Purpose of Research
The purpose of this research is to explore the use of corporate common language among multinationals. Common language is necessitated by the growing globalization, which results in cultural diversities. Multinationals employ workers from diverse background, all of whom have to communicate. In many cases, multilingualism becomes a communication barriers, especially where there is no common language. Therefore, common language is perceived to be a critical requirement for all workers in a multicultural environment. The study focuses on a German multinational working across the EU.
Research Objectives and Questions
The primary objective of this research is to establish how the German office of the case company handles the issues around corporate common language. To achieve this, the study explores the company’s policy towards this issue. Additionally, the scholars are interested in discerning the patterns of common language use with the German office and the attitudes of the workers towards these patterns. The research questions are built around these objectives. The rationale is that the corporate policy shapes the practices around the common language usage.
Literature Review and Gaps
The current studies on the use of CCL have not offered a conclusive definition of this concept. Therefore, the general usage of the term often insinuates a formal language deployed by companies for internal communication, which might be contained in formal documents (Sanden (2015; Forsbom, 2014). The current literature has also established that English is the most commonly used language across the world by multinationals. For example, internal communication can be facilitated by the use of a CCL since multilingualism acts as a hindrance (Thompson, 2018). Other benefits include creating a sense of belonging among organizational members and allowing the human resource department to accomplish its goals.
Methods
Approaches
Scholars have to determine the most appropriate approaches and methods for their study. There is a need to distinguish between qualitative and quantitative studies since they work best in different situations. This study uses qualitative research since it allows the collection of qualitative data that does not require quantification. As a phenomenology study, the researchers are not interested in measuring variables. On the contrary, the phenomenology approach is selected since it allows respondents to express themselves and their lived experiences without bias. The researcher has also selected to use a case study solely based on the fact that a single subject, a single company, is used in the research. Lastly, primary data was collected using semi-structured interviews.
Sampling
Sampling can be described as the process of selecting participants for a study. Not all workers will be recruited, which means that only a portion of them will become respondents. The estimated size of the population was 112 workers from the Konstanz and Berlin locations. Validity of the study is facilitated by eliminating all individuals with less than three months working experience with the company. Convenience and purposive sampling techniques were used. Lastly, recruitment procedures are simple since only one firm is targeted. In this case, the first step is to seek permission from the company through an official email. The last step is to seek employees willing to be engaged in the study.
Data Collection and Analysis
Interviews were the main data collection used by the researcher. Considering the limitations in movements and the availability of modern technologies, all interviews were conducted using Zoom. Open-ended questions were preferred since they allowed the interviewer to ask follow up questions where clarifications were needed. Under normal circumstances, time limits are given for interviews, often to avoiding spending too much time with a single respondent. However, no time limits were present in this study, but all sessions lasted between 25-40 minutes. The language used for the interview was English, a decision made based on the assumption that all workers were conversant with it. the method for data analysis was thematic analysis, where a six-step process was followed.
Findings
Language Policy at Case Company
The first objective of the study was to determine the language policy used in the case company. The findings regarding this subject were positive in some aspects, for example, the results showed the company to have a well-defined language policy. The findings indicate that formal internal documents did not contain this policy. As a consequence, most of the participants stated that they were not aware of what the company’s language policy was since they could not find in in any internal documents. Across the three departments, the application of the language policy was in the form of ‘unwritten rules’, which guided communication practices. English was also used as the main language in all the departments.
Patterns of CCL and LL Use
The results indicated that workers across the three departments preferred to use CCL, especially for all formal communication. LL was used in certain situations depending on the preferences of the workers. Without a formally written language policy for the company, it was possible for the workers to use more than one language. Across all three departments, employees preferred to use English language for all formal communication. The marketing department also used English for informal purposes and German was only used in a few incidence. However, the other two departments, customer care and technology, a common theme was that all formal communications were done in English while a significant proportion of informal communications were done in German.
Attitudes Towards Multilingualism
The company was a multinational, which meant a diverse culture and multilingualism were a major feature. Additionally, workers had different preferences to language depending on their cultures, which often resulted in most workers preferring to use CCL even in informal communications. The patterns within the marketing department were easier to discern dur to a general preference over the use of English language. However, greater levels of diversification meant that confusion was often experienced by the workers, especially for the customer care department. In the technology department, the responses was termed ‘possible confusion’, which means that the department did not experience this problem as much as the customer care department did.
Discussion
Findings
Multinational companies find themselves facing a critical challenge of diversity, both culturally and in terms of language. Without a common language in place, internal communication can be a disaster. In this case, CCL is perceived as the greatest framework for facilitating internal communication. However, large companies comprise multiple departments, all of which could have sub-cultures that determine their internal practices. In the case company explored in this study, the three departments were similar in some ways and different in others. For example, even though marketing was the most culturally diverse department, it experienced the least problems with multilingualism.
Limitations and Implications
Convenience sampling poses several limitations, including the potential bias resulting from the researcher’s bias. In this case, generalization of the findings may be negatively affected by the sample if it is not representative of the entire population. Additionally, the researchers used Zoom, which could affect the richness of the data. Spending too much time on Zoon may be a new phenomenon, which means that most respondents could easily get uncomfortable. Lastly, the researcher acknowledges the possibility of some questions providing dishonest responses. The implications of the findings include that the use of both LL and CCL depended on the demographic composition of the workplace and departments. Confusion can also arise when a company does not have a written language policy.
Future Research
The future studies on this subject may be designed to address some of the major drawbacks exposed in this research. For example, the research doubts the generalizability of the findings due to the sampling techniques used. Therefore, it is recommended that a future inquiry should seek to achieve a better level of generalizability. Second, only three departments were investigated in this research, which can be deemed too few, especially for a multinational company with multiple departments. This could also make generalization of the study results better. Lastly, it is recommended that quantitative methods should also be used, which should help understand the phenomenon from multiple angles.
References
Sanden, G. R. (2015). Corporate language policies: What are they. Journal of Economics, Business and Management, 3(11), 1097-1101.
Thompson, M. C. (2018). Multilingualism in the workplace: Communicative practices between store owners and assistants in Chinese shops in Cape Town(Doctoral dissertation). Stellenbosch University. Web.
Forsbom, A. (2014). The myth of common corporate language-a case study of a Finnish MNC’s customer support team (Master’s thesis). Aalto University.