Managing international groups requires proper understanding of the key notions of intercultural dimensions and their general concept. In terms of establishing effective communication channels with various nations, the factor of recognizing the main cultural distinctions plays a crucial role. Since Australian and Thai people are different due to the Hofstede’s and Hall’s theories, the workshops’ interaction strategy should be developed depending on the countries’ acceptance of context and individualist behavior prevalence.
Management and resource management at the international level assume the presence of cultural characteristics and differences, which are studied in the paradigm of intercultural theories. Geert Hofstede established Hofstede’s cultural dimensions concept, which provides a framework for cross-cultural interaction. Using a structure developed from component analysis, it illustrates the influence of social and cultural contexts on its members’ principles and how these attitudes connect to behavior (Venkateswaran & Ojha, 2019). Hofstede’s model encompasses five dimensions: power distance, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity and femininity, individualism and collectivism, indulgence and restraint (Venkateswaran & Ojha, 2019). Another significant model in terms of intercultural communication is referred to Edward Hall, who defined the distinctions between high-context and low-context countries. High-context cultures, according to Hall, have an underlying connotation that context and connections are more essential than words, while in low-context nations, the unambiguous message is nearly exclusively delivered through words (Milla & Mataruna-Dos-Santos, 2019). In general, both Hofstede’s model and Hall’s theory are widely applicable, considering the spheres of management and organizational behavior.
To grasp the essence of intercultural dimensions, it is needed to refer to the practical cases from the experience of the Industry Speaker. Since the culture of Japan does not allow workers to voice their opinions to superiors, the Industry Speaker had to encourage young employees to bring their thoughts to managers. In addition, according to the Industry Speaker, in Singapore, people are not initially encouraged to ask questions and be skeptical, and the government attempts to transform the society in order to foster critical thinking and provoke action. Finally, the Industry Speaker provided an example of communicating with a Mexican woman that, due to her culture, prefers conversations at close range, whereas, for Europeans and Australians, personal space and distance are important.
What concerns the workshop’s objective to establish clear communication with Australian and Thai employees, it is possible to refer to the cultural distinctions determined by Hofstede’s model. Regarding Hofstede’s theory, the most significant difference between Australian and Thai cultures is the individualism dimension, emphasizing that Australia is a highly individualist country and Thailand is a highly collectivist nation (Country Comparison, 2022). Thus, highlighting practical examples of how to adapt messages to make them suitable for all staff members, it can be proposed to note the importance of collaboration in huge teams. As a result, the individualist part, which consists of Australians, will recognize the necessity to contribute to the group, leading to an improved process of delivering messages. Referring to Hall’s concept, since Australia is a low-context country and Thailand is a high-context nation, it is possible to suggest the implication of a clear and direct type of communication in the workshop. In this case, potential misunderstandings can be avoided since there is no reason for noticing indirect speech or context if the speaker uses simple expressions and notes the absence of dual meanings.
What concerns strategies and specific actions that will make the new staff feel accepted, it is possible to suggest two steps. Relating to the first step, it is feasible to employ diversity training that will assist employees in understanding and accepting their coworkers’ cultural differences and tolerating one other. Diversity training can develop a healthy work culture through encouraging inclusive employee experience, stimulating cooperation, and generating new opportunities. Moreover, it can be proposed to create a friendly atmosphere in the workshop by elaborating interactive activities that will integrate Australian and Thai people, engaging them in getting acquainted. As a result, both employee groups will possess a sense of recognition and acceptance in working settings.
To summarize, both Hofstede’s model and Hall’s theory are widely applicable, considering the spheres of management and organizational behavior. Highlighting practical examples of how to adapt messages to make them suitable for all staff members, it can be proposed to note the importance of collaboration in huge teams. Regarding strategies and specific actions, it is feasible to employ diversity training and create a friendly atmosphere in the workshop by elaborating interactive activities.
References
Country Comparison. (n.d.). Hofstede Insights. Web.
Milla, A. C., & Mataruna-Dos-Santos, L. J. (2019). Social media preferences, interrelations between the social media characteristics and culture: a view of Arab nations. Asian Social Science, 15(6), 1911-2025. Web.
Venkateswaran, R. T., & Ojha, A. K. (2019). Abandon Hofstede-based research? Not yet! A perspective from the philosophy of the social sciences. Asia Pacific Business Review, 25(3), 413-434. Web.