The
Cross-Cultural Workplace
Any workplace in any
society in the world is always a very dynamic and complex environment with a
host of variables and forces at work that influence social interaction patterns
and resultant levels of performance and productivity. The cross-cultural workplace has an even
higher level of dynamic complexity because you have culture-shaped institutional
structures and norms interacting with people of different cultures. In many cases institutions have been
shaped by several cultures during the colonial and post-colonial periods and
they are a sometimes a competing mix of value, practice and belief
patterns. In the
cross-cultural workplace you have people of different cultures with different
culturally molded personalities and motives interacting with each other. It can be exciting, dynamic, creative
and productive, but it can also be stressful, confusing, frustrating and
nonproductive. You can have a
combination of aggressive, non-aggressive and passive-aggressive people all
thrown into the mix. We can see the
chaos theory at work in any organization or institutional setting and sometimes
we can really see it at work in the cross-cultural setting.
It is helpful to look
at the nature of expatriates and try to develop a typology of expatriate
psychology with an emphasis on motives and personality. Why is the expatriate there to
begin with? What is their motive
for working overseas -- travel and adventure, exploring new societies and
cultures, commitment to development work, tired of their home society and
culture, can’t make it in their home society and culture, don’t want to make it
in their home society and culture, on the rebound from a broken relationship,
running away from something, running toward something, or just thought they’d
like to try something different?
What is their
personality like? Is it typical or
atypical of their home culture? How
is their personality naturally in conflict with or in harmony with the typical
host culture personality type? Are
they suffering from culture shock and if so what effect is this having on their
personality, their patterns of interaction with people and their job
performance? How quickly are they
moving on the continuum of cross-cultural understanding? How ethnocentric are they? What personal emotional baggage are they
carrying with them and what effect is this having on their interpersonal
interactions and performance? Are
they happy and productive? Are they
unhappy and unproductive?
One factor that has
had a big influence on the structure and operational norms of many institutions
and organizations in societies with a colonial past and post-colonial or
neocolonial present is the transient nature of the expatriate contract
worker. It has had and
continues to have a considerable effect on the attitudes of host country
people. On balance, even though
expatriates made and continue to make significant contributions to developing
Pacific island nations, the transient nature of expatriate workers has also had
negative effects on the workings of organizations, institutions and
bureaucracies. And, although there
are many positive exceptions, it has also had negative effects on the
interpersonal relationships of locals and expatriates and their perceptions of
each other.
These outsiders come
and stay for a short time and then leave again. Many of them go through an initial
period of culture shock and adjustment and related family problems, and by the
time they and their family finally get adjusted and learn to understand and work
within the host culture it’s time for them to go home again. Because of their planned brief stay they
sometimes try to accomplish too much in a short time. They may feel rushed to achieve
something in a hurry. They may get
easily frustrated at the pace of their achievement and tend to force themselves
on people and step on toes trying to accomplish something in a short time. Islanders know that they won’t be
staying long and some might try to get as much out of the expat contract worker
as they can while they are there.
Sometimes this appears to the expatriate as exploitative and insincere
and sometimes it is but often it’s not. Sometimes the expatriate feels
that the host country people don’t appreciate their hard work and are
ungrateful. Islanders have seen
expatriates come and go. They
have seen them come with big ideas that turn into considerable accomplishments
that often crumble as soon as they leave.
Many times the locals tolerate the expatriate ideas and help them or
allow them to make significant operational changes knowing that soon they will
leave and things will be back to their previous state. There are also, of course, many other
cases where host country people genuinely appreciate the work of expats and do
all they can to continue and build upon their good work after they leave.
When I worked in Fiji
I built up a thriving vocational training program in the area of welding and
metal fabrication and, in conjunction with the local Red Cross, produced
wheelchairs, walkers and hospital furniture. I also developed a poultry-farm
training unit that was profitable and self-sustaining. Within six months of my departure both
of these operations were no longer in existence. I was a bit disappointed, but I knew I
had gotten a lot out of the experience and I knew that the boys that I had
trained had benefited and perhaps that was all I could ask for. This is the ultimate fate of many Peace
Corps Volunteers and development workers in general, but also the fate of many
contract workers as well.
Many expatriate
contract workers who couldn’t accomplish much or whose projects folded soon
after they left have criticized islander commitment and motivation, but the
islanders are not entirely to blame for the failure to carry on with projects
initiated by expatriates. Often the
expatriates have done everything themselves in an effort to have their
ego-stroking achievement and they have failed to include locals in the planning
and implementation processes thereby not giving them any stake in continuing
after the expatriate leaves. So
many projects are just glory buttons for the expatriates, which is why good,
solid, sustainable development projects are always those that build in local
stakeholders from their inception.
I am certain that this is partly to blame for the discontinuation of my
own Peace Corps projects. I did
most everything myself, thus not giving my local counterparts a stake in the
operation and its success. But
there are also cases where local counterparts have been included and
stakeholding has been a major consideration of planning but the project still
falls flat after the expatriate leaves.
Expatriates need to
understand these dynamics, but so do island people. It is very helpful if host-country
people understand the motives, perceptions, frustrations and anxieties of the
expatriate workers. In the final
analysis, however, the initial and sustained success of projects requires local
commitment and this requires that host-country people sincerely value the
project and its goals. If this is
lacking, then nothing can make a success out of even the best planned and
implemented projects.