Features
Global Diversity: Navigating International Differences
Tory Clarke, 03-15-2009
The most innovative, creative solutions to problems often are borne from teams of globally diverse employees with experience in different functions, markets, geographies and cultures.
“The urgency for diversity leaders to be culturally dexterous is unprecedented, given our reliance on acquiring and retaining talent while meeting the expectations of customers from around the globe,” said Todd Corley, senior vice president of diversity and inclusion at Abercrombie & Fitch. “The rules are different. More than ever, diversity leaders need to show how relevant we are as advisers helping our organizations navigate this complex and turbulent business environment.”
Yet, those teams with different backgrounds and experiences may not know how to work together. Where should they start collaborating? Diversity executives must navigate international differences when implementing global diversity strategies.
Workplace Diversity Outside of the U.S.
The term “diversity” does not have a globally shared meaning. For some it could be based on race or gender; for others it could mean physical ability or sexual orientation. And for others still, it could reflect a support of all differences.
In Managing Diversity: Towards a Globally Inclusive Workplace, Michalle E. Mor Barak wrote, “The ways in which we define diversity in the US, which is where most of the research comes from, do not travel across national boundaries, nor does it translate well across cultural and linguistic boundaries.
“People from Mexico and China said that if you translate the word to their languages, the concept would be meaningless,” the book continues. “In the US, ‘diversity’ might refer to the racial/ethnic categories that have been used by the Census bureau for many years, such as Asian American, Latino and so forth. In Ireland, on the other hand, the significant diversity categories are religious. In India, any discussion of diversity would have to include the societal division into castes. Whatever distinct categories you use to define diversity, they must have meaning within the national and cultural context.”
Each country and culture has its own historical context for diversity that often is defined in terms of exclusion, or identifying groups that have been deprived of opportunity. For example, in the U.S., workplace diversity as a business imperative is an evolution of equal employment opportunity and affirmative action, with a focus on race, gender, physical ability and sexual orientation. But that definition is outdated and far from global since a minority population in one country may be the majority in another.
Consider the following examples:
- Japan has a highly ethnically homogenous population. Corporations have a traditional tendency toward male, Japanese-born management teams. In recent years, companies such as Nissan, Sony and Matsushita Electric have made diversity headlines by promoting or recruiting foreign-born and female executives to their leadership ranks.
- In the U.K., diversity traditionally has encompassed race, gender, sexual orientation and religion. However, increasingly high levels of immigration have brought cultural heritage and language to the forefront as diversity topics, resulting in hiring quotas for the police service, and the international BBC news service to hire minorities in proportions exceeding those in the population.
- In Scandinavian countries, where workplace policies generally are considered pioneering and have long been highly favorable toward women and mothers, the rise in immigration is bringing a new diversity agenda to the table.
When behavioral diversity is added to the mix, the definition of diversity becomes even more ephemeral. In some Asian countries, it is customary to wait to be asked an opinion before speaking up; whereas in many Western countries failing to voice your opinion is seen as a lack of knowledge or management strength. In many major Western-influenced corporations, openness around sexual orientation is encouraged and accepted; yet, in many Middle Eastern countries the subject is taboo.
With appropriate resources and time, an individual executive can become more culturally competent. But how does this translate into a global environment with thousands of employees?
U.S.-Centric Diversity Model Ineffective
U.S. corporate diversity initiatives have influenced how countries that traditionally prefer not to discuss race, gender and equality issues view diversity in the workplace. Consider a recent commentary on the U.K.’s Business in the Community (BITC) Web site following publication of a study criticizing diversity at senior management and board level:
“Why have we made such depressingly poor progress on closing the gap in employment between ethnic minorities and whites? … [U]nlike the United States we have no comparable civil rights history. If ever we want to reflect the multicultural society in which we live … this UK society needs to recognise that it has a problem with race. In this respect the United States is a much more progressive society.”
Many assert the U.S. has led the way by formalizing the business case for diversity and inclusion in the corporate environment, but many U.S. companies developed their corporate diversity strategies in response to immediate and local issues. The global implementation of a diversity initiative designed to meet the needs of one country is unlikely to be effective tackling the intricate cultural and behavioral nuances in a multisite, international organization.
Shinder Dhillon, director of global diversity and inclusion at Air Products and Chemicals, countered the perception of diversity being U.S.-centric. “If we relate it to representation and targets, or just race and gender, I can see how you might think that. Affirmative action is quantitative, legally driven and can be remedial. Diversity-inclusion is qualitative, strategically driven and based on behaviors. That is another reason we are focusing on inclusion, so it becomes more global. Inclusion excludes no one.”
Organizations should think globally and act locally. Illustrate sensitivity to local issues without losing sight of the overall mission. This requires flexibility, balance and an in-depth understanding of the social and cultural contexts of business.
Integrating a Global Perspective Into Diversity
Under the umbrella of a shared mission, the focus on awareness and inclusion in a global organization, and using diversity initiatives to reinforce a global set of standards and cultural integrity, reconciles cultural differences without erasing them and achieves organizational change.
“People from almost 200 countries now work for [global chemical company] BASF. They contribute to a different way of looking at things, and different convictions. We see diversity as something that enriches us, and we want to have more of it,” said Dr. Jurgen Hambrecht, chairman of global chemical company BASF, in a statement.
“We are active on five continents, and our markets are correspondingly diverse. The diversity in the company — with regard to nationalities, cultures and competencies — helps us to understand these differences better and to make use of them. That is a huge advantage in terms of global competition. It needs to be understood that common values take precedence over individual differences, and that all of our employees have a common goal — the success of the company.”
