Handbook of Corporate Communication and Public ... - Blogs Unpad

Handbook of Corporate Communication and Public ... - Blogs Unpad Handbook of Corporate Communication and Public ... - Blogs Unpad

blogs.unpad.ac.id
from blogs.unpad.ac.id More from this publisher
31.12.2014 Views

language policies. With rare exceptions (Marschan et al., 1997; Dhir and Goke-Pariola, 2002), the need for corporate language policies has not been adequately recognized in either the strategic management literature or the communication literature. Dhir and Savage (2002) offer a judgment-analytic approach for corporations to assess the economic value of languages. They posit that different organizations may receive different value from delivered functions of a language. It is imperative that the assessed value account for not only those functional properties and qualities of the language in question, but also the context of the strategic environment in which the organization assessing it exists and operates. For a given corporation, the value of a language may be determined by various factors. Examples of these factors provided by Dhir and Savage (2002) are the degree to which: 1 the language is used in the demographic community defining the organization’s strategic environment relative to other available languages; 2 the demographic community defining the organization’s internal environment has collectively invested in the language relative to other available languages; 3 the language is demanded as a commodity within the demographic community defining the organization’s strategic environment, both external and internal, relative to other available languages; 4 the demographic community defining the multinational business organization’s strategic environment, both external and internal, creates knowledge in the language relative to other available languages; and, 5 the language can be developed as the multinational business organization’s economic means of production within the time frame of its strategic plan relative to other available languages. With such conception of language, corporations can begin to think in terms of a portfolio of language assets much in the same way as it thinks of a portfolio of financial currency assets. It is noteworthy that the analogy between language and currency holds even in situations where nations (e.g. India) seek improved communication efficiency through adoption of a language not indigenous to them (e.g. English), and improved financial efficiency through replacement of their national currency (e.g. quetzals in Guatemala, colóns in El Salvador, balboas in Panama, and sucres in Ecuador) with a currency of another nation (US dollar) as legal tender. The adoption of both language and currency may be formal or informal, and official or unofficial. For more information on currency replacement, a process usually referred to as dollarization, see Calvo (1999), Antinolfi and Keister (2001) and Edwards (2001). Workforce diversity Since the 1990s, considerable attention has been paid to the conditions under which cultural diversity enhances or detracts from work group functioning. There is considerable literature recommending that managers should increase workforce diversity to enhance work group effectiveness, both in domestic and global organizations (Thomas, 1991; Jackson and Associates, 1992; Morrison, 1992; Cox, 1993). However, empirical research in support of these recommendations is limited. Studies have been reported on the impact of diversity in (1) identity of group memberships, in terms of race and sex (Cox, © 2004 Sandra Oliver for editorial matter and selection; individual chapters, the contributors

1993; Jackson and Ruderman, 1995); (2) organizational group membership, in terms of hierarchical position or organizational function (Bantel and Jackson, 1989; Ancona and Caldwell, 1992); and (3) individual characteristics, in terms of idiosyncratic attitudes, values and preferences (Meglino et al.,1989; Bochner and Hesketh, 1994). On the one hand, decision scientists have developed sophisticated techniques for seeking optimal solutions to maximum diversity problems (Kuo et al.,1993; Glover et al.,1995; Agca et al., 2000). On the other hand, organizational theorists have generated numerous dimensions for classifying demographic differences. Milliken and Martins (1996) found that very few organizational studies have examined how cultural values affect individuals or groups in organizations. The challenge of defining diversity itself confounds the understanding of the impact of workforce diversity. Yet, diversity management is predicted to be one of the most significant organizational issues of coming decades (White and Nair, 1994). Diversity is a characteristic of groups of two or more people. It typically refers to demographic differences of one sort or another among group members (McGrath et al.,1995). These differences have often resulted in different kinds of diversity. Consequently, empirical studies have resulted in ambivalent results, depending on the manner in which diversity is characterized. Studies on race and gender, for instance, have demonstrated both positive and negative impacts on work group functioning (Williams and O’Reilly, 1998). In another instance, Pelled (1996) makes one set of predictions about how group work members are affected by racial diversity, and another about how they are affected by functional background diversity based on the visibility of race and the job-relatedness. Different researchers hypothesize different models for the impact of diversity on work group effectiveness. Pelled (1996) expected racial diversity, as a source of visible differences, to impact work group effectiveness negatively. Cox et al., (1991), on the other hand, expected racial diversity, as a source of cultural differences, to have a positive outcome. Ely and Thomas (2001) have reviewed the studies reported in the literature on cultural diversity at work, and categorized them in terms of effects of proportional representation and of group composition. They focused on demographic variables including race, ethnicity, sex, social class, religion, nationality and sexual identity; but not on language. The merits of diversity are debated widely in a variety of organizations. In the face of admonitions from scholars that neglect of workplace diversity may run the risk of loss of competitive advantage, corporations have undertaken various forms of diversity management initiatives. These initiatives have generally aimed at (1) increasing sensitivity to cultural differences; (2) developing the ability to recognize, accept and value diversity; (3) minimizing patterns of inequality experienced by women and minorities; (4) improving cross-cultural interactions and interpersonal relationships among gender and ethnic groups; and (5) modifying organizational culture and leadership practices (Soni, 2001). Whether the goal of a diversity initiative is achieved depends largely on an organization’s diversity climate, which in turn is defined by the organization’s culture (Cox, 1993). According to Soni (2001), ‘If employees and managers do not accept and value differences and recognize the importance of the employer’s diversity management initiatives, these initiatives are likely to have a very low probability of succeeding’ (Soni, 2001: 396). © 2004 Sandra Oliver for editorial matter and selection; individual chapters, the contributors

language policies. With rare exceptions<br />

(Marschan et al., 1997; Dhir <strong>and</strong> Goke-Pariola,<br />

2002), the need for corporate language policies<br />

has not been adequately recognized in<br />

either the strategic management literature or<br />

the communication literature. Dhir <strong>and</strong><br />

Savage (2002) <strong>of</strong>fer a judgment-analytic<br />

approach for corporations to assess the economic<br />

value <strong>of</strong> languages. They posit that different<br />

organizations may receive different<br />

value from delivered functions <strong>of</strong> a language.<br />

It is imperative that the assessed value account<br />

for not only those functional properties <strong>and</strong><br />

qualities <strong>of</strong> the language in question, but also<br />

the context <strong>of</strong> the strategic environment in<br />

which the organization assessing it exists <strong>and</strong><br />

operates. For a given corporation, the value <strong>of</strong><br />

a language may be determined by various factors.<br />

Examples <strong>of</strong> these factors provided by<br />

Dhir <strong>and</strong> Savage (2002) are the degree to<br />

which:<br />

1 the language is used in the demographic<br />

community defining the organization’s<br />

strategic environment relative to other<br />

available languages;<br />

2 the demographic community defining the<br />

organization’s internal environment has<br />

collectively invested in the language relative<br />

to other available languages;<br />

3 the language is dem<strong>and</strong>ed as a commodity<br />

within the demographic community<br />

defining the organization’s strategic environment,<br />

both external <strong>and</strong> internal, relative<br />

to other available languages;<br />

4 the demographic community defining<br />

the multinational business organization’s<br />

strategic environment, both external<br />

<strong>and</strong> internal, creates knowledge in the<br />

language relative to other available languages;<br />

<strong>and</strong>,<br />

5 the language can be developed as the<br />

multinational business organization’s economic<br />

means <strong>of</strong> production within the<br />

time frame <strong>of</strong> its strategic plan relative to<br />

other available languages.<br />

With such conception <strong>of</strong> language, corporations<br />

can begin to think in terms <strong>of</strong> a portfolio<br />

<strong>of</strong> language assets much in the same way<br />

as it thinks <strong>of</strong> a portfolio <strong>of</strong> financial currency<br />

assets. It is noteworthy that the analogy between<br />

language <strong>and</strong> currency holds even in<br />

situations where nations (e.g. India) seek<br />

improved communication efficiency through<br />

adoption <strong>of</strong> a language not indigenous to<br />

them (e.g. English), <strong>and</strong> improved financial<br />

efficiency through replacement <strong>of</strong> their<br />

national currency (e.g. quetzals in Guatemala,<br />

colóns in El Salvador, balboas in Panama, <strong>and</strong><br />

sucres in Ecuador) with a currency <strong>of</strong> another<br />

nation (US dollar) as legal tender. The adoption<br />

<strong>of</strong> both language <strong>and</strong> currency may be<br />

formal or informal, <strong>and</strong> <strong>of</strong>ficial or un<strong>of</strong>ficial.<br />

For more information on currency replacement,<br />

a process usually referred to as dollarization,<br />

see Calvo (1999), Antinolfi <strong>and</strong> Keister<br />

(2001) <strong>and</strong> Edwards (2001).<br />

Workforce diversity<br />

Since the 1990s, considerable attention has<br />

been paid to the conditions under which<br />

cultural diversity enhances or detracts from<br />

work group functioning. There is considerable<br />

literature recommending that managers<br />

should increase workforce diversity to<br />

enhance work group effectiveness, both in<br />

domestic <strong>and</strong> global organizations (Thomas,<br />

1991; Jackson <strong>and</strong> Associates, 1992;<br />

Morrison, 1992; Cox, 1993). However, empirical<br />

research in support <strong>of</strong> these recommendations<br />

is limited. Studies have been reported on<br />

the impact <strong>of</strong> diversity in (1) identity <strong>of</strong> group<br />

memberships, in terms <strong>of</strong> race <strong>and</strong> sex (Cox,<br />

© 2004 S<strong>and</strong>ra Oliver for editorial matter <strong>and</strong> selection;<br />

individual chapters, the contributors

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!