Intercultural Sensitivity Among Employees

Intercultural Sensitivity Among Employees A Pilot Study in Multinational Corporations in Hyderabad SNEHA VERGHESE*

Abstract Multicultural work force has become a common feature in Indian organisations. Hyderabad, home to several multinational companies (MNCs) is no exception to this. Diversity in workforce has become a standard norm rather than a cutting edge in MNCs. Employees with different Indian subcultures work together and experience ample intercultural interaction. The present study is an attempt at gauging the inter-cultural sensitivity among Indian employees working in MNCs in Hyderabad, India. A total of 62 employees participated in the study, of which 22 were female and 40 male. Chen and Starosta’s 24-item Intercultural Sensitivity Scale, was adopted to measure intercultural sensitivity. The study found that respondents highly enjoyed interacting with people from different cultures and have respect for others’ cultural values. However, the lower ISS score for Interaction Engagement and Interaction Attentiveness indicated that they were hesitant to initiate a situation that involved an intercultural interaction or in sustaining their involvement in an intercultural interactive setting. Key words: Intercultural sensitivity, Culture, Engagement, Interaction

The nature of our workplaces has changed. We have moved away from the homogenous composition of the workforce in organizations to a heterogeneous mix of team members from all over the world. With this new multicultural makeup come differences in cultures which in turn bring differences in areas such as * Research Scholar, Department of Communication & Journalism, Osmania University, Hyderabad.

communication styles, approach to time, managerial styles and a plethora of other cross cultural differences. Cultural differences manifest in many ways. Within a multicultural team, a person's cultural background will impact how they act and behave. There will be differences in areas such as communication, attitude towards conflict, approaches to task completion and decision making styles. Although cross-cultural Interface | February 2016 | 53

Sneha Verghese

differences do not always cause obvious problems, it is their more subtle manifestations that can and do lead to a lack of clear communication. Multicultural teams ought to identify where things may be going wrong or how to best leverage their differences. Since a multicultural workforce is a reality in Indian organizations, it is crucial for the members of the organization to: - Perceive and understand the nature of cultural differences. - Understand their own cultural assumptions and behaviors - Understanding others’ cultural assumptions and behaviors -See how these differing assumptions can create multicultural conflicts that cost time, money and efficiency. Globalisation and the presence of multi national corporations in Hyderabad has changed the face of the corporate sector and the composition of the work place which has become more diverse, pluralistic and multicultural. The Indian society is an amalgamation of several sub-cultures, where each subculture could be defined by religion, language, and/or caste. Previous studies have focussed on the attitude and perception of Whites towards Indians as a whole, but no study has so far been conducted on how sensitive Indians themselves are towards other sub-cultures which are a part of their own country. Multi-national corporations being home to a variety of sub-cultures, give their employees the opportunity to interact and work with people from different backgrounds, and are thus an appropriate place to study inter-cultural perceptions and behaviours. 54 | February 2016 | Interface

Conceptual Framework Intercultural communication has been defined as “The process that occurs when two or more cultures or co-cultures exchange messages in a manner that is influenced by their different cultural perceptions and symbol systems, both verbal and nonverbal”. M. Komarovsky and S.S. Sargent (1949) defined subculture as “cultural variants displayed by certain segments of the population.” Subcultures are distinguished not by one or two isolated traits – they constitute relatively cohesive cultural systems. They are worlds within the natural worlds of our national culture. Class, race, occupation, residence and region are the terms referred to define sub-culture. According to Blaine Mercer (1958), “A society contains numerous sub-groups, each with its own characteristic ways of thinking and acting. These cultures within a culture are called subcultures.” Referring to sub group values and language, Kimball Young and Raymond W. Mack say that “such shared learned behaviours which are common to a specific group or category are called subcultures.” They then identify ethnic, occupational and regional variations as the basis for defining sub-cultural identities. Thus, a sub-culture can be defined as an ethnic, regional, economic, or social group exhibiting characteristic patterns of behaviour or shared set of values, sufficient to distinguish it from others within a larger culture or society. According to Bennett, intercultural understanding is an individual process and defines it as continuum of different levels

Intercultural Sensitivity Among Employees

of personal development in the recognition and acceptance of cultural differences. Developing intercultural sensitivity means to develop capability to recognize and to accept differences between cultures’ perception of the world. He said that developing sensitivity goes through the following stages of ethnocentrism and ethno relativism- denial, defense, minimization, acceptance, adaptation and integration. Bennett (1998) says that, like interpersonal communication, intercultural communication focuses on face-to-face (or at least person-to-person) interaction among human beings. For this kind of communication to occur, each participant must perceive him- or herself being perceived by others. That is, all participants must see themselves as potentially engaged in communication and capable of giving and receiving feedback. Different religious groups (Hindu, Muslim, Parsi, Christian, Sikh, Jain, etc) and ethnic groups or regional communities such as Bengali, Marathi, Telugu, Tamil, Hindi, Punjabi, etc., are considered to be sub-cultures for the study which focuses on interaction among them. In other words, it examines the interaction and sensitivity among the several subcultures that co-exist within the Indian cultural framework.

Review of Literature Most studies related to inter-cultural communication have been carried out between different nationalities, with people of each nationality considered as a ‘culture.’ This section reviews a few studies on inter cultural communication and on

intercultural sensitivity levels of employees of different nationalities working in multinational companies and in the corporate sector. Chen and Starosta’s (1977) conceptualization of intercultural sensitivity states that someone who is interculturally sensitive possesses the desire to “understand, appreciate, and accept” others’ culture and seeks encouraging results from interactions with them. The interculturally sensitive individual sends and receives encouraging and assuring responses in situations that call for intercultural communication. There is a noticeable attitude of respect between him and the people he interacts with. Intercultural sensitivity is the affective aspect which not only represents the ability of an individual to distinguish between the different behaviours, perceptions, and feelings of a culturally different counterpart, but also the ability to appreciate and respect them as well (Chen & Starosta, 1997) They pointed out that the main problem of the confusion is embedded in the long-time misperception of three concepts:intercultural sensitivity, intercultural awareness, and intercultural communication competence.The three are closely related but separate concepts.Intercultural communication competence is an umbrella concept which comprises cognitive, affective, and behavioral ability of interactants in the process of intercultural communication. In other words, the cognitive aspect of intercultural communication competencies represented by the concept of intercultural awareness refers to "the understanding of culture conventions Interface | February 2016 | 55

Sneha Verghese

that affect how we think and behave". The affective aspect of intercultural communication competence is represented by the concept of intercultural sensitivity that refers to the subjects’ “active desire to motivate themselves to understand, appreciate, and accept differences among cultures" (Chen & Starosta, 1998, p. 231). And the behavioral aspect of intercultural communication competence is represented by the concept of intercultural adroitness that refers to "the ability to get the job done and attain communication goals in intercultural interactions" (Chen & Starosta, 1996, p. 367). The confusion of these concepts directly impacts the evaluation of intercultural training programmes such as affective training, cognitive training,behavioral training, self-awareness training, cultural awareness training, and area simulation. According to them successful intercultural communication demands interactants' ability of intercultural awareness by learning cultural similarities and differences,while the process of achieving awareness of cultural similarities and differences is enhanced and buffered by the ability of intercultural sensitivity. Together with intercultural adroitness that concerns the behavioral effectiveness and appropriateness, the three concepts form the foundation of intercultural communication competence. Moreover, the authors proposed that individuals must possess six affective elements to be interculturally sensitive: selfesteem, self-monitoring, openmindedness, empathy, interaction involvement, and suspending judgment. Chen & Starosta developed and validated a comprehensive scale that assesses 56 | February 2016 | Interface

intercultural sensitivity, the affective dimension of intercultural communication competence. A 24-item intercultural sensitivity scale was developed by them with five factors: interaction engagement, respect for cultural differences, interaction confidence, interaction enjoyment, and interaction attentiveness. As Bhawuk and Brislin (1992) suggest, intercultural sensitivity is an individual’s reaction to people from other cultures, which can predetermine that individual’s ability to work successfully with those people. The authors further suggest it is obvious that in an age of technology and rapid expanse of products, commodities and more importantly culture, the ability to communicate interculturally and achieve a high level of intercultural sensitivity will become not only necessary, but also a sought after skill by universities, companies, and employers everywhere. Landis and Bhagat (1996) argue that “intercultural sensitivity is crucial to enabling people to live and work with others from different globalization of business intensities, and an individual’s sensitivity to cultural differences combined with an ability to adapt his or her behavior to those differences will become increasingly valuable” (Anderson et al., 2005, p. 46). In other words, the increase in travel and international business ventures, necessitates that an increasing number of people will need to be aware of cultural differences and will need to increase their level of intercultural sensitivity in order to stay current within their market area. “Globalization continues to redefine our identity in the workplace, at home,

Intercultural Sensitivity Among Employees

and other arenas of our life by breaking down the stereotypical roles we played at previous weeks or years. Moreover, globalization demands a community where people of different cultural backgrounds must learn to be interdependent in order to survive. As a result, the need for intercultural communication competence in the globalizing society becomes indispensable for a peaceful and successful life in the new millennium” (Chen 2000, p. 78).

Aim The aim of the present study is to gauge the levels of inter-cultural sensitivity among employees of multinational corporations in Hyderabad towards people from different sub-cultures whom they interact with, especially at the workplace.

Research Questions 1. How sensitive are employees of multinational corporations to inter-cultural differences? 2. Where do Indians stand on an intercultural sensitivity scale?

Methodology The pilot study for the survey was undertaken among employees working in MNCs in Dell, Deloitte, Syntel, Cognizant, Thomson Reuters, Wipro, Google, Genpact, CSC, HSBC, IBM, Infosys, etc. in Hyderabad. While the employees were the population for the study, convenience sampling method, a nonprobability sampling technique was adopted to select 62 sample units. The sample had 22 females and 40 males.The

age of the participants ranged between 20 and 40, with 27 being the average age. The distribution of respondents on the basis of religion and the language spoken and place of origin was as follows: Religion: 43- Hindus, 8 - Christians, 4Muslims, 2 -Jains . Three participants did not reveal their religion. Language spoken/Place of origin: 32 Telugu, 10 - Hindi, 4 -Urdu, 4 -Maharashtrian, 3- Malayali, 2-Punjabi, 2-Tamilian, 2-Oriya/Odia, 1-Gujarati, 1-Marwari/Rajasthani and 1- Kannadiga. Research instrument

The questionnaire consisted of two sections -- Section I on Intercultural Sensitivity Scale and Section II on Demographic details. Section I:

The first section was Chen and Starosta’s Intercultural Sensitivity Scale (ISS), which is a 24- item questionnaire designed to measure intercultural sensitivity. The scale has five factors or constructs on which its statements are based: Overall there were 24 items on the five constructs. • Interaction Engagement had seven items related to participants’ feeling of participation in intercultural communication. • Respect for Cultural Difference had six items on how participants orient to or tolerate their counterparts’ culture and opinion. • Interaction Confidence had five items on how confident participants are in the intercultural setting. • Interaction Enjoyment included Interface | February 2016 | 57

Sneha Verghese

three items dealing with participants’ positive or negative reaction towards communicating with people from different cultures. • Interaction Attentiveness had three items related to the participants’ effort to understand what is going on in intercultural interaction. Participants responded to all the 24 items/statements on a five point Likert scale: 1- strongly disagree, 2-disagree, 3uncertain, 4-agree, and 5 is strongly agree. According to Chen and Starosta (2000), “higher scores of this measure are suggestive of being more interculturally sensitive”. Before summing the 24 items, items 2, 4, 7, 9, 12, 15, 18, 20, and 22 were reversecoded for data analysis. Reverse-coding was used in this case because in addition to having "positively-keyed" or positively worded items (i.e. "I enjoy interacting with people from different cultures") the ISS had "negatively-keyed" items (i.e. “I don't like to be with people from different cultures"). Reverse coding was done as follows: 1=5, 2=4, 3=3, 4=2, 5=1. “Reverse-coding the negatively-keyed items ensures that all the items – those that are originally negatively-keyed and those that are positively-keyed – are consistent with each other, in terms of what an “agree” or “disagree” imply.” (Wake Forrest Website). Reverse-coding was done so that high scores on the questionnaire reflect relatively high levels of the attribute being measured by the questionnaire. Section II:

The second part of the questionnaire elicited demographic information of the 58 | February 2016 | Interface

respondents- age, gender, regional community, religion, educational qualifications, organization and number of years of work experience. The responses were analyzed and compiled factor-wise to calculate the intercultural sensitivity of the participants.Abbreviations used in the tables indicate the following: SA= Strongly Agree, A= Agree, U= Uncertain, D= Disagree, SD=Strongly Disagree. All figures in parenthesis refer to the corresponding percentage of the total sample of respondents.

Results and discussion Factor 1: Interaction Engagement Table 1 reveals that all the respondents enjoyed interacting with people from different cultures and most of them (93%) also said that they were openminded. However, only 61% said that they tend to wait before forming an impression of culturally distinct counterparts. This shows that 39% of the subjects still tend to be influenced by stereotypes- perceptions or beliefs formed based on previous opinions and attitudes. Though stereotypes help a person to decide the attitude to be adopted when interacting with a person from a different culture for the first time, it can prove to be an impediment as stereotypes generally apply to the behaviour norm of groups rather than the individual, leading to wrong/misplaced notions about the person. It can be inferred that respondents are ready to interact with people of other sub-cultures; prefer to be open-minded;

Intercultural Sensitivity Among Employees Item

SA

A

U

D

SD

I enjoy interacting with people from different cultures (Item 1) I tend to wait before forming an impression of culturally distinct counterparts. (Item 11) I am open-minded when interacting with people from other cultures. (Item 13) I often give positive responses to my culturally different counterpart during our Interaction (Item 21) I avoid those situations where I will have to deal with culturally-distinct persons. (Item 22) I often show my culturally-distinct counterpart my understanding through verbal or non-verbal cues. (Item 23) I have a feeling of enjoyment towards differences between my culturally-distinct counterpart and me. (Item 24)

36 (58)

26 (42)

0

0

0

7 (11)

31 (50)

16 (26)

7 (11)

1(2)

22 (35) 10 (16) 4 (6) 6 (10)

36 (58) 34 (55) 9 (14) 23 (37)

3 (5) 13 (21) 8 (13) 23 (37)

1 (2) 5 (8) 22 (36) 8 (13)

0

10 (16)

20 (32)

23 (37)

4 (7)

5 (8)

0 19 (31) 2 (3)

Table 1:Frequency and percentage distribution of respondents on Likert items for Factor 1

but their underlying prejudices and stereotypes influence their understanding of their culturally-distinct counterpart and affect their attitude and behaviour during intercultural interaction. Data in Table 2 indicates that 91 per cent of the respondents like to be with people of other cultures, 97 per cent believed in respecting the values of people from different cultures. However, while 52 per cent were of the opinion that they did not think their culture better than others 31 per cent were uncertain and 17 per cent felt that their culture was better

than that of the others,. Also, 36 per cent were uncertain about people from other cultures being narrow-minded. To sum up, it is implied that respect for other cultures is high among MNC employees, but more than 30 per cent people have chances of judging other cultures as narrow minded or considering other cultures to be inferior (having marked ‘uncertain’ for items 2 and 20). Nearly 70 percent of the sample showed respect towards other religions, indicating an ‘acceptance of cultural difference’ and a major shift from ethnocentrism to

Item

SA

A

U

D

SD

I think people from other cultures are narrow-minded. (Item 2) I don't like to be with people from different cultures. (Item 7) I respect the values of people from different cultures. (Item 8) I respect the ways people from different cultures behave. (Item 16) I would not accept the opinions of people from different cultures. (Item 18) I think my culture is better than other cultures. (Item 20)

2 (3)

0

22 (36)

23 (37)

15 (24)

1 (2) 37 (60)

1 (2) 23 (37) 35 (56) 3 (5) 9 (14)

3 (5) 2 (3)

25 (40) 0

32 (51) 0

6 (9) 12 (19) 19 (31)

1 (2) 25 (40) 19 (31)

1 (2) 21 (34) 13 (21)

19 (31) 1 (2) 2 (3)

Interface | February 2016 | 59

Sneha Verghese

Item

SA

A

U

D

SD

I am pretty sure of myself in interacting with people from different cultures. (Item 3) I find it very hard to talk in front of people from different cultures. (Item 4) I always know what to say when interacting with people from different cultures. (Item 5) I can be as sociable as I want to be when interacting with people from different cultures. (Item 6) I feel confident when interacting with people from different cultures. (Item 10)

17 (28)

39 (64)

5 (8)

0

0

4 (6) 12 (19) 14 (22) 15 (24)

1 (2) 26 (42) 34 (55) 36 (58)

8 (13) 19 (31) 10 (16) 10 (16)

32 (51) 5 (8) 3 (5) 1 (2)

17 (28) 0 1 (2) 0

Table 3:Frequency and percentage distribution of respondents on Likert items for Factor 3

ethnorelativism. Cultural difference is no longer judged by the standards of one’s own culture and “those who have moved into this stage have undergone a shift in their perception of difference; they no longer find difference threatening.” The Table 3 reveals that 92 per cent of the respondents were sure of themselves when interacting with people from other cultures, 79 per cent did not find it hard to talk in front of people from other cultures and 82 per cent said they were confident when interacting with people from

other cultures. However, 31 per cent felt uncertain of whether they knew the right things to say when interacting with people of different cultures. These figures indicate that employees generally had a high level of confidence regarding themselves while interacting with colleagues from a different culture. The uncertainity among 31 per cent of them could be attributed to linguistic barriers or lack of knowledge, cultural upbringing or due to their apprehensions regarding their counterpart’s customs,

Item

SA

A

U

D

SD

I get upset easily when interacting with people from Respect for Cultural Difference different cultures. (Item 9) I often get discouraged when I am with people from different cultures. (Item 12) I often feel useless when interacting with people from different cultures. (Item 15)

3 (5)

6 (10)

4 (6)

22 (35)

27 (44)

1 (2)

5 (8)

7 (11)

26 (42)

23 (37)

0

2 (3)

3 (5)

24 (39)

33 (53)

Table 4:Frequency and percentage distribution of respondents on Likert items for Factor 4 Item

SA

A

U

D

SD

I am very observant when interacting with people from different cultures. (Item 14) I try to obtain as much information as I can when interacting with people from different cultures. (Item 17) I am sensitive to my culturally-distinct counterpart's subtle meanings during our interaction. (Item 19)

11 (18)

39 (62)

11 (18)

0

1 (2)

15 (24)

31 (50)

15 (24)

1 (2)

0

2 (3)

21 (34)

22 (36)

12 (19)

5 (8)

Table 5:Frequency and percentage distribution of respondents on Likert items for Factor 5 Respect for Cultural Difference

60 | February 2016 | Interface Respect for Cultural Difference

(Item 19)

Factor

Mean

Factor 1: Interaction Engagement Factor 2: Respect for Cultural Difference Factor 3: Interaction Confidence Factor 4: Interaction Enjoyment Factor 5: Interaction Attentiveness Total Overall Mean Score

3.8156 4.0645 3.9645 4.1666 3.6559 19.6671 3.9327

Table 6

verbal/non-verbal cues,etc.,The fear of being misunderstood by their culturallydistinct counterpart could also be a reason. From Table 4, it can be seen that levels of Interaction Enjoyment are quite high among MNC employees. Situations where the respondent gets discouraged/ upset during inter-cultural interaction seem occasional. While most respondents said that they were observant when interacting with people from different cultures and that they try to obtain as much information as possible while interacting with people from different cultures, only 37 per cent said that they were sensitive to their culturally-distinct counterpart's subtle meanings during their interaction (Table 5).This reflects that though the respondents attempt to be observant of their colleagues from other cultures, often they are not very sensitive to the subtle meanings during their interaction. Mean Scores

The average score of each of the five factors was calculated to examine the overall picture of the levels of intercultural sensitivity among MNC employees. The mean score of the five factors was also computed. The Table 6 reveals that Factor 4- In-

Intercultural Sensitivity Among Employees

teraction Enjoyment had the highest score of 4.1666, closely followed by Factor 2-Respect for Cultural Difference4.0645, Factor 3-Interaction Confidence3.9645, Factor 1-Interaction Engagement3.8156, and least of all Factor 5-Interaction Attentiveness-3.6559. The average score of the five factors is 3.9327.

Conclusions It can be concluded that the overall rating of MNC employees in Hyderabad on Chen and Starosta’s Intercultural Sensitivity Scale is quite high, i.e., 3.9327. This shows that they are high on intercultural sensitivity, and that there is a major shift from ethnocentricism to ethnorelativism. Among the five factors, the respondents rate highest on Factor 4, i.e., Interaction Enjoyment, followed by Respect for Cultural Differences, Interaction Confidence, Interaction Engagement and Interaction Attentiveness. The broad conclusion is that though the respondents highly enjoy interacting with people from different cultures and have respect for others’ cultural values, not all respondents feel comfortable initiating a situation that involves an intercultural interaction or in sustaining their involvement in an intercultural interactive setting. Also, they do not evince the same interest in learning more about their culturally distinct counterpart’s culture, thus retaining their earlier prejudice/ stereotypical notions.

References Bartel-Radic, A. (2009). Adaptive Interface | February 2016 | 61

Sneha Verghese

capability abroad of Brazilian MNCs: the role of IHRM and Brazilian national culture. In 5ème colloque de l’IFBAE–Grenoble, 18 et19 mai 2009. Bennett, Milton J. (1993) "A Developmental Model Of Intercultural Sensitivity." Bennett, M. J. (1998). Intercultural communication: A current perspective.Basic concepts of intercultural communication: Selected Readings, 1-34. Chen, G. M. (1997). A Review of the Concept of Intercultural Sensitivity, Human Communication, 1 (1), 1-16. Chen, G. M., & Starosta, W. J. (2000). The development and validation of the intercultural sensitivity scale. Del Villar, C. (2012). Intercultural Sensitivity of Filipinos in Multi National Corporations in the Philippines. Human Communication.(15), 2, 59-84. Hou, X. (2010). An empirical study of Chinese learners’ intercultural

62 | February 2016 | Interface

sensitivity. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 1(3), 327-331. Komarovsky, M., & Sargent, S. S. (1949). Research into Subcultural Influences Upon Personality, 49. McMurray, A. (2007), Measuring Intercultural Sensitivity Of International And Domestic College Students: The Impact Of International Travel, University of Florida, 19-20 Mercer, B. E. (1958). An Introduction to the Study of Society. R. K. Merton (Ed.). Harcourt, Brace & World. Samovar, L. A., Porter, R. E., & McDaniel, E. R. (Eds.). (2008). Intercultural Communication: A Reader. Cengage Learning. Yinger, J. M. (1960). Contraculture and subculture. American Sociological Review, 625-635. Young, K., & Mack, R. W. (1962). Sociology and Social Life. American Book Company, 49.