, pp.299-304) suggests, they
should invest greatly in training their managers and other personnel in various foreign
languages and motivate them to improve on their linguistic skills.
On the other hand, the behaviouristic angle, such as: willingness to engage with linguistically
different employees, creating the culture of support, embracement, acceptance and
responsiveness also appear to have a positive effect on dealing with multilingualism in work
(Selmer, Lauring, Jonasson, 2013, pp.135-156).
To expand on the matter of implications of linguistic varieties within the organisation, one
need to notice that, it is conjointly agreed within the academic sphere that,
miscommunication inflicted by, amongst many other factors, verbal misunderstandings leads
to a weakened team commitment and motivation, and in consequence diminished satisfaction
and reduced performance (Korovyakovskaya, Chong, 2015, pp.41-54).
More than that, Korovyakovskaya and Chong (2015, pp.41-54) communicate the vast scale of
the challenges confronting the management in order to overcome the frictions and
antagonisms within the teams, which are highly likely to occur in result of misapprehension.
Cultural differences are revealed to create the underlying problems with miscommunication
as the native speakers of different languages present different approach to dealing with
situations. This may result in an increase of aggravation amongst the team members. Finding
an adequate strategy is derived to be the essential skill that managers need to focus on
(Korovyakovskaya, Chong, 2015, pp.41-54).
Furthermore, according to Lauring and Selmer (2012, pp.156-172), linguistic diversity is a
largely overlooked dimension within a corporate environment, while at the same time, it is a
key element of human interaction and it may be the determining factor in communication
breakdowns.
The authors report that, socio-cultural differences and lacking language skills can
indisputably affect the individuals’ communication and interchange of knowledge.
Despite the above, it is proclaimed that, communication frequency is the decisive factor
accommodating the positive attitude towards linguistic diversity. Namely, the daily encounter
with linguistically diverse individuals leads to the type of natural unforced amalgamation of
the differences. The employees grow more tolerant and open to those dissimilarities.
Authors, Lauring and Selmer (2011, pp.81-93) address the issue of linguistic diversity and
the group’s performance.
25
They examined the problem of exclusion of multilingual employees and the way the feeling
of discrimination interferes with the team’s collaboration and affects motivation and
engagement. As a result, according to them, positive attitude to linguistic diversity
corresponds with acceptance of various language proficiencies, accents and vocabulary.
The results of the research conducted by Lauring and Selmer (2011, pp.81-93) published that,
the group’s high openness to diversity has a positive effect on the team’s performance and the
satisfaction within the group.
Furthermore, it has confirmed that positive attitude to linguistic diversity supports group’s
satisfaction and accomplishment.
On contrary, Kulkarni and Sommer (2014, pp. 637-652) argue that, differing pronunciations
and inadequate vocabulary can have adverse effects on one’s affiliation with the group.
Furthermore, certain language insufficiencies can create social categories or clusters of
people aligned around the same language, they can also affect the group’s communication
processes and the necessary interactions for the team’s good performance.
Despite the fact, Lauring and Selmer (2011, pp.81-93) exposed the niche in the linguistic
diversity research area and the need for further study in order to provide constructive
information for the management of multinational teams.
Furthermore, in contrast Mukta Kulkarni (2015, pp.128-146) in another article raises the
concern over communication processes among linguistically diverse employees throughout
various levels of the organisational hierarchy. The research revealed strong presence of
feelings of exclusion, frustration and suspicion, particularly distinct within the lower levels of
the employee network. In addition, exposure to momentary language deviations escalated the
perception of being devalued, as a result of misunderstanding.
That in consequence, stems the creation of clusters of people, affecting the functioning of the
individuals and the groups equally. Furthermore, the findings of that study report poor level
of information exchange or even some degree of loss of the information, time delays in the
communication processes and deceleration of the interaction.
As a result of the aforementioned, the audit indicates that multilingualism in the workplace
can lead to negative feelings within the group, such as low trust and low social interaction,
loss of understanding, rejection and segregation. Despite the above, the study showed the
benefits of linguistically diverse workforce as an asset in engaging with external parties of
the company, such as clients or vendors. Over and above, the communication within
linguistically diverse teams is considered by numerous academics as the key factor which has
a decisive impact on its performance (Chen, et al, 2006, pp.679-693).
