Within the framework of relationships at the workplace, misunderstandings often arise between colleagues, and they must be resolved in order not to harm the work process. With regard to a multicultural environment, when people working in the same company have a different cultural background, the issue of possible disagreements becomes more acute. This actualizes the necessity for understanding in detail what challenges can arise in the workplace with people from different cultures.
Firstly, difficulties in a workplace with people of diverse cultures might arise in case of misunderstandings within personal interaction. Various confusions might happen “when a focal person’s perception of how another person thinks of his or her relationship to the focal person differs from the way that the other person actually thinks about it” (Byron and Landis, 2019, p. 2). This is a widespread situation when colleagues or a boss and subordinates belong to different cultures. According to Byron and Landis (2019), problems in communication become obvious when a leader thinks that his workers trust him more than it is in real life. Hence, he expects them to be more honest about being late and completing work tasks and can regard all their words as truth, while they may hide some information from him. If a boss and employees are from different cultures, they have dissimilar ways of non-verbal communication, which can also serve as a means of conveying information about the degree of loyalty and relationships’ closeness.
Secondly, people belonging to different cultures have different worldviews, particularly regarding attitudes towards certain concepts, such as deadlines, commitments, agreements, etc., which are crucial in the work process. For example, Indians are used to bargaining, which is not considered indecent in business communication. When I worked for a company that was entering into an agreement with an Indian trading firm, a misunderstanding arose during the contract signing. The Indians, who offered their specialists for the implementation of our project, put forward incredibly strict requirements. It seemed to our management that the deal would fail because we could not fulfill all the conditions, among which, for example, was a personal car for every Indian engineer.
However, our office of communications consulted with a professor of Indology, who explained the intricacies of the Indian mentality and helped establish a dialogue between the companies. He claimed that they do not really mean that we have to satisfy all the stringent demands. Indians in big business follow the local market rules when a trader announces an initially significantly increased price so that after he bargains with a buyer, the price is still profitable for him. Refusing to fulfill their conditions immediately and saying that it is impossible are considered impolite. The first step is to remove at least one condition, and then negotiations can be continued. Thus, our consultant explained that we could not provide a car for every Indian engineer because our employees do not have private vehicles; this would be disrespectful to them, and we risk losing our employees. The Indians agreed to this, and in the end, a mutually beneficial deal was made.
To conclude, misunderstandings that can arise in a workplace between representatives of dissimilar cultures can be harmful to the work process. Colloquies from different cultures are less likely to be able to understand how they relate to each other. Understanding the degree of trust that is possible between superiors and subordinates is important for a satisfactory workflow. What is more, if people do not know the peculiarities of another culture’s mentality, they might lose a potential partner.
Reference
Byron, K, & Landis, B. (2019). Relational misperceptions in the workplace: New frontiers and challenges. Organization Science, 1–21.