Striking a Balance - lup.lub.lu.selup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/1736392/file/1736422.pdf · acts like this one in order to make it relevant in the business world while simultaneously

Striking a Balance A Cultural Analytical Study of a Cross-Cultural

Consultancy Anna-Mari Fagerström

Elias Mellander

Master of Applied Cultural Analysis Supervisors

Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences Jessica Enevold

TKAM01 - Spring 2010 Orvar Löfgren

I

Abstract

Striking a Balance: A Cultural Analytical Study of a Cross-Cultural Consultancy

Anna-Mari Fagerström

Elias Mellander

ThisthesisaimstoaidtheconsultancyLivingInstituteinevaluatingtheperceivedeffects

ofthecross‐culturaltrainingcoursesitprovidestoawidevarietyofclients.Todothiswe

studythecompanyinrelationshiptoitsclients,mappingoutitstheoreticalfoundationas

wellasitsstrategiesforteachingculture.Inordertogainadeeperunderstandingofwhat

thecompanyteachesandhowtheclientsputlessonstouse,wefocusonhowtheconcept

ofcultureispackaged,soldandtaughtandwhathappenstoitintheprocess.By using an

ethnographic approach, performing observations and in-depth interviews, we create empirical

material with depth as well a breadth; describing both the perspective of the company and the

experiences of its clients. By doing this we also want to reach beyond taking the informants’

accounts at face value to identify patterns of logics and assumptions.To perform this analysis we

employ a number of theoretical concepts from intercultural communication and cultural analysis

as well as discourse and narrative analysis. The company combines perspectives from the

traditions of intercultural communication and anthropology in order to deliver an accessible but

complex understanding of culture. We show Living Institute has to handle a number of balancing

acts like this one in order to make it relevant in the business world while simultaneously

retaining theoretical depth. These balancing acts are not specific to Living Institute, but apply to

anyone wanting to employ culture analytical concepts outside academia. This commodification

process reduces and simplifies the meanings of culture. Living Institute, however, manages to

put culture on the agenda, demonstrating to its clients how, why and in what ways culture

matters to them.

Keywords: cultural awareness; intercultural communication; diversity management; cross-

cultural communication; cultural economy; discourse analysis; cultural analysis; expatriates;

narrative; anthropology.

II

Acknowledgments

A big thanks to Living Institute for the opportunity to work with them and all the support they

have given us. We would also like to thank all the informants, who took time from their busy

schedules to share their experiences. Special thanks to our academic supervisors and everyone

else who have contributed by guiding us along the crooked path that has been the writing of this

thesis. Of course, we also direct many thanks to all the teachers and our fellow students at

MACA for making these two years inspiring, challenging and most importantly, fun. Last but

not least we would like to thank each other for a rewarding collaboration and great company.

Thank you!

Lund, 2010-05-27

Anna-Mari Fagerström

Elias Mellander

III

TableofContents

Abstract ....................................................................................................................................................................I

Acknowledgments .............................................................................................................................................. II

TableofContents ...............................................................................................................................................III

Introduction...........................................................................................................................................................1

Background,aimandresearchquestion .....................................................................................................2

PresentationofLivingInstitute ......................................................................................................................4

Theoreticalframework......................................................................................................................................7 Previousresearch .................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Frominterculturalismtodiversitymanagement....................................................................................................................... 9 Culturalanalyticalperspectives ......................................................................................................................................................11

Methodologicalapproaches .......................................................................................................................... 13

Informantportraits.......................................................................................................................................... 16

Culturalgoods .................................................................................................................................................... 21 AdayattheCrashCourse...................................................................................................................................................................21 Thewholepackage ................................................................................................................................................................................25 Raisingculturalconsciousness ........................................................................................................................................................29 TheEdutainer ..........................................................................................................................................................................................32 Danes–Thewaytheyare...................................................................................................................................................................34

Culturalexperiences........................................................................................................................................ 38 Overcomingculture...............................................................................................................................................................................38 Cosmopolitanculture ...........................................................................................................................................................................44 Whenyou’restrange.............................................................................................................................................................................46

CriticalperspectivesonCulture .................................................................................................................. 50 Enactingabalance .................................................................................................................................................................................50 Thedifferencesthatmakeadifference ........................................................................................................................................52 Culturalcurrencies ................................................................................................................................................................................55 Workinprocess ......................................................................................................................................................................................57 Learningalesson....................................................................................................................................................................................59

Conclusions ......................................................................................................................................................... 63 Strikingabalance...................................................................................................................................................................................63 Insights .......................................................................................................................................................................................................70 Applyingoneself .....................................................................................................................................................................................72

References........................................................................................................................................................... 74

StrikingaBalance:ACulturalAnalyticalStudyofaCross‐CulturalConsultancy 1

Introduction

Inanincreasinglyglobalizedworkmarket,wheretransnationalconnectionsare

commonplace,culturalconflictsareboundtoarise.Morethanlanguageissuesmaycloud

communicationbetweenpeople,andinabusinesscontextthebreakdownofcommunication

spellsfinancialtrouble.Theseissuesmaymanifestthemselvesinanumberofways,ranging

fromthefeelingofisolationandfrustrationthatanexpatriate1mayexperienceworkingata

locationfarfromhome,toteamsthatmustcooperateacrossnationalandculturalborders.

Thishasinturngivenbirthtoa“cultureshockpreventionindustry”,wheretrainingin

culturalsensitivityandknow‐howisemployedtolimittheeffectsoftransnationalcultural

frictions(Hannerz,1996,p.108).Researchininterculturalcommunicationincreasedsince

theturnofthemillennium,butthereisstilluncertaintywithinthescientificcommunityon

whattheoreticalfoundationthiskindoftrainingshouldbebuilt(Larsson,2010).

TheDanishconsultancyLivingInstitutehasfoundtheirownanswertothis,combining

theoreticalperspectivesfromanthropologyaswellasfromtraditionalintercultural

communication,aimingtocreateagenuinecuriosityandawarenessofculturalissues.Living

Instituteprovidescross‐culturalworkshopsandtrainingtocompanies:Deliveringboth

tailoredcoursesforincomingandoutgoingexpatriates,alongwithCulturalAwareness

WorkshopsforentireteamsinDenmarkandabroad.Byemployingaculturalanalytical

perspective,LivingInstitutestrivestoprovideeveryclientwithacustomizedsolution.This

makesthecompanyinterestingfromtheperspectiveofanappliedculturalanalystontwo

levels:Firstly,becausetheorganizationusescultureasacommodity,creatingtheconceptina

shapesuitabletoandforbusiness,andsecondly,withitstheoreticalbackgroundin

anthropology,LivingInstituteisaprimeexampleofapplyingculturalanalysisintheworldof

business.InthisthesiswewillexploreLivingInstitute,thecompany’srelationshiptoits

clients,someofthechallengesitfacesandwhatit“does”withtheconceptofculture.

1InthisstudyweusethedefinitionofexpatriatefromHannerz(1996),referringtoapersonwhohaschosentoliveabroadtoworkforaperiodoftimeandwhocanchoosetoreturnbackhomewheneversheorhelikes.


Background,aimandresearchquestion

AclientrequestingFinnishculturaltrainingforanoutgoingDanishexpatriatecontactedthe

cross‐culturalconsultancyLivingInstitute.Asaresult,thecompanylookedtorecruita

freelanceconsultantwithgoodknowledgeofFinlandandFinnishcultureandthuscontacted

oneofthisthesis’authors,Anna‐MariFagerström,tosetupameetingbetweenherandthe

company’smanagingdirector.Inordertogettoknowthecompanybetter,shewasalso

invitedtoattendoneofthecompany’sCulturalAwarenessSeminars,entitled,“WhyareDanes

soweird?”.ThetrainingsessionfortheDanishexpatriategoingtoFinlandnevercametopass,

butinsteadtheauthorswereinvitedtoassistLivingInstitutewithanotherchallenge.

Thecompanyconsistentlyperformsevaluationsurveysonthespotaftereachworkshop,

trainingsessionandseminar,askingiftheparticipantsfoundtheinformationusefulandthe

presentationgood,generallyreceivinggoodfeedback.Becauseofthefastpacedbusiness

contextinwhichLivingInstituteoperates,therewashoweverlittletimeforboththecompany

anditsclientstoreturntoevaluatetheresultsofthetrainingtogether.Thus,therewaslittle

knowledgewithinthecompanyastohowthetraining,theoreticalconceptsandcultural

actionplanswereimplementedbyitsclientandiftherewasadiscernibledifferenceforthe

clientbeforeandafterthetrainingsession.Sinceasurveywouldnotbeabletocatchthe

emotiveandpracticalaspectsofthekindoftraining,LivingInstitutedecidedaculture

analyticalperspectivewasneededtodigdeeperandexploretheeffectsofthecompany’s

culturalcoursesovertime.AsMoeran(2005)pointsout,byusinganethnographicapproach

onecanapplya“strategicexchangeperspective”,examiningtheinterconnectednessofpeople

andknowledgeinalargercontext,notlimitingittotheoreticalconcepts(p.2).Inshort,he

authorswereaskedtoinvestigatethelong‐termeffectsofthetrainingprovidedbyLiving

Institutetofindoutwhetherornotthetraininghadledtoanykindofchangefortheclients.

Therefore,thisthesiscanbeunderstoodasaformofevaluationwiththegoalofcreatingnew

insightsforLivingInstitute’sproductswiththeaidofclients’perspectives.

TogainadeeperunderstandingforthewaysinwhichLivingInstitutetransfers

knowledgetoitsclientsandhowthatknowledgeisputtouse,wewillfocusontheconceptof

culture.OuraimistoshedlightonwhatmeaningLivingInstituteinfusesintocultureandhow

theconceptisputtouseoncetaughttothecompany’sclients.Tocreateananalytical

foundationfromwhichtodothis,wewillemploythefollowingresearchquestions:


WhatarethecentralassumptionsandtheoreticalknowledgeonwhichLivingInstituteis

based?

InwhatshapedoesLivingInstituteprovideculturalknowledgetoitsclients?

Wastheknowledgeprovidedperceivedasusefultotheclientsandhowwasitputtouse?

Byemployingthesequestionswehopetocreatea“thickdescription”,notonlyfocusingonthe

goalsofLivingInstitutebutonthesceneinitsentirety,incorporatingthecontextinwhich

actionsareperformed(Geertz,1973,p.16).Inthiswaywehopetodiscoversomeofthe

unreflectedandunexpectedconsequencesofthetrainingthatthecompanyprovides.


PresentationofLivingInstitute

Inthischapterwewillintroducethisthesis’leadingcharacter,namelythecrosscultural

consultancyLivingInstitute,givinganoutlineofthecompany’shistory,thepeoplebehinditand

howitoperates.

LivingInstituteisasmallcompanywithonlyitsmanagingdirectorworkingonafull‐time

basis.Sheisresponsibleforalloperationsincludingselling,marketing,designingworkshops

andensuringthequalityofthetraining.Thesecondmostprominentpersoninthecompanyis

theseniorconsultant,ananthropologist,whoisresponsibleforprovidingatheoreticaland

scientificallysoundfoundation,aswellasdesigninganddeliveringmostofthecompany’s

trainingsessions.BesidesworkingwithLivingInstitute,healsoworksasanexternallecturer

attheuniversity,anactor,commentator,writerandbookreviewer.Inaddition,Living

Institutehasarosterofaboutfifteenexternalconsultants,whofreelanceonacase‐to‐case

basis.

LivingInstituteisthebrainchildofthemanagingdirector,whoisthecompany’s

founderandtoagreatextentdictatesthecompany’sphilosophyandpractices.Shebelieves

onecantraceculturelikeaconnectingthreadthroughoutherlife,fromherchildhoodtothe

present‐day.GrowingupwithaGermanfatherandDanishmother,atanearlyageshewas

abletostudythedifferencesofambianceandatmosphereindifferentcultures.Shealwaysfelt

shewasdifferentfromotherchildrenbecauseofherGermanheritage.Afterhighschoolshe

unintentionallyendedupteachingDanishtoexpatriatesinadistinguishedlanguageschoolin

Copenhagen.Despitehavingnopriorteachingexperience,attheageofnineteenshetaught

herfirststudent,theCEOofagiganticmultinationalcompany.Thiswasherfirstexperienceof

workingwithcultureanditfunctionedasaneye‐openerofsorts.Afterafewyearsofwork

shewentbacktoschoolinordertobecomealanguageteacher.Consequently,shechanged

jobsandbeganteachingDanishtoimmigrantsandrefugees.Giventhequitedifferentclientele

fromtheinternationallanguageschool,thisexperiencemadeherevenmoreawareof

culture’simportance.Duringthistimesheandherhusbandalsoestablishedaverysuccessful

restaurantinCopenhagen,withfoodandmusicfromallovertheworld—anenterprisethey

ranformorethantenyears,untilherhusbandwasaskedtomanageanotherestablishment.

Afterafewyears,herhusbandwasofferedajobwithinahigh‐endtechnologicalcompanyin

anotherpartofDenmark.Thewholefamilyrelocatedtoasmalltown,whereshecameto

experiencethebiggestculturalclashesshecouldeverhaveimagined.Shehadagreatjobin

thesamecompanyasherhusband,butshecontinuouslystruggledwiththefactthatshewasa


citygirlhavingtodealwithsmalltownattitudes.Duringthistime,anexpatriatecameto

workforthecompanyandshesawwhathappenedtohimintheunfamiliarculturalcontext—

howtheDanesactedaroundhimandwhattheydidwhenthey,forthefirsttime,hada

foreignerontheirteam.Theculturalmeetingdidn’tturnoutthatwellandthisgaveherthe

ideatogobacktoCopenhagenandestablishacompanythatdealtwithcultureshocksandthe

issuesofretainingforeignexpatriatesinDenmark.

LivingInstituteopenedforthefirsttimeinAugust2001,notlongbefore9/11andits

followingcrises.Peopleweren’ttravelingandcompaniesweren’thiringnewpeople.Thus

therewaslittlebusinessforLivingInstitute.Afterafewyearssheopenedthecompanyagain,

followingrevitalizedgrowthintheglobalmarket.Businesswasslowtobeginwith,butwhen

the“cartooncrisis”struckin2006,itstartedtopickupthepace.Suddenlyshedidnothaveto

propagateforthesignificanceofculturesincethecrisishadbeenarudeawakeningtomany

companieslackinginculturalawareness.AtthetimeLivingInstitutewasonlydealingwith

foreignexpatriatesinDenmark,butthedemandforcoursesdirectedtooutgoingDanish

expatriates,shorttimebusinesstravelersandtoemployeesworkinginmulticulturalteams

increasedquickly.

Today,LivingInstitute’sslogan“Culturematters”sumsupboththecompany’s

philosophyandeverydaybusinesspractice.Thecompanysellscross‐culturaltrainingand

educationtocompaniesoperatingintheglobalmarket,deliveringtailoredcoursesforsingle

incomingandoutgoingexpatriates,aswellasworkshopsforentireteamsinDenmarkor

othercountries.TheproductLivingInstitutesellsisdevelopedfromanthropologicaltheory,

aimingtocreateagenuinecuriosityandawarenessofculturalissues,steeringawayfrom

simpleexplanationsofhowpeople“are”indifferentpartsoftheworld.However,asinmost

caseswhereacademictheoryisappliedinthefastandglobalworldofbusiness,themessage

mustbegivenashapesuitableforabusinesscontextwheretheclientsarenotnecessarily

“talkinganthropology”.

Thecompanyappliesaculturalanalyticalperspectivetohelpittailorsolutionstobest

suittheneedsoftheclient.LivingInstitutesellsanumberoftemplateproductsthatcanbe

customizedtofulfillspecificdemands,suchastheDanishLivingCrashCourseandCultural

AwarenessWorkshops.TheDanishLivingCrashCourseisaone‐daycourseforexpatriates

livingandworkinginDenmark.ItfocusesonDanishhistory,workingculture,mentality,“do’s

anddon’ts”andunwrittenrulesatworkaswellasinprivatelife.TheDanishLivingCrash

Courseisheldonceamonth,ifenoughparticipantsareenrolled.CulturalAwareness

Workshopsarearrangedforclientsworkinginternationally.Thiscoursecanbecustomized


forteamsorforsingleindividualsinneedofpersonalcoachinginadditiontocountry‐

specificinformationormoregeneralculturalawareness.


Theoreticalframework

Inthischapterwewilltouchuponthreetheoreticalthemesrelevanttoourstudy.Thefirst,

“PreviousResearch”,focusesonstudiessimilartoours,dealingwithresearchonthefieldof

interculturalcommunicationaswellasperspectivesontheapplicationofcultureintheworldof

business.Thesecond,“Frominterculturalismtodiversitymanagement”,dealswithsomeofthe

mostprominentcurrentswithinthefieldofintercultursalcommunicationandmanagement

strategies.Inthethirdandfinal,“Cultureanalyticalperspectives”,wewillpresentthetheoretical

traditioninwhichthisthesisplacesitselfalongwithanumberoftheoreticalperspectivesusedto

digdeeperintotheempiricalmaterial.

Previousresearch

Whiletherehasbeenmuchliteraturewrittenaboutinterculturalcommunicationitself,

surprisinglylittlehasbeenwrittenabouttheconsultanciesworkingwiththeseissues.Tommy

Dahlén’s(1997)doctoraldissertation,AmongtheInterculturalists,isananthropologicalstudy

ofpracticingconsultantsinthefieldofinterculturalcommunication,agroupthathecalls“the

interculturalists”.Dahlén(1997)focusesonthevariedrangeofconsultantcompaniesand

organizationsinthefield,emphasizingtheprofessionalismoftheinterculturalists,“andthe

waycultureandculturaldifferencesareconceptualizedandrepresentedamongthem”(p.9).

Dahlénexaminesthecomplexfieldwhereinterculturalistsworkandexertinfluence.In

relationtoourstudy,Dahlén’sresearchrepresentsamoregeneralmacrolevelviewofthe

fieldofinterculturalcommunication,whilezoominginontheonespecificconsultancy.

Dahlén(1997)looksatthefieldfromtwoperspectives.Firstly,hestrivestounderstand

theinterculturalists’cultureinitsowncontext.Secondly,hecomparestherelationshipofthe

interculturalists’understandingofculturetoananthropologicalone.Thisisemphasizedin

theconclusionsofthedoctoralthesis,whereDahléndiscussesthewayinwhich

interculturalistsarerecyclingolderanthropologicalconceptionsofcultureandthattheyseem

tohaveneglectedtoexaminethenewdiscussionsanddevelopmentswithinanthropology.

MediaandcommunicationsscientistIngerLarsson’sdissertation,AttByggaÖver

Kulturgränser2(2010),focusesonSwedesworkinginaninternationalcontext,butalso

discussesthefieldofinterculturalcommunicationfromacriticalperspective.Shequestions

thetraditionalfunctionalistapproachtocultureoftenusedwithinintercultural

communication,insteadadvocatingasocialconstructionistperspective.Thefunctionalist

2Roughlytranslatesto“Buildingbridgesacrossculturalborders”.


approachtoculturetreatitasfixedsetsofcategoriesandcharacteristics,turningculture

intologicalsystemsofideasandvalues,anapproachthathasalongstandingpopularity

withinthefieldofinterculturalcommunication.AccordingtoLarsson,socialconstructionism

insteadprovidesapointofviewfromwhereisitpossibletofollowthedevelopment,changes

andfasttransformationofculture,somethingwhichisclosertowhatactuallyhappensinthe

interactionbetweenpeople.Socialconstructionismshouldberegardedasakeyconceptwhen

talkingaboutnationalidentity,insteadofresortingtotheoftenmisusedconceptofnational

culture.Larssonwritesaboutculturalandnationalidentity,regardingidentitiesassocially

constructedthroughinteractionswithotherhumanbeings.Larssonalsonotesthelackof

relevantliteratureandresearchonthefieldofinterculturalcommunication,especiallywithin

thefieldofanthropology.

WhenexaminingacompanylikeLivingInstituteitalsobecomesrelevanttotouch

uponresearchdealingwiththeinterbreedingofculturalscienceandbusiness.BillyEhnand

OrvarLöfgren(2009)discusstheproblemsfacedbycultureanalyticalacademicsworkingas

consultantsinthepublicandprivatesector.Accordingtothemthereisaneedforreciprocity

intherelationshipbetweenacademiaandpracticingconsultantsandthatthereisgreat

potentialforgainingnewskillsandunderstandingsindialoguewitheachother.Ehnand

Löfgrenpointoutthatasacademicstheyhavecrossedthethinborderbetweenthetwo

worldsmanytimeswithoutevennoticing,forexample,whenorganizingworkshopsorbeing

consultedbyorganizationsoutsideofacademia.Theyconclude,“researchthatdoesnot

involvethewayspotentialusersoftheresultsactandthinkalwaysmissessomething

important”(p.47).

TheamalgamationofcultureandeconomyisfurthertoucheduponbyLöfgrenand

Willim(2005)inthebook,Magic,CultureandtheNewEconomy,whoclaimamoreintimate

connectionbetweenthetwocanbetracedtothegrowthofwhathasbeencalled“thenew

economy”,whereculturebegantoplayamoreprominentroleinbusinessascompanies

startedtoborrowconceptsfromacademiaandculturalanalysis.Theypointoutthemost

importantwayinwhicheconomyandculturemixedwasintheattempttopackageandsell

intangibleculturalconceptsandexperiences.Culturaltechnologiessuchasritualizationand

narrationareputtoworktogivecredibleformtotheculture‐as‐product,turningtheminto

tangiblegoods.AccordingtoLöfgrenandWillim,theseamalgamationsarefruitfulobjectsfor

culturalanalysis,partlybecausetheyusemanyofthesamesignsandideas,albeitinanew

context,butalsobecausetheyoftenmakegreatclaims,highlightingsomethingswhile

keepingothersoutofthelight.


TheverysamethemeisdiscussedbyduGuyandPryke(2002)whoclaimcultureand

economycannotbeunderstoodasseparateentitiessincetheyaretoagreatextentdependent

onandpartofeach.Theypointoutthe“turntoculture”canmeanmanydifferentthingsand

takevariousforms,butthatitisanoutcomeofthere‐emergedfocusoncultureasacritical

notionforunderstandingtheeconomicandorganizationallife.Oneofthecentralfeaturesof

theculturalturnaccordingtoduGayandPryke(2002)“isarenewedinterestinthe

productionofmeaningatwork”(p.1),meaningthatitisregardedconstitutingforhowpeople

areacting,thinkingandfeelinginanorganizations.RayandSayer(1999)alsoclaimthatthe

borderbetweencultureandeconomyhasbecomeblurred,buttheyalsostressthatitisstill

there,sincetheconceptsotherwisewouldhavebeensynonymous,whichtheyareclearlynot.

Inmostcases,thevalueofeconomyisinstrumentalwhilethevalueofcultureisnot.However,

economymustalwaysbeenunderstoodasapartofculturesinceitisthroughcultural

processesthatitgainsitsvalues.

Frominterculturalismtodiversitymanagement

Asmentionedabove,thissub‐chapterdealswithsomeofthemostprominentcurrentswithin

thefieldofinterculturalcommunicationandmanagementstrategies.Thetheoriespresented

inthefollowingserveathreefoldpurpose:tofunctionasacursoryoutlineofthefield,tobea

sourceforanalyticalconceptsandtoformempiricalmaterialinthecaseswhenbeingan

internalizedpartofLivingInstitute’scurriculum.

Thefieldofinterculturalcommunicationwasfoundedinthe1950sbyanthropologist

EdwardT.Hall,whodevelopedtheoreticalandmethodologicalframeworksfordealingwith

communicationacrossnationalborders(Hall,1973).Claimingthat“Thereisnowaytoteach

cultureinthesamewaythatlanguageistaught”,(p.25)hetouchesupononeofthecore

elementsofourstudy—theprocessesofteachingandlearningculture.Hedescribeshisown

experienceofteachingculturalsciencetopeopleoutsideacademiawhoweregoingoverseas

towork,oftenlackingthekeeninterestinculturehewasusedtofromhisanthropology

students.TogetherwithGeorgeL.Trager,thisledhimtostartdevelopinganewmethodfor

analyzingculture,whichisbymanyconsideredthefoundationfortheintercultural

communicationfield.

FollowinginthefootstepsofHall,GeertHofstedeandFonsTrompenaarsaretwoofthe

mostwidelyrecognizedtheoristswithinthefieldofinterculturalcommunicationtoday,being

primerepresentativesofthefunctionalistapproachpropagatedagainstbyLarsson(2010)

andhavinglittletodowiththefieldanthropologicalroots.Thisbecomesevidentincategories


employedbyHofstede(2001)forrepresentingdifferencesinnationalculturesforalarge

numberofcountries3.AccordingtoHofstede(2001)thereare“fiveindependentdimensions

ofnationalculturedifferences,eachrootedinabasicproblemwithwhichallsocietieshaveto

cope,butonwhichtheiranswervary”(p.29).Thedimensionshehasidentifiedare:power

distance,uncertaintyavoidance,individualismversuscollectivism,masculinityversus

femininityandlong‐termorientationversusshort‐termorientation.Hofstede(2001)argues

“thattheremustbemechanismsinsocietiesthatpermitthemaintenanceofstabilityin

culturepatternsacrossmanygenerations”(p.11).Herefersto“mentalprograms”,atypeof

conditioningthatstaysstableovertime,learnedinveryearlychildhoodandcontainingbasic

values(p.2).

FonsTrompenaars4,alongwithCharlesHampden‐Turner(1998)hasfocusedon

culturaldifferencesandwhatkindofimpactthesedifferenceshaveon“processesofdoing

businessandmanaging”(p.1).TrompenaarsandHampden‐Turner(1998)definecultureas

“thewayinwhichagroupofpeoplesolvesproblemsandreconcilesdilemmas”(p.6).Their

bookpresentsthesolutionsthatdifferentcultureshaveonuniversalproblemsandfromthese

solutionstheyhaveidentifiedsevenfundamentaldimensionsofculture,whicharedivided

intocategories,muchinthesamewayasHofstedeuseshisdimensions—i.e.todescribe

differencesinnationalcultures,placingdifferentculturesonaculturalscaleaccordingto

scorestheyhavegainedthroughsurveys.

Whiletheoriesininterculturalcommunicationseeminglyfocusonthecultural

differencesacrossthebordersofnationstates,emphasizingthemeaningofnationalityin

socialinteraction,thestrategycalleddiversitymanagementinsteadspreadsitsfocusto

encompassotherfactorsofculturaldifference.AccordingtoWrench(2007)diversity

managementisarelativelynewmanagementstrategythatgainedprominenceinthe

Europeanmarketduringtheearly1990sandhascontinuedtoplayavitalrole.Itpartly

sharesthesameconcernswithinterculturalcommunication,strivingtominimizecultural

frictionsindiverseworkplaces.Thetheoreticalframeworkis,however,verydifferent.While

interculturalcommunicationfocusesoncross‐culturalism,nationalorigin,misunderstandings

andproblemsthatmightarisebetweenindividualsinbusiness,diversitymanagementisa

strategythatnotonlytakestheindividuals’needsintoaccount,butaimtocreatepoliciesand

strategiesonanorganizationallevel(Wrench,2007;Kandola&Fullerton,1998).

3ForamorecomprehensivesummaryofHofstede’stheory,seeDahlén(1997).4ForamorecomprehensivesummaryofTrompenaarsandHampden‐Turner’s’theory,seeDahlén(1997).


Culturalanalyticalperspectives

Havinggivenatheoreticaloutlineofthefieldinwhichweoperate,wearenowgoingto

introducethetoolswebringinorderto“makesense”ofitall.Thisthesisplacesitselfwithin

theculturalanalyticaltradition.Inpracticethismeansthatnotonlyisculturetheobjectof

study,butalsothelensthroughwhichthefieldisviewed,meaningthatdifferenttypesof

knowledgecanbecreatedbyshiftingbetweendifferentperspectives.Weapproachculturein

thesamemannerasEhnandLöfgren(2001),treatingit,fellowshipandidentityas

multifacetedandfragmentedconceptsthatarecreatedandnegotiatedthroughdifferent

categoriesdependentonspecificcontexts,ratherthanasessentialproperties.Cultureisnota

rational,systematicandwellthoughtoutstructure,butsomethingwhichisrenegotiatedand

fluctuating,oftenmadevisiblethroughfriction,conflicts,inconsistenciesandparadoxes.

AlongthelinesoftheanthropologistsPatriciaSunderlandandRitaDenny(2007),wedonot

regardcultureassomethingdeterminatelytiedtoagrouporaplace,neitherasaproperty

“active”insomeinstanceswhiledormantinothers.

Tocreateaclearerdistinctionbetweentheetic,anthropologicaluseofcultureandthe

emic“layman’s”definitionwewilllooktotheethnologistMagnusÖhlander(2005)who

discussestheconceptofcultureandhowitisusedoutsideoftheculturalsciences.According

tohim,therearethreecommoncategoriesforhowtheconceptisputtouse,allofwhichare

interlinkedandinmanywaysdependentoneachother.Thefirstisasaqualitythatonecan

possess,e.g.“beingcultured”or“beingrefined”.Thesecondisassomethingthatone“does”,

likeliterature,music,theatreandthusculturebecomesmoreorlesssynonymouswithart.

Thethirddefinitionofcultureisasvaluesandidealsthatpeoplegatherround,i.e.thatitisa

qualitysharedbyacertaingroup.Öhlanderclaimsthatallofthesedefinitionsareproblematic

sincetheytreatcultureastheresultofaprocess,asanobject.Inessencethismeansthat

culturecouldexistwithoutpeople,anotionthatdoesnotfitwiththecultureanalytical

perspective.

Sincetheempiricalmaterialonwhichthisstudywillbebasedprimarilyconsistsof

interviews,wehavealsochosentoemployanalyticalconceptsfromtwotheoreticaltraditions

aptatcatchingthewaysinwhichmeaningsaretransferredthroughlanguage:narrativeand

discourseanalysis.Theseanalyticalmethodsfocusindifferentwaysonhowlanguageisused

toconveymeaning.Thedistinctionthatweareprimarilygoingtoemployhereisthatof

BarbaraCzarniawska(1998),makingadistinctionbetweenthediscourseandthe

conversation.Thenarrativeisisolatedintheformerwhileitoriginatesfromactorsor

“speakers”inthelatter.Thefirsttreatstextsasentitiesuntothemselves,whilethesecond


treattextsascommunicativeaction.Discoursesarespreadoutandreoccurringwhile

conversationsarelocatedinaspecificplaceinspaceandtime.Thetwoperspectivesare

complementarywiththediscoursefunctioningasarepertoirefortheconversationandthe

conversationasadevelopingmediumforthediscourse.Theperspectivescarrywiththema

furtherimplication;notviewinglanguageasamererepresentationoftheworldbutas

constitutingforsociallife.Therefore,thepositionsfromwhereonecandefinetheflowof

discoursearepositionsofpower(WintherJørgensen&Phillips,2000).

WhenevaluatingapedagogicactivitylikethetrainingthatLivingInstituteprovides,

bothanarrativeapproachanddiscourseanalysisareusefulsincetheycanfunctionasmeans

touncoverhowmeaningsaretransferredbetweendifferentcontexts,keepinginmindthat

therelationshipbetweenexperienceandnarrativeisn’tstatic;thenarrativeisshapedbythe

experiencebutatthesametimeitgivesshapetoit(Palmenfelt,2000).However,sincewedo

notwishtolimitourselvestostudyingtheuseoflanguage,wewillalsoemployamore

experientialperspective.ThisbecomesparticularlyimportantwhenturningthegazetoLiving

Institute’strainingsession.ThestudyofeventslikethesearetoucheduponbybothO’Dell

(2005)andRistilammi(2000),dealingwithhowdifferentatmospheresandexperiencesare

invokedinordertoachievecertainresults.

Tocreatefurtherunderstandingofhowculturecanbepackaged,taughtandsold,we

havealsochosentousePierreBourdieu’scapitalmetaphor,originallyusedtoillustratethat

economiccapitalmerelyisoneofseveralfactorsaffectingsocialclassandthemicro

managementofpower.Besidesmonetaryassets,individualsalsopossesscultural,socialand

symboliccapital,thepossessionofwhichcanbeusedasmeanstodisplaypower,giventhe

rightcontext.Culturalcapitalcanbeembodieddispositions,objectifiedinshapeof“cultural”

possessionsorinstitutionalizedintheshapeofeducationandthelike(Skeggs,1997).Social

capitalismanifestedthroughsocialconnectionandbelonging,whilesymboliccapitalisthe

shapetheothertypesofcapitaltakeoncerecognizedandacknowledged;thepointbeingthat

thedifferentcapitalsnotbeing“worth”anythinguntiltheyarelegitimizedfromapositionof

power(Bourdieu,1999).


Methodologicalapproaches

Inthischapterwewilldiscusstheresearchmethodsusedforcreatingourempiricalmaterial

alongwiththepossibilitiesandlimitationstheypresent.Wehaveperformedakindof“double

ethnography”,puttingfocusonLivingInstituteanditsclientsinordertocreateabroad

foundationfortheforthcominganalysis.

Oneofthemainadvantagesofethnographyisthatonecanchoosearesearchmethodbest

suitedforexaminingtheproblemathand.Thisis,however,anidealsituationandwhen

performingfieldworkonehastobeabletoadapttotherulesofthespecificcontextinwhich

oneoperates.IdeallywewouldhaveperformedparticipantobservationofLivingInstitute’s

clientsinordertogainabetterunderstandingofwhatchallengestheyfaceintheirday‐to‐day

workandofhowLivingInstitutecanbetteraddresstheseissues.Alas,evenwiththehelpof

LivingInstitutewewerenotabletoestablishcontactwithanyinformantswhowerewillingto

grantaccesstothemforanylongerperiodoftime.Asaresultofthiswearepreventedfrom

sayinganythingwithcertaintyabouthowtheinformantsputtheirnewlygainedknowledgeto

use,beinglimitedtotheirnarratedaccountofevents.

LivingInstitutewarnedusfromthestartthattheirclientsmainlyworkatthe

manageriallevelininternationalcompanies,makingtheirschedulesoftenextremelyhectic

andtimescarce.WiththehelpofLivingInstitute,wewereabletoestablishcontactwithsix

formerclientswhogladlyparticipatedinourstudy,adiversegroupcontainingbothDanes

andforeignexpatriateswhohadallreceiveddifferentkindsoftraining.Theamountoftime

theywereablespendwithusvaried,resultinginsomeoftheinformant’svoicesappearing

“louder”thanothersthroughoutthisthesis.

Thescopeofthestudyislimitedbytwofactors:Timeandaccess.Thefirstisself

evident.Thesecondisaconsequenceofthefieldinwhichweoperate:Wewerecompletely

dependentonLivingInstitutewhenrecruitinginformants.Althoughwedidhaveasayinwho

wethoughtwouldberewardinginformants,wewererestrictedbythesamplethatwas

presentedtousbyLivingInstitute.Naturally,thislimitstheempiricalmaterialandthe

differentperspectivesonLivingInstituteandtheireducationtoafewvoicesthatthecompany

itselfhasjudgedtobeinterestingand/oraccessible,somethingwhichmustbetakeninto

considerationwhenviewingtheresultsofthisstudy.Itstandstoreasonthatformerclients

willingtospendtheirtimebysharingexperiencesandopinionsonLivingInstitutewillnotbe

entirelynegativetowardthecompanyandthetraining.Hopefully,theevaluationgenrein


whichwewriteledtheclientstogiveclearandsincereanswers.Itisalsohardtoimagine

themwantingtowastetheirtimebynotsharingtheirhonestopinions.

Theinterviewsperformedcanbedescribedas“semi‐structured”—usingaspecificsetof

questionsasbaseforanopen‐endedconversation,allowingustocontroltheconversation

whilenotcontrollingtheinformant.Themainadvantageofthesemi‐structuredinterviewis

thatitallowsforflexibilitywhileitatthesametimeletsyoukeepyour“eyesontheprize”.

Thiskindofinterviewisbestsuitedforsituationswhenyouarelookingforempirical

testimonyfromanindividualperspective(Fägerborg,1999,p.55).Westrovetoaskthekind

ofquestionsthatencouragetheinformantto“narrate”ratherthan“answer”,allowingthe

informanttoputfocusonwhattheyfoundtobeimportant,notreducingthemtobeingmere

objectsforustostudy.Anotherbenefitofthisinterviewtechniqueisthatleadingquestions

arelessofaconcernsinceitisharderfortheresearchertohavethe“correctanswer”inmind

beforehand(Arnstberg,1997,p.90).Becausenearlyallinterviewsituationshadarather

stricttimelimit,theinterviewswererelativelyfocusedontheinformant’sstory,withus

askingquestions,strivingtomakethemrecallspecificmemoriesinrelationtoLivingInstitute

andtheproblemsthatledthemtocontactthecompany.Whilebeingopenwiththepurposeof

theresearchproject,weweredeliberatelyvaguewhendescribingourresearchquestionsas

suggestedbyDavies(2008),sincewedidnotwanttheinformantstofocustoomuchonthe

cultureconceptitself,butrathertothewaysitwasputtouseintheireverydaylives.Tobe

abletolistenmoreactivelyandaskrelevantfollow‐upquestions,weusedadigitalrecorder.

Whileanethnographeralwaysmustbewaryofthepowerrelationsthatareactive

duringaninterview,beingcarefulnottoexploittheinformant,thisdidnotseemtobean

issueofgreatimportanceforthisstudy.Inthemeetingwiththeinformantsbothourroles

wereclearlydefined.Thoughweweremetwithnothingbutsmiles,itwasclearwewerethe

oneswhohadbeengrantedanaudienceandnottheotherwayaround.We;ratheryoung

ethnographerswritingourmaster’sthesis.They;aged30to50withlongprofessionalcareers

behindthemandhighpositionsintheirrespectivecompanies.Thefactthatweworkedasa

pairfornearlyalloftheinterviewsprovedtobeagoodstrategyfordealingwithwhat

potentiallycouldhavebeenaratherintimidatingsituation.Wedid,however,manageto

establishmeaningfulconversationswithallinformantsandseveralofthemclaimedtheyfelt

ithadbeenagoodopportunityforthemtoreflectontheirownsituationandonthetraining

theyhadreceivedfromLivingInstitute.OneexampleofthiswasValeriewhoseemedtobe

quitedisappointedwhenshe,aftermorethantwohours,hadtobreakofftheinterviewin

ordermakeanimportantbusinesscall.


Tobeabletocreatearichempiricalmaterialandtocontextualizetheinformation

gatheredthroughtheinterviewswithLivingInstitute’sclients,wealsochosetoperforma

seriesofinterviewswiththepeopleworkinginthecompany.Allinallweperformedfive

interviews;onewithLivingInstitute’sfounderandmanagingdirector,onewiththesenior

consultant,theanthropologistresponsibleformostofthetraining,andthreewithconsultants

whohaveworkedwiththecompanyondifferentoccasions.Theseinterviewsweremore

“informative”innature,focusingonthehistory,practiceandidealsofthecompany,butthey

alsogaveusanopportunitytodelvedeeperintothecultureofLivingInstitute,helpingus

understandhowtobestdirectourmessagetothecompany.Tofurthergainanunderstanding

ofthecompany’smethodwealsoattendedanumberoftrainingsessionsasparticipant

observers,withthegoaltogaincomplementaryknowledgeofthepracticesthatmakeup

LivingInstitute,notlimitingourselvestostudyingidealizednarratives.Aspointedoutby

Öhlander(1999),thiskindofdirectobservationcanfunctionasagreatcomplementto

interviewssincetheypresenttheopportunitytocatchun‐reflectedactionsanddiscrepancies

betweenthatwhichwasnarratedandwhatwasactuallyperformed,aswellasdatathatnot

easilycanbeputintowords.Thisalsogaveusabetterunderstandingforthestoriesofthe

clientsandhelpedusaskmorecompetentandbetter‐informedquestionsinthefollowing

interviews.Theseobservationswerekeptrelativelyopen,tryingnotonlytocatchwhatwas

toldbyLivingInstitute,butalsohowthetrainingwasperformedandwhatkindof

atmosphereandemotionswereinvokedduringthesessions.


Informantportraits

Wewillnowintroduceourprimaryinformants,consistingofformerclientsofLivingInstitute.

Wedothissothatthereadermaygainbetterunderstandingoftheirexperiences,perceptions

andlives.ThegroupcontainsbothDanishandforeignknowledgeworkers,livinginDenmark

permanentlyoronashorttermbasis.AsmostoftheLivingInstitute’sclients,theyworkatthe

manageriallevelinawidevarietyofdifferentbranches.Intheireverydayworktheymay

encountermanysituationswithpotentialforculturalfriction,suchashavingemployeesand

colleaguesindifferentcountries,travelingfrequentlyaspartofthejob,operatingina

multiculturalworkingenvironmentorasanexpatriateinDenmark.

Manfred:Expatveteran

Manfredisinhisearlyfortiesandhehasbeenworkingintheinternational“hamster‐roll”,as

hecallsit,sincehewasnineteen.Afterfinishinghighschool,Manfredstartedworkingfora

healthcarecompanyinhisnativehomeland,Germany.Hewaspartofathree‐yearinternal

educationprogramwherehegotpaidwhilestudyingandasapartofthiseducationhesoon

receivedhisfirstexpatriateassignment.ManfredremainedwiththeGermancompanyforten

yearsandthenwentontoworkforaSwisscompanyfornineyears.Duringthistimehehas

livedandworkedintheUK,theUS,Germany,Austria,Chile,ColombiaandMexico.Hehas

livedinsomeofthecountriesmorethanonceandisn’treallysureifhehasmadetenor

elevenmovesbetweendifferentcountriesandjobs.

In1995hemethiscurrentwifeinColombiaandshehassincestayedwithhim

throughouthismanyrelocations,untilthemostcurrentone.Manfredhadjustfinishedan

assignmentandthecouplehaddecidedtosettledownforawhile,movingtoColombiawith

theirtwochildren.However,itdidnottakelongbeforeManfredwasheadhuntedbyaglobal

searchcompanyforanexecutivepositioninglobalmarketingintheDanishlife‐science

companyHumanCare.Hedecidedtotakethejob,butheandhiswifedecidedthatshewould

stayinColombiawiththechildren.HemovedtoDenmarkinAugust2009andexplainsithas

beenhardtobeseparatedfromhisfamily.However,hewaspleasantlysurprisedbythelevel

ofunderstandingforhissituationthathereceivedfromhisnewemployerandhehasbeen

abletomakefrequenttripstoColombia.Soonhowever,Manfred’sfamilywillbemoving

“here”,thatis,toBarcelona.HeexplainsthathewillbeinCopenhagenduringtheweeksand

inBarcelonaduringtheweekends.Goingfromdoortodoorwillonlytakehimfourhoursand

takingaflightisliketakingabustohim,heexplainswithalaugh.WhenManfredfirstcameto

DenmarktheHRdepartmentinHumanCarerecommendedheattendLivingInstitute’sDanish


LivingCrashCourse.Heplannedtotakethecourseonseveraloccasions,butbecauseofa

busyschedulehekeptpostponingit.WhenhefinallytookthecoursehehadbeeninDenmark

formorethansixmonthsandhehadalreadyrunintoseveralproblemsandchallenges,both

professionallyandinhispersonallife.

Thomas:Goalorientedbusinessculturalist

ThomasworksatthemanageriallevelinMicrocator,adivisionofalargerinternational

company,exclusivelyworkingwiththeoutsourcingofIT‐services.CustomersinDenmark

delegatesomeoftheirfunctionstoMicrocator,whichthenapplydifferentoutsourcingmodels

dependingontheclient’sneeds.InmanycasesoutsourcinglikethismeansthatMicrocator

takesovertheexistingresourcesfromtheclientandreplacessomeofthemwithoffshore

resources.MicrocatorhasemployeesinbothDenmarkandAsiathatworktogetherinthe

samedevelopmentteams.Thecompanyisimplementingarotationplanwhereasmallgroup

ofAsianemployeesworkonsiteinDenmarkinordertostrengthenthecollaborationwiththe

overseasteams.ThomashasworkedforMicrocatorforfourmonthsandseemsverydevoted

andenthusiasticwhenitcomestodevelopingtheoperations,especiallytherotationplan

describedabove,andhasplayedanessentialroleindevelopingit.Thomasisself‐taughtinthe

fieldofinformationtechnologyandhehasworkedindifferentsettingswithinthebusinessfor

morethan20years.Hehasworkedinternationallyforroughlytenyearsandhas,among

othersplaces,beenstationedintheUSandItaly,somethinghefindstohaveimprovedhis

culturalcompetence:

Thomas:“IwastheonlyDanishguyworkinginthisItalianIT‐companysoIreallyfeltinmyownbodyhowit

feelstobetheonlyone.WorkingintheUSgavemeatleastverygoodsenseofworkingwithdifferentcultures

anddifferentpeopleandIreallylikedthatandthediversityofpeopleingeneralsoIthinkthatissomeofthe

thingsthatIcanmakeuseoftodayworkingwithoffshorepeople.”

Thomasisanexperiencedbusinesstravelerwhohastraveledalot.Hehastiredofthe

ordinarypatternofbusinesstrips,whichforhimonlymeansspendingtimeinanother

airport,sleepinginanotherhotelandcatchinganothertaxi,albeitinanothercountry.Forhim

ithaslostallsenseofadventure.Hethinksthathehasmadeallthecommonmistakes

businesstravelercan,whichforhimincludestheneedtoknoweverythingaboutthe

destination,somethingwhichhesimplydoesnothavetimeforanymore.Bytakingthecourse

hehopedtogainknowledgeabouthowtoavoidthemostbasicproblemswheninteracting

withhisAsianbusinesspartners,bothoffshoreandinDenmark.


Anne:Borntobeinterculturalist

Annehasanidealbackgroundforworkinginternationally.Sheismultilingual,bornin

EnglandandraisedinDenmark.DuringherstudiesshespentoneyearinAustraliaandlater

shehasworkedintheUSaswellasinSwitzerland.Shenowworksforaninternational

companyinthefieldofhealthcarecalledNordhealth.Thecompanyisrepresentedworldwide

inmorethan70countries,buthasitsmaindivisionsinDenmarkandtheUS.Sincethe

companyhasworkedtoachieveamoreglobalpresenceinthelasttwoyears,itsresearchand

developmentoperationshavebeenrevised.DuringthisprocesstheDanishofficebecamethe

headquartersandsomeofthefunctionsearlierlocatedintheUShavebeentransferredto

Denmark,whichledtotrustissuesandcommunicationproblemsbetweenthetwodivisions.

Annemanagesaglobalteamofexpertssituatedinanumberofdifferentcountries,such

astheUS,Japan,ChinaandDenmark.ShemeetsherDanishcolleaguesandemployeesinher

dailyworkandtherestshemeetsinglobalmeetingstwiceayear,aswellasonherfrequent

businesstripstoboththeEastandWest.Herdailyroutinereflectsthis,sincewhenshewakes

upinthemorningshestartsherdaywiththee‐mailsfromtheEastandendsherworkdayat

homeintheeveningwithe‐mailsfromtheWest—thereisanine‐hourtimedifferenceinboth

directions.

Valerie:Culturaldenier

Valerieworksformultinationalcompanyasheadofaninternationalgroupoffinanceexperts,

beingresponsibleforemployeesinDenmark,aswellasintheUS,ChinaandItaly.Valerieis

fromAustriaandhasworkedandlivedthereformostofherlife.Whenshemovedto

Denmark,shehadinternationalworkenvironmentexperiencesinceshehadworkedashead

ofaninternationalbusinessunitinherhomecountry.Herfirstexpatriateassignmentwasa

half‐yearperiodthatshespentinChina.Shedescribesthisasherfirst“real”international

experience,spendingalongerperiodinanothercultureanditwasalsothefirsttimeshe

reallyfeltlikeastrangeramongotherpeople:

Valerie:“IwasneverthinkingthatIcouldexperiencesomethinglikethis.Itwasreallystrangefeelinglikea

stranger,likeanaliensomewhere.”

ValerierelocatedtoDenmarkoneandhalfyearsago.Earlyonshefacedproblemsinbothher

privateandprofessionallifeforvariousreasons.Asaresultofherexperiencesinthe

internationalworkfieldandparticipationtotheDanishLivingCrashCourse,shehas


developedadenyingattitudetowardscultureasaninfluentialfactorinhumaninteraction.

ForValeriedifferencesinhumanbehaviorarecausedbydifferencesinpeople’spersonalities,

havingrecentlydecidedthatculturedoesnotmatter.

Diane:Culturalagent

DianeworksasahumanresourcemanagerforQualityHelp,afirmdeliveringservicestoother

companies.Whilethefirmdoesnotoperateinthetransnationalmarket,nearlyfiftypercent

ofitstotalnumberofemployeeshasimmigrantbackground,ranginguptoninetypercentin

somelocations.Dianeisresponsibleforrecruitmentaswellascoursesandtrainingofferedto

thestaff.Sheisveryinterestedinissuesofculturalawareness,diversityandequalityandhas

takenonaleadingroleinpromotingtheseissueswithinthecompany.Herreasonfor

contactingLivingInstitutewasthatoneofthedepartmentswithahighnumberof“new

Danish”employees,thetermshepreferstouse,hadproblemswithmanagersnotknowing

howtomanagetheirmulticulturalteams.

DianefoundoutaboutLivingInstitutefromhersupervisor,whohaddecided

QualityHelpshouldbuyaworkshopfromthecompany.Dianeorderedaone‐hourworkshop

onculturalawareness,whichwastobeheldatseveralofthedepartmentmeetingsin

QualityHelp.Intotalthreeworkshopswereheldfordifferentaudiences,includingthe

managersandsomeofthecompany’sdirectors.

Doris:Minianthropologist

Dorisworksasamanagerforaninternationalgroupofexpertsinaninternationalhealthcare

companyHealthAid,whichproducesmedicalandpharmaceuticalproductsforaworldwide

market.Shespeaksveryhighlyofhercompany’svaluesandculture,whichshefindsveryeasy

torelateto.DorisstartedhercareerwithinthecompanyinSouthAmericaandrelocatedto

Denmarktwoyearsago.ShewasborninAfrica,butgrewupinSouthAmerica,soherfamily

hasahistoryofmovingalot.ShehighlyappreciatestheDanishmanagementstyleat

HealthAidandshepickedDenmarkoutofanumberofpossiblerelocationdestinations,such

asFrance,China,theUSandBrazil.HerdecisionwasinfluencedbyherfirstvisittoDenmark

someyearsago,avisitthatlastedthreemonths.Shedescribesitasanimportantlearning

process,wheresheexperiencedfirsthandthedifficultiesofmovingtoanothercountryto

work.


Doris:“IsaidIdonotwanttocomehere.Iwanttogohome.Iwasjustlookingforwardthosethreemonthsto

gohome,butatthesametimeIthinkaftermysecondmonthandwhenIwasonmythirdmonthIstartedto

understandalittlebitmoreandtryingtounderstandwhythingswerethewaytheyweresoIalwayshadin

mindtoaskthequestions‘Why?’,insteadofcriticizingandsaying‘Thisisstupid,Idon’tlikethis’or

blahblahblah,soIjusttryalwayssay‘Butwhyisitlikethat?’andthenItrytounderstandtheircultureandwhy

theyworkastheywork.Itmakesiteasiertoacceptornot,atleasttounderstand.”

Thisshowsagreatdealofreflexivityandanawarenessofherownculturalawareness.Ina

way,Dorisislikeamini‐anthropologistobserving,interpretingandtryingtounderstandthe

behaviorandenvironmentthatsurroundher.HermainmotivationwhenchoosingDenmark

wastobecomeabetterprofessionalbylearningfromtheDanishworkstyleandbusiness

practice.DorisattendedtheDanishLivingCrashCourseafterbeinginDenmarkformorethan

sixmonths.Shefoundoutaboutthecompanyfromafriend,whomsheattendedthecourse

with.BeforeshetookthecourseshehadbeentoDenmarkontwoseparateoccasionsandhad

experiencedanumberofsituationsthatreallyannoyedherandthatshewouldliketoknow

moreabout.


Culturalgoods

Havingintroducedouraim,ourmethodologicalapproaches,thetheoreticaltraditionsonwhich

webuildalongthemaincharactersofourstudy,LivingInstituteanditsclients,wewillnow

commenceouranalysis,plungingheadfirstinto“AdayattheCrashCourse”,asubchapter

aimingtogivethereaderafeelingfortheshapeandforminwhichthecompanydelivers

culturalknowledge.Thisisfollowedbyanotherfoursubchapters,alldelvingdeeperinto

differentaspectsofLivingInstituteanditsproducts.In“Thewholepackage”wewillexaminethe

ideals,theoreticalfoundationsandpracticesthatthecompanyisbuiltaround,lookingtohow

theyaffecttherelationshiptotheclients.In“Raisingculturalconsciousness”wewilldealwith

thestrategiesemployedbythecompanytocreateculturalawarenessinitsclients.In“The

Edutainer”weexplorehowthecompany’sproductsbalancebetweentheoreticaldepthand

entertainingadventure.Finally,in“Danes–thewaytheyare”,wewillmapoutthewayinwhich

thecompanyusesaspecificculturalnarrative,thatoftheDanes,inordertoconveyamessage.

AdayattheCrashCourse

WewereabletoattendtrainingsessionsgivenbyLivingInstituteonthreeseparateoccasions.

Ourgoalwhenattendingthecourseswastogainafeelingforthepracticeofthecompany,the

handiworksotospeak.TogivethereaderabettergraspofwhatitisthatLivingInstitute

actuallydoes,wewillhererecountadayspentataDanishLivingCrashCourse.Wehave

chosentodothisinordertomovebeyondthatwhichisnarratedbythecompany’s

representativesandclients,touchingupontheunreflectedandephemeralaspectsofthe

trainingsession.IfallLivingInstitutedidwastodeliver“culturalknowledge”abookcould

havesufficed.Sincethisisnotthecaseitbecomesessentialtoexaminetheshapeinwhich

knowledgeispresented,lookingattheproductinitsentiretyandnotonlyatitsdiscursive

content.

ThecoursewasheldinaConferenceCentreclosetoChristianshavnincentral

Copenhagen,alocationfrequentlyusedbyLivingInstituteforthispurpose.TheCentreis

quiteflashy,beinghousedinanoldharbourbuilding,rightnexttothewater,combiningthe

historicalarchitecturewithmoderndesign,mergingoldwoodenbeamsandcolumnswith

clean,whitesurfaces.Theconferenceroominwhichthecoursewasheldwasdominatedbya

large,blacktablewithaprojectionscreenattheoneshortside;thedomainofthesenior

consultant,wholedthetrainingsession.Ateachchairaroundthetableabinderwasplaced,

containingtheprogramfortheday,contactinformationforalltheparticipants,the

Powerpointslidesdisplayedduringthesessionaswellasanumberofexercisesandafuture


actionplan.Thebinderanditscontentswereelegantlydesigned,justlikethesurrounding

environment.Duringthisparticularsessiontherewerefourparticipants,allfromdifferent

companiesandcountries.AccordingtotherepresentativefromLivingInstitute,thiswasan

unusuallylownumberofattendants,whichmadeitpossibleforeachtoaskmorequestions

thanwhatisordinarilypossible.Otherthanthis,itwasaquiteatypicalCrashCourse,

includingalltheordinaryelements,accordingtotheseniorconsultant.

Startingat9a.m.thecoursewentonuntil5p.m.,withaonehourlunchbreakwherethe

participantsandtheconsultantatetogether.Itstartedoffwiththeseniorconsultant

presentinghimselfand“thepackage”thathewastodelivertotheparticipantsduringtheday

andhowitrelatedtowhatLivingInstituteusuallydoes.Hewascarefulinpointingoutthat

thecompany’sclaimsarebasedonresearchedknowledgeandscientifictradition,notonmere

individualexperiences.Hefurthercementedhisscientificauthoritybytellingtheparticipants

thathecouldgivethemreferencesiftheywantedtoreadmoreandduringthedurationofthe

dayhefrequentlyusedtermslike“thisisasociologicalfact”,whichhelpedmaintaina

scientificair.Theseniorconsultantwasverycharismaticandconvincingandheseemingly

hadanswerstoalloftheparticipants’questions,eventhoughheoftenstrivedtohelpthem

comeupwiththeanswersthemselves,ratherthandeliveringsimplesolutionstocomplex

culturalissues.Heconstantlystruggledwithkeepingtherightorderonthemattersthatwere

tobediscussed,guaranteeingtheinquisitiveparticipantsthatalltheirquestionsaboutwhat

theyshoulddoincertainsituationsorwhyDanesdoastheydowouldbecomeapparentlater.

Oncetheprogramofthedayhadbeenpresented,theparticipantswereaskedto

introducethemselvestoeachother,everyonegettingplentyoftimetotelltheirownstoryand

whytheywereattendingthecourse.Theywerethenaskedaboutwhattheirexpectationsfor

thedaywereandtheiranswersconcernedbothprivateandprofessionalmatters.Thefriendly

andopenatmospherewaskeptthroughoutthedayandtheparticipantswereconstantly

encouragedtospeaktheirminds,sharetheirownexperiencesandaskquestions.Twoofthe

participantshadonlybeeninDenmarkforfourweeks,whilethetwoothershadbeenthere

forroughlysixmonths.TheseniorconsultantexplainedthatfourweeksinDenmarkisa

perfectamountoftimeforsomeonetoattendthecourse,butthatsomewhotakeithavebeen

inthecountryforayear,whileothershavejustcomeofftheplane.Hecontinuedtoclaim

everythingisnewandexcitingwhenarrivingtoanewcountry,a“honeymoon”ofsorts,and

thatittakesalittlewhileforproblemstoemerge.Peoplewhowaittoolongbeforeattending

thetrainingmightontheotherhandencountersomanyproblemsthattheymightlosetheir

patienceandjustwanttogohomeinstead.


Oncethelecturestartedfor“real”theseniorconsultantstartedflippingthrough

Powerpointslides,ratherquickly,presentinganthropologyandthetraditionofstudying

cultures.Theslidesthemselveshadlittleinformation,someconsistingofbulletpointswhile

othersonlycontainedheadlinesandpictures.Somecontainedgraphsanddiagrams,mostly

usedtoillustrateextremedifferencesinstatisticswhenitcomestoDenmarkinrelationtothe

restoftheworld.Somepictureswere“funny”andclearlyintendedtomaketheparticipants

smile.AnearlyslidecontainedaclipfromthemovieBorat,wherethemaincharacterarrives

totheUSandbreaksagreatnumberofculturalnormsuponenteringtheairport,muchtothe

amusementoftheparticipants.Thiswasthenusedasaconversationstarter,gettingthe

participantstodiscusswhattheyhadseen,whattheythoughthappenedandhowsituations

ofculturalconfusioncanleadtofeelingsofinsecurityandanxiety.Theseniorconsultant

stressedthattrustisimportantwhenitcomestoacceptanceandthatpeoplecreatetrustby

sharingculturalbehavior.Whenculturalpatternsarebroken,trustislostandpeoplebecome

suspiciousofeachother.Hepointedtothatitwasnotlongagothatwewerelivingonthe

savannahinAfricaandthatourbrainshaveyettodeveloptothemultitudeofculturesthat

existintheglobalworld.Backthenhumansneededtobeabletotrustinordertosurviveand

inawaywearestilllikethat,whichmakesaglobalworldwithmanyunknownenvironments

problematic.

Hewentontodemarcatewhatculture“is”.Oneofthewayshedidthiswasbyaskingthe

participantswhentheystopsaying“goodmorning”.Theyallhadclear,butdifferent

conceptionsofthis.Theseniorconsultantthenpointedoutthatweknowtheanswer,butthat

wedonotknowwhywestopsayingitatacertaintimeofthedayandthatsayingitinthe

wrongplaceatthewrongtimemighthaveunforeseenconsequences.Oneoftheparticipants

claimedthathekeptsaying“goodmorning”untilnoon,somethingwhichsomeDanes,being

thesarcasticpeoplethattheyare,mightinterpretasimplyingthattheyarelateforwork.The

seniorconsultantwarnedtheparticipantsofaskingpeople“why”theyaredoingthings,since

traditionsandhabitsoftenareun‐reflected.Asking“why”onlyremindspeopleofthisand

mightembarrassthem.Insteadtheparticipantswereencouragedtoaskaboutwhathappens

incertainsituations,lettingthe“natives”explaintothemintheirownwords.Thesenior

consultantconcludedthatcultureisnotrationalandthattheyneedtounderstandthatifthey

aregoingtobeabletoliveinaforeigncountryforanextendedperiodoftime.Atthesame

timetheyshouldnotbeafraidtoaddressculturalissues.Hetoldthemthattheyareallowedto

trytochangethebehavioroftheirDanishco‐workersincaseitinterfereswiththebusiness


goals,buthealsostressedchoosingtheirbattlescarefullyandnotconfrontingevery

culturalissuefacedsinceitwouldbetooexhaustingandfrustrating.

Aftertheinitialpresentationofculturalawarenesstheparticipantsweretoldtolookin

thebackoftheirbinders,wheretherewasatextdescribinganumberofreal“casestories”

aboutculturalmisunderstandings.Theyreadandthendiscussedwhattheythoughtthe

problemwas.Theseniorconsultantpitchedin,explainingcertainbehaviorsand

contradictorystatements.Thecoursecontinuedwiththeparticipantsdiscussingthecultural

clashesanddifferencestheythemselveshadencounteredduringtheirtimeinDenmark.Some

ofthethingsthatcameupweretheneedforconsensus,conflictavoidance,strongdivision

betweenworkandpersonallife,relaxedattitude,trust,“hygge”andhealthylifestyle.The

seniorconsultantremindedthemtolookatwhattheywerecomparingagainst,whatitisthat

makesthesethingsstandoutasdifferent,thussheddingsomelightontheirowncultural

habits.Hethenaskedthemtoonceagainlookinthebackoftheirbindersforan“actionplan”,

somethingthattheycouldtakehomeandworkactivelywithtochangetheirbehavior.The

actionplanconsistedofthreefields:positivesandnegativesofthecurrentsituation,whatto

doaboutitandthedreamscenario.Theywerethenaskedtofillinthefirstandlastfield,i.e.

whattheircurrentsituationwaslikeandwhattheywouldlikeittobeinthebestofworlds.

Theythengottopresentwhattheyhadwritten.Mostofthedreamscenarioswerepersonal,

likegettingpersonalcontact,learningtospeakDanishandgenerallynotfeelingalienated.

AfterlunchthefocuswasplacedonDanishhistoryor,morespecifically,partsofDanish

historythattheseniorconsultantclaimedtohaveinfluenceontheDanishmentalitytoday.He

wentontospeakaboutDenmark:asaveryoldcountry;thatusedtobeverybigbutnowis

verysmall;thatreligionhasneverbeenextremelyimportant;thatallsocialrevolutionswere

nonviolent;thathasbeeninvadedbytheGermanstwotimesinrecenthistory;andthatthere

isatraditionofcollectiveownership.Allthesefactorsheturnedintoarrowspointingatthe

Danishcharacteristicsthathadpreviouslybeenmentioned.Hecontinuedbyrecountingabout

Danishsocietytoday,movingmoreandmoreintotheworldofbusiness,answeringmanyof

thequestionsposedbytheparticipants.Theissueoftrustwascentralinhisargumentandhe

claimedthattrustisthefoundationofthewaythatDanishsocietyworks.Inseveraloccasions

hesaidsomethinggeneralabouttheDanesonlytoaddtheopposite,e.g.“TheDanesaregreat

atworkingingroups,buttheyarealsoveryindividualistic”—constantlybeingcarefulofnot

paintinganovertlystereotypicalimageoftheDanes.Theparticipantswereallowedtoget

more“handson”withtheirquestionsandtheseniorconsultantgavemoredirectanswersand

suggestions.


Attheendofthedaytheparticipantswereonceagainaskedtopickuptheiraction

plansandfillinthesecondfield,“whattodo”,usingtheknowledgetheyhadaccumulated

duringthedaytomapawayfromtheircurrentsituationtotheirdreamscenario,withthe

seniorconsultantpitchinginwithsuggestions.Thesessionendedwiththeseniorconsultant

handingoutevaluationformsandtellingtheparticipantsthathe’dbehappytocomeoutto

theircompaniesandspeakifneedbe—forpay,naturally.Whentheformswerefilledout

everybodygotup,shookhandsandsaidgoodbye.

Thewholepackage

Seniorconsultant:“/…/butIthinkstillthatourmethodisquiteunique…Ithink,butIhavenoidea,it’sjusta

feelingIhaveandsometimessomethingIhearfromtheothers,theother,someofourclientswho’vebeentoone

ofthosecoursesandsay‘youaresoitcompletelydifferent’,whatweseethereissomeveryschematicthing

aboutthe‘others’,‘that’showtheyareinAsiaorChina’,buttheideaofculturalunderstandingisneglected.For

usit’sapackageandit’sveryimportantforustokeepitasapackage.”

AccordingtothemanagingdirectorofLivingInstitutethecompanywasthefirstmoveronthe

Danishcross‐culturalcommunicationmarketandeventhoughafewcompetitorshave

emergedsincethecompanywasfounded,boththeDirectorandtheseniorconsultantpride

themselvesonhavingauniqueandsuperiorproduct.Thecompanyputsemphasisonfinding

themostknowledgeablepersonstoworkasexternalconsultantsinordertoprovidedifferent

perspectivesintheeducationtheydeliver,aswellaskeepinguptodatewiththemostrecent

developmentsinthefieldofinterculturalcommunication.Whatreallysetsthecompanyapart

howeveristheanthropologicalperspectiveaddedbytheseniorconsultant,whousesLiving

Instituteaspartofhispersonalagendatopopularizeanthropologyandputittouseoutsideof

academia.Hereasonsthatinterculturalcommunicationtrainingonlygivessomeonethemere

basicsforoperatinginaforeigncultureandinteractingwith“others”,whichmightbeenough

tosurvive,buthardlytolive.Justteaching“thebasics”isalreadydonebythecompany’s

competitorsandthebareminimumdoesnotfitwithhisandthemanagingdirector’sideaof

highquality.Instead,LivingInstitutestrivestoconveyamoreanthropologicallyflavored

understandingofculture,encouragingtheclientstobecuriousaboutthe“others”theymay

encounterandtrytounderstandwhytheyareacting“differently”insteadofdismissingthem

asweirdorstupid.However,sincetheyareoperatingwithinabusinesscontext,heoften

pointsoutthattheclientsareallowedtochangethe“others”theyworkwithincasetheir

behaviorconflictswiththebusinessgoal.Inthatcase,adeeperculturalawarenesscanhelp

theclientunderstandwhatbattlestofightandwhentoletgo.


ThereisastrongambitionwithinLivingInstitutetokeeptheeducationtruetoits

scientificrootsandnot“cheapen”themessage.Whatthecompanystrivestodeliveriscultural

awarenessandnotsimpleanswersabout“howpeopleare”indifferentpartsoftheworld.

Becauseofthis,boththemanagingdirectorandtheseniorconsultantexpressreluctance

towardarrangingcourseswheretheydonothavesufficienttimefordelivering“thewhole

package”:

Managingdirector:“WhenwewereatIntertellIpromisedmyselffor50thtimethatIwillneverdothisagain.

Whenwehaveanhourandhalftotell50to60peopleaboutculturalawareness,‘WhyDanesareweird’or

whatever,andthenknowingthatwedidn'tevenscratchthesurface,butwhenwesaygoodbyetothesponsor,

thepersonwhoboughtthehourandhiredus,Icanhearthatshesays‘Thiswasgreat,goodbye,’andformewe

didn'tevenstartyetandIkeeppromisingtomyselfnottodothis.”

AnotherconcretemanifestationofthisisthattheLivingCrashCoursealwaysstartswitha

thoroughlectureonculturalawareness,totheextentthatthecourseleaderavoidsanswering

specificquestionsaboutDanishcultureuntilthepartonculturalawarenessisdone,as

mentionedabove,alltopreparetheparticipantsandmakethemrealizethattherearenoeasy

answers.Thecompanyusesthreesteps(seefigure1)forconveyingtheirmessagetothe

clients,thefirstbeingtopromote“culturalawareness”,i.e.anunderstandingforwhatculture

isandwhyitmatterstothem.

Figure1.Threestepstoculturalawareness


Thesecondstepiscalled“culturalmapping”,whereinfocusisputonthewaysinwhich

peopletendtodifferandculturalissuesthatareofsignificancetotheclient,pointingout“the

differencesthatmakeadifference”,astheseniorconsultantputsit.Hereinterculturalists

suchasHofstedeandTrompenaarsplayamoreactiverole,theircategoriesofcultural

differenceservingasawaytoillustrateculturalvariety.Thethirdandfinalstepaimstohelp

theclientsquestionandexploretheirownculture,thusmakingthemawarethatcultureisnot

justsomethingthat“others”carryandthatwhatonecarrieswithoneselfinevitablycolors

culturalencounters.ThusLivingInstitutecombineswhatHofstede(2001)callstheculture

specificandculturegeneralapproaches,dealingwithbothinformationaboutspecific“target”

culturesandculturalawarenessinabroadersense.Theclaimthatthiscombinationisa

necessityplaysacentralroleinthecompany’snarrative,sincetheformerisseenasuseless

withoutthelatter.Itfunctionsa“nodalpoint”ofsorts;anideaaroundwhichtheLiving

Institute’sculturalnarrativeisconstructedandwhichthisdiscoursestrivestoupholdastrue

(WintherJørgensen&Phillips,2000,p.33).

Theanthropologicalperspective,scientificvalidityandhighqualityareconceptsthatare

explicitlyheldinhighregardwithinthecompany,functioningaskeysymbolsaroundwhich

theephemeralproductscanbeconstructed.Theseniorconsultantdescribesthegoalas

turningalloftheirclientsinto“smallanthropologists”,makingthemsystematicallyinquisitive

andcuriouswhenfacingculturalfrictions.AgoodexampleofthisapproachisDoriswho

seemstofullyhaveembracedthisideology.Sheconstantlystrivestounderstandratherthan

explainandasaresultsheoftencompareseventssheexperiencesinDenmarktowhatsheis

usedtofromherhomecountry,weighingandcomparingdifferentapproaches.Shehasgone

ontonotonlybeinganalyticalaboutherownlifebutalsohelpingherexpatriatefriends:

Doris:“Thensheaskedtheperson‘Wouldyoulikemetotakesomething?WhatshouldItake?’,thenshelooked

attheperson‘Whatdoyoumean,whatshouldyoutake?’,‘Yeah,shouldItakesomefruitsorsomethingto

preparethepizza?’,andtheotherperson‘No,onlyyou’,‘Butareyousure?Icantakesomething,thereisno

problem’,‘Didyouhearme?It’sonlyyou’,thenIlookedatherwhenshewastellingmethisstorylater,Isaid,

‘Ah‐ah,youdidallwrong!Youshouldnotdothat,apersoninvitedyou.It’sbecauseshewantsyoutobethereat

herplaceandsheisoffering.Shewillprepareeverythingforyou.Youdon’tneedtoaskifyouneedtotake

anything.Ifshewantsyoutotakeanythingshewilltellyou’/…/It’snicebecausewecantalktoeachotherand

exchangeandhowwethinkandwhatisbehindthatsothat’swhyIalwayssay‘Whyisthequestion’,sowhen

youunderstandthepersonisinvitingyouandit’sherpleasuretohaveyouathometopreparethedinnerfor

you,sothat’ssomethingnice.”


Someoftheclientshadreceivedcross‐culturaltrainingpreviouslyfromothercompanies

andtheywerethusabletocomparetheirpreviousexperiencestothetrainingreceivedfrom

LivingInstitute.Inallcases,thecompanyrepresentsabetteralternativeandthetrainingthey

hadreceivedbeforecomparesbadlytothatofLivingInstitute.Oneoftheinformantshad

participatedinsomanycoursesthathecouldnotreallyspecifytheirnature.Oneinformant

describedcoursesthatwerenotthatsuccessfulas“lectureswithnicepictures”,yetanother

onedescribedtheonethatshehadattendedas“moreirritatingtome”andsheconcludedthat

shecouldhavegottenthesameinformationfromGoogle.

Theconvictiontodeliver“thewholepackage”mighthoweverputLivingInstituteat

oddswiththeirclients.Itisfarfromeveryonewhohastakenthemessagetohearttothesame

degreeasDoris.Manyoftheclientsareextremelybusypeople,asalreadymentioned,taking

acoursetosolveconcreteproblemstheyhavefacedintheirwork.Eventhoughallofthe

clientsinterviewedappreciatethecomplexityofthetrainingsomehavecomplaintsregarding

thelackoffocusonbusinessissues:

Thomas:“MaybeIwouldhavelikedtohavealittlebitmorebusinessrelated.Ireallycan’tputmyfingeron,it

wasnotthatbusinessorientedthatIexpected,likehowdoyounegotiateorhowdoyougetalongthethings

whenpeoplekeeponsaying‘yes’whentheymean‘no’andhowdoyouactually,ifyouwanttodothis,youare

goingthereandyouwanttoimplementanewthinganditisagainstsomethinganditisagainsttheirculture,itis

againstsomethingandtheywilljustnoteatit,sohowdoyoudothatlikesmallthingsbecauseitisdifferentand

itisdifficult.Thatcouldbenicetohave.”

Manfred:“Ithinkthewaythedayisstructuredyoucanre‐assesstomakeitmoreworthwhilefortheparticipant.

Whathappenedisthatduringthewholemorningtheconsultantwouldsay‘We’llgetbacktoit.We’llgetbackto

it.Let’sparkthis.We’lldiscusslater,we’lldiscusslater.’Ithinkyou’rebetterofftoopenupthedaywiththe

stereotypeDaneandyoudothisforthirty,forty‐fiveminutesjust,youknow,‘Thisishowweare,thisishowwe

are’/…/Ifyoujuststartedoffsaying‘ThisistheDane’andthenyoucompletewiththehistorypieceandthenthis

andthisandthis,Ithinkitwouldbealittlemoreeffectiveandthiswayyougetaroundthis‘We’llgetbacktoit,

we’llgetbacktoit’,butover‐allIthinkitwasagoodstructuredday.”

LivingInstitute’sclientsdonotalwaysseetheimportanceoftheculturalawarenesstraining.

Theyoftenapproachtheissuefromtheirownperspective,lookingforknowledgeandtools

thatarequickandeasytoaccess,deliveredinalanguagefamiliartothem.Simpletoolsfor

businessandstructurearebothhighlyvaluedandsoughtafterandthussomeoftheclients

expressamildfrustrationbecauseoftheextensivescopeofLivingInstitute’straining.The

questionthenbecomeswhobenefitsfromthefocusondeliveringculturalawareness,instead


ofquickanswers.LivingInstituteclaimsitisintheclients’bestinterest,regardlesswhat

theythinkthemselves.Onecanhowevernotoverlookthepurposethenarrativeconveying

thesevaluesserveasafoundationforacompanycultureandcorporateidentity,profiling

LivingInstituteagainstitscompetitors.AccordingtoCzarniawska(1998)itisimportantto

turnthenarrativeperspectivetoanorganizationinthiswayinordertounderstandhow

knowingandcommunicatingtakesplacewithinit.InthecaseofLivingInstitutethe

“knowing”isofparticularinterest,sinceitservesafoundationforteaching,somethingwewill

returntolater.Fornow,letuskeepourfocusontheconceptofculturalawarenessaswego

ontodiscussoneofthecompany’smainstrategiesformakingculture’ssignificancevisibleto

theclient.

Raisingculturalconsciousness

Seniorconsultant:“Thereissomuchtabooaroundculture,thatpeoplefeelthattheyarenotallowedtoaddress

itorsaysomethingaboutit.Iusuallyusethatoldpictureoftheelephantintheroomthateveryoneknowsis

therebutyoucan’ttalkaboutit.Youcanfeelit,youcansmellitandseeit,buteveryoneisjustpretendingthat

it’snotthere,youneedtogetbeyondthat.Youneedtobeabletofeelthatit’sallrighttoaddressandtalkabout

cultureandseewhenit’sthereandalsosometimesquestionit.”

Aswehavealreadymentioned;alargepartofLivingInstitute’strainingrevolvesaround

helpingtheclientsrealizethewaysinwhichculturematters.Sincesimplytellingtheclients

thatcultureplaysanimportantroleinday‐to‐daydealingswouldnotsuffice,thecompany

activelyputstheclients’ownexperiencestowork,encouragingthemtosharewitheachother

andLivingInstitutethroughnarratingtheirownviewsoncultureandculturalproblemsthey

havefaced.ThisbecomesmostapparentduringtheLivingCrashCoursessincethefullfocusis

turnedtotheexpatriates’livingconditionsinanewculture.Eventhoughitisnotexplicitly

statedbyLivingInstitute,thisprocesscanbeinterpretedasaformof“consciousnessraising”;

aconceptthatisanorganizationalformaswellasapoliticaltheoryandananalyticaltool,

originallydevelopedwithintheUnitedStates’feministmovementinthe1970s.

Consciousnessraisingtraditionallywasafeministmethodwheretheparticipantswould

gatherandsharetheirexperiencesofgenderedoppression.Eventhoughthesharingof

experiencesmighthaveatherapeuticeffectfortheparticipants,thisisnotthepointof

consciousnessraising.Instead,thegoalistocreateagreaterawarenessoftheindividual’s

placewithinacertaingroupandinsocietyasawhole.Bysharingstoriesaboutoppression,

theparticipantswouldbeabletoseethatwhattheyhadexperiencedwerenotisolated,

personalincidentsbutpartsofalargeroppressingstructure—andbydefiningtheproblema


moreeffectivemovementforchangecouldbemobilized.Thuspersonalexperiencewas

transformedintoapoliticalissueandtheindividualbecamepartofacollective(Gemzöe,

2003;MacKinnon,1982).

Whileitmightnotberelevanttospeakabout“oppression”whenitcomestothe

problemstheLivingInstitute’sclientsface,onecanclearlydrawparallelsbetween

consciousnessraisingandthewayinwhichthecompanystrivestocreateculturalawareness.

Byencouragingtheclientstosharetheirexperiencesandthoughtsonbeinginanewculture

orcountry,LivingInstitutecanturntheparticipants’attentiontothewaysinwhichculture

affectstheirlives.Thisofteninvolveschallengingtheclients’viewofthemselvesas“normal”,

makingtheirownculturevisibletothem,helpingthemmovefrom“thisisjustnormal”to“oh,

thisisactuallyspecificbehaviorthatcouldjustaswellbecompletelydifferentifIwasbrought

upinadifferentenvironment”,astheseniorconsultantputsit.Duringthetrainingsessions

thatwereobserved,theparticipantswereactivelyencouragedtospeaktheirminds,share

experiencesandaskquestions.Anecdotesaboutculturalfrictionswerefrequentlyusedbythe

seniorconsultanttoillustrateproblemsortoserveasastartingpointfortheclientsinorder

forthemtosharetheirexperiencesonasimilartopic.Theparticipantswereaskedtodiscuss,

analyze,listandcomparedifferentempiricalcasesonseveraloccasionsduringtraining

sessions.Oneresultofthiswasthattheclientsstarttosharetheirexperiencesonsimilar

eventsandsituationsthattheyhaveexperienced,evenwhennotexplicitlyasked.Thus

individualnarrativestheclientssharewitheachotherbecomepartofLivingInstitute’s

greaternarrativeandtheproblemsorchallengesthattheynarratearemoldedintoacultural

shape.Whattheindividualhasexperiencedisnotanisolatedincident,butpartofagreater

structure,i.e.culture.Thusthetrainingsessionsserveasaframingdeviceofsorts,puttingthe

everydayexperiencesinaframedefinedbyLivingInstituteasculture.Thisisawayforthe

companytoexertdiscursivepowerbyusingscientificauthority,claimingtherightto

interpretindividualexperience.

However,thereisnaturallynoguaranteethattheclientswillinterprettheirown

experiencesasproofofvalidityinLivingInstitute’snarrative.Thereisalwaysariskthat

experiencesareframedinanotherway,formingadiscursiveresistance—somethingValerie

doesonseveraloccasions.Shehaschosenpersonalityastheprimaryframeforunderstanding

behavior,thusshedoesnotfeelherexperiencesfitthenarrativepresentedbyLivingInstitute,

eventhoughthecompanymightstilluseherexperiencesasatoolforraisingcultural

awareness.AccordingtoethnologistPer‐MarkkuRistilammi(2000)itisoflittleimportance

whethertheparticipantsataneventarecriticalornotsincetheirpresenceinitselfisenough


tosanctiontheevent.Onecouldgosofarastoarguethiskindofresistancehaslittledirect

relevanceforLivingInstitutesincethepresenceoftheclientdoesinitselfconfirmthe

presenceofculture,oratleastofsomekindofproblemthattheclientshavenomeansof

solving.Theclientsarerepresentativesofculturalproblemsmerelybybeingpresent.

Whiletheconsciousnessraisingprocessallowstheclients’narrativestobecomepartof

agreaterculturalnarrativedefinedbyLivingInstitute,theysimultaneouslyshapethe

company’sorganizationalnarrative.LivingInstituteusesitsclients’storiesasawaytoput

fleshontotheoreticalbones,toadjustthenarrationtothelistenersandasawaytogather

furtherevidenceforthevalidityoftheirclaim:

Seniorconsultant:“WhenIstartedout,whatIdidwasthatIwasreallylookintotheclassics,allthe

anthropologicalclassics,andalltheculturalunderstandingI’velearnedthereandalltheexamplesfrom

fieldworksinAfricaandthatsortofstuff,butafterwardsIjustgotsomanyexamplesfrombusinesslifethat

basicallytoldthesamestoriesbutwithotherexamplesandjustwithotherissues,soIusedthatinformationin

myexamplegivingandIjustchuckedawaythetheoreticalstuff/…/So,themoreexperienceofworkingwith

peopleinbusinesslifeandtheiragendashasreallychangedtheformatandthecontents.”

Inasense,thecoursesserveasaformoffieldworkwhereLivingInstituteisabletogather

empiricalmaterialtofurtherdeveloptheeducationitdelivers.Oneshouldalsoconsiderthe

airofauthenticitythattheuseofexamplesfrom“reallife”givestothetrainingsessions,

lettingshortanecdotesillustrateacertainproblemorserveasabasisforadiscussion.By

instigatingaculturalconversation,LivingInstitutewantstoencouragetheclientstokeep

talkingaboutcultureafterthetraining,keepingawarenessaliveandspreadingittoother

peopleintheworkplace.Theanalyticalprocessisstartedthroughspeechanditisby“talking

abouttheelephant”thattheclientsaresupposedtobeginaculturalanalysisoftheirown.The

presenceof“culturalexperiences”thusmakesthetrainingmoreefficient;themoreexamples

theparticipantsthemselveshave,themoreconcreteexamplesofculture’seffectscanbe

given:

Doris:“SomethingIcouldn’tunderstandandIwasveryangryaboutthemandthenwhenIwenttotheLiving

Instituteandwedidthiswholedaycourse,myfriend,Ididitwithafriendaswell,SouthAmerican,andwewere

theonesthathadthemosttimeinthatgroupinDenmarkandwecouldseethatitwasmuchmorebenefitforthe

bothofusbecausewewereaskingquestionsallthetime,wehadexamplesandwewerejustkeentoextract

whateverwecouldgetfromhim,sowehadalotofthingstodiscuss/…/”


Inpractice,thiscanseemabitcontradictorysincethis,forexample,wouldmeanthe

foreignexpatriateshouldwaitbeforeattendingtheDanishLivingCrashCourse,gaining

valuable“culturalexperiences”byrunningintoproblemsintheireverydaylives.The

inexperiencedclientwhohasyettomakehisorhermistakesmightavoidsomeofthemby

attendingatrainingsession,butwouldpotentiallynotbeconsciousabouttheminthesame

way,makingthelessoninvisibletohim/her.Thesharingofculturalexperiencesisalsohugely

dependentontheparticipants’willingnesstotalkaboutthefrictionstheyhaveencountered.

Consideringthatexperienceslikethesemightbeofaverypersonalnature,oftenrevolving

aroundpotentiallyembarrassingmishapsinsocialinteractions,thisishardlysomethingone

cantakeforgranted.ThechallengeforLivingInstitutethusbecomestocreatean

environmentthatencouragestheclientstoshare,whichwewillexplorefurtherinthe

followingchapter.

TheEdutainer

Closelyrelatedtothecompany’sidealofcreatinganopenandwelcomingatmosphereduring

theirtrainingsessionstofacilitatesharingexperiences,istheideathatthetrainingshouldbe

funandentertaining.Inthetrainingsessionsweobservedanumberofstrategieswereused

tocreate“fun”,rangingfromtellingsmalljokesaboutDanishpeculiaritiestoshowingclips

fromthemovieBorat,exemplifyingculturalfrictionthroughtheKazakmaincharacter’s

chaoticarrivalinNewYork.However,theentertainingaspectsaretightlyintertwinedwith

scientificreasoningandreference,inordertoprovecertainpointsortoserveasabasisfor

furtherdiscussionwithinthegroup.Naturally,noteverylittlejokeservesananalytical

purpose,buttheyhelpcreateanatmosphereoffriendlinesswheretheparticipantsfeelfreeto

speaktheirminds.OneoftheconsultantswhohaveworkedwithLivingInstituteonafew

occasionsgivesanexampleofhowexercisescanbemadeentertainingatthesametimeas

theyarethought‐provoking:

“Basicallythegroupgetssplitintotwo,/…/,Ithinkwehad30people,sohalfofthemstayedinsidetheroom

withthemanagingdirectorandtheotherhalfcameoutwithmeintothehallway,soclosedofffromoneanother.

Thegroupinsidewiththemanagingdirectoristold‘Allright,we’regonnaformareceivingline,andwe’regonna

actlikewe’remeetingthequeenandthisisgonnabevery,veryformalandwe’regonnabevery,veryseriousand

trynottobreakourcomposure’.Withmygroup,I’mtellingthem‘Allright,we’regonnagoinandtheyaregonna

beonalineandwearegonnagoupandshaketheirhands,butIwantyoutodosomethingwhenyoushaketheir

hands’(Sheshakestheauthors’handandticklestheminthepalmwithonefinger)/…/So,thisissortoftheplan,

youknow,somepeoplearegonnagetitandsomepeoplearen’tandsoIstarted,therewasacircle,andsoIgave


thehandshaketoonepersonandthenIsaid‘Passitaroundtoeveryoneelse’andtheycan’tseewhatyou’re

doingwithyourhandswhenyoudothishandshakesoeverybodyjuststartslaughingwhentheygoaroundin

thiscircle,passingonthehandshakeandwhatitmeansis‘Iwanttosleepwithyou’/…/It’sbasicallybarculture

andlaterwhenweweretalkingaboutitoneofthewomensaid‘Yeah,youknow,Ihaven’thadthatkindofthing

happenedtomesinceIwasnineteengoingatthebarsincollege’/…/Sothepointoftheexerciseis:Howdidyou

adaptyourbehavior?Ifyouknewwhatitmeantandyouknewyouhadtopassthisontosomebody,didyou

changesomehow?Didyousmileattheminacertainwaytoletthemknowthatthiswasajokecomingup?And

forthosewhodidn’tgetitandhadtopassiton,youknow,didyoutrytoactlikeitwasfunnyeventhoughyou

didn’tthinkitwas?Sothewholeconversationthenopenedupandbecame…thisishowthingshappenwith

culturalawareness.Theremaybeacustomthatyoudonotunderstandbutyouhavetothinkfast.HowamI

gonnareact?IfIlaugh,aretheygonnagetinsulted?Andifyoudoknowwhatitmean,howamIgonnamanage

mybehaviortobeappropriate?/…/sothathelpedbreaktheicewiththewholegroup.“

Thecompany’sambitionto“edutain”isexplicitandthereasoningbehindthisisthatpeople

becomemorereceptivewhenhavingfunandarenotasdefensiveabouttheirownvaluesand

habitsastheymightotherwisehavebeen.Ristilammi(2000)haspointedouthowthe

managementofexpectationsandsuspenseareimportantwhenarranginganykindofevent,

butespeciallywhentheparticipantsareexpectedtoactandnotmerelyobserve.Bybeing

emotionallystimulating,aneventwillengageitsparticipantstoahigherdegree,makingthem

morelikelytocontinuetheprocessinstigatedattheeventafterward.

Oneconsequenceoftheambitiontokeepthemessageentertainingandengagingisthat

LivingInstitutehascutdownontheoreticalcontent,avoidinglecturingaboutcultural

theoriesandfocusingonconcreteexamplestheparticipantscanrelateto.Theattitudes

withinLivingInstitutetowardthisseemtoberatherambivalent:whilethepreachingof

theoryisnotheldasimportantinitself,thegoalisstilltoteachandtheedutainmentismerely

atooltogetthere.Whilemostoftheclientsinterviewedseemtohaveenjoyedthehumorous

approachandciteditasoneofthecompany’sstrengths,Valerie,whotooktheLivingCrash

Courseandenjoyedit,wasratherdisappointedwhenherco‐workersthattookthecourse

afterherdidnotseemtocomeoutofitwiththesamequestionsandcuriosityasher:

Valerie:“/…/someofthecolleagueswhoparticipatedinthecourseandaskedabouttheiropinionandtheyall

said‘Yeah,itwasquiteinteresting’,andIsaid‘Okay,whatdidyoutakeoutofit?’,‘Yeah,itwasquiteinteresting’.

So,Idon’tknowiftherewasreallyaneye‐opener.Itwasinterestingtohearsomethingaboutdifferentcultures–

thereitisagain‐anddifferentcountries,historyofdifferentcountries,butwhatyoureallytakeoutofthisin

yourdailybusiness,Ireallydon’tseeanyhugeimpact.”


Beingentertainingisabalancebetweenbeingengagingandmerelybeingasourceof

amusement.WhileLivingInstitute’sintentionsareclearonecannotguaranteewhatthe

participantstakewiththemwhenleaving.O’Dell(2005)discussesthisproblem,pointingout

thatexperiencesalwaysaresubjectiveandindividual,buttheenvironmentinwhichtheyare

experiencedcanbeplannedandorganized.Thisistheonlyformofcontrolthatan

organizationsellingexperiencesasproductscanhaveoverwhatitsclientsactually

experience.Judgingfromtheclients’praise,LivingInstituteseemstohavearathergood

routineforcreatinganenvironmentforpositiveexperiences.Onecanonlytheorizeabout

whatitwouldhavemeantfortherestofthecompany’sproducthaditnothadcompetent

eventmanagingcapabilities.ItishoweverimportanttonotethatwhatLivingInstitutesellsto

alargeextentisdefinedbytheformatinwhichisdelivered,notonlyfunctioningasamere

formofentertainmentbutalsoasawaytoengageandgettheparticipantstoopenup,making

iteasierforthemtosharetheirexperiences.

Danes–Thewaytheyare

TheactiveparticipationoftheclientsisacentralpartofLivingInstitute’strainingsessions,as

wehavediscussedintheprecedingchapters.However,alargepartofthetrainingalso

revolvesaroundthestoryoftheDanesandDanishculture,regardlessofclientele.While

givinganoverviewofDanishhistoryandsocietytoday,thefocuseventuallyendsupon

factorsthatarerelevantwhendealingwithDanesinabusinesscontext:Danesareanti‐

authoritarianandcraveconsensus;theyviewtheircultureassuperiorwhileavoidingbold

claimsonapersonallevel;andtheyareverydedicatedatworkbutdonotletitintrudeon

theirprivatelife.Thelistcangoonandon,thepointherenotbeinghowLivingInstitute

describestheDanes,butwhy.

WhentrainingforeignexpatriatesthestoryabouttheDanesservesasasourceof

information,ascriptofhowtoactinthenewcontext,butalsoaswhatEhnandLöfgren

(2001)calla“symbolicalinversion”(p.49);bymakingtheDane’scultureexplicitthe

expatriatecancompareandmakeherownculturevisiblebyseeingwhatitisnot.When

trainingDanes,thestoryservesasasurfaceforreflection,illustratingthatcultureisnotjust

somethingthat“others”carry.ThestoryoftheDanesthusfunctionsasatoolforcultural

understandingonseverallevels,fundamentallybecominga“we”or“others”,displayingthe

categoriesofculturaldifferencethataredeemedrelevantbyLivingInstitute.Thisservesas

oneofthecornerstonesinLivingInstitute’sphilosophy,allowingforclientstobereflective

abouttheirownculturesotheymaymoveonandexploreothers’.


However,bytellingthestoryabouttheDanes,LivingInstitutedoeswhatittellsits

clientstoavoid;createastereotype.TheconsultantsofLivingInstitutetakegreatcarein

pointingoutthatitisinfactastereotypeandthatfewpeoplein“reallife”actuallywill

correspondtoit.OnecouldcompareittowhatHofstede,PedersenandHofstede(2002)

wouldcalla“syntheticculture”;theexaggerationandsimplificationofnationalelementsof

culturewiththegoaltoillustratecultural“dimensions”relevantfortheclient.Thereis

howeverananxietywithinthecompany,regardingiftheclientsactuallyunderstandthe

pedagogicpurposeofthestereotypeandnotjustincorporateitatfacevalue.

UsingtheDanesasatoolinthiswaycanbetracedbacktoLivingInstitute’sidealof

retainingscientificaccuracy.SincethecompanyoperateswithintheDanishmarketand

continuouslystrivestostayuptodatewiththelatestresearchonDenmark,itdoespossessa

lotofinformationonhowDanishsocietyfunctionsonbothasocietalandculturallevel.The

DaneinLivingInstitute’snarrativeisn’tamerestereotype;itisanextremelywellgrounded

stereotype.Onemightalsoarguethat,fromthecompany’sstandpoint,theDanesarea“safe”

alternativeforusingasapedagogicstereotypesincetheonestellingthestoryareDanes

themselves.Alotofhumorisputintothepresentation,withtheaimtomaketheclientslaugh

aswellasthink,somethingwhichhardlywouldhavebeenpossibleifusinganother“other”.

WhileitisimpossibletosayhowthestoryoftheDanesisputtouseintheclients’

everydaypractices,wecanseehowitisputtouseonadiscursivelevel,functioningasa

sourceforexplanationforwhythingsareastheyareinthekingdomofDenmarkinthestories

ofbothDanesandexpatriates.Oneexampleofthisisthe“tribe”concept,usedbyLiving

Institutetoexplainthelowculturalvariation,highleveloftrustandlowrespectforauthority

withinDanishsociety,thatmakerepeatappearancesinsomeoftheclients’stories.Inthis

caseThomasusesittoexplainhowhemustchangehismanagerialapproachwhengoing

abroad:

Thomas:“Ithinkalotofthisisactuallyalsothatwelearnhowwearetootherpeopleandthewayweactand

behavebut,forinstance,thisbeingatribe;whatcanyousaycomingfromatribecountryandtoanothercountry

thanatribecountry?Wequestiontheleaderallthetimebuttheyneverquestionanythingthemanagerdown

theresays/…/”

Thisgoestoshowthegreatexplanatorypotentialoftheseconceptsatthesametimeasit

highlightsthepotentialriskofunreflecteduse,turningpedagogicimageintoatruthaboutthe

selforthe“other”,turningcultureintoa“being”ratherthana“doing”.Onceastereotypeis

transmitted,forwhateverreason,thereislittlecontroloverhowitisputtousewhen


enteringnewcontexts,whichonceagainillustratesthedelicatebalanceLivingInstitute

musttreadbetweenusingconceptsthataresimpletounderstandanduseaswellas

explainingthecomplexrealitiesofculture.

Anotherriskwhenemployingstereotypesistheopposite—thatthepicturepaintedis

rejectedalongwithallthepaintandbrushesusedtocreateit.Ifwhatisdescribeddoesnot

correspondwiththeexistingunderstanding,thenthereisariskthatnotonlywillthe

stereotypebeseenasfalse,butsowilleverythingthatcomesalongwithit.Manfredhasonly

hadthreeweekstoreflectuponwhathelearnedduringtheDanishLivingCrashCourseand

whiletherearemanythingshepraisesaboutit,therearesomepointsinthestoryaboutthe

Daneshedoesnotrecognize:

Manfred:“Soit’salotaroundthisspeed.Speedindecisionmaking,speedinaction…alotwasdiscussedatthe

courseabouttheDanishproductivity(sigh),I’mnotsureIseethat,I’mnotsureIseeit.It’salotofmeetingsand

alotof,don’tgetmewrong,butwastedtimeortimeinvestmentthatyoumakethattakesquiteabittoproduce

something,soI’mnotyetthere,I’mnotyetahundredpercentconvincedthattheDanisharesoproductive.Not

sureyet.”

Valerierepresentsamoreextremeresultofthis,apparentlyrejectingtheconceptofculture

altogethersinceshedidnotfeeltheinformationshereceivedhelpedhersolvetheproblems

shefacedatwork.

ThestoryoftheDanesmighthoweverserveanadditionalpurposeandthatisasanideal

pictureorwarningsign.Thelevelof“truth”presentinthestereotypebecomeslessofanissue

inthiscase,itsmainfunctioninsteadbeingtoserveasacatalystinaprocessofchange.This

approachbecomesmostapparentinthestoriesofDorisandAnne.Doris,comingfromSouth

America,regardstheDanishstyleofworkasmoreefficientandrationalthanwhatsheisused

tofromherhomecountry,somethingshewantstoattain.Anne,whoorderedaworkshop

withthegoaltogetanAmericanandaDanishteamtoworkbettertogether,pointsouthow

thestrengthsandweaknessesofLivingInstitute’sDanehelpedthemseewhattheteams

couldlearnfromeachother:

Anne:“Werecommendedtoeachother,whatcantheAmericanslearnfromtheDanish?Onethingthatcameup

thattheycouldlearnfromuswastrust,learntotrustus,becausewetrustthem,buttheyshouldalsolearnhow

totrustus.Ithinkthatwasthemainthingthatcameoutfromthat.Ithinkforwhatwecouldlearnfromthemis

thatthediversity,itisaverydiversesocietytheycomefromandwecanlearnfromtheminmanagingthat.”


Whiletheseapproachesalsocanbeinterpretedasexamplesoninternalizeddiscoursesof

difference,withanenclosedriskofessentializingculture,theycanalsobeseenasthe

opposite.Usingstereotypesasaninspirationalmodelfundamentallybuildsonthe

assumptionthatwecanchange,thatwecanlearnfrom“others”andthatourcultureisnota

lifesentencethatwemustcarryaroundonourshoulders.


Culturalexperiences

HavingexaminedthecentralvaluesandpracticesofLivingInstitutewewillnowturnourgaze

toclientsandtheculturalfrictionstheyhaveencountered.Firstly,in“Overcomingculture”,we

willtakealookatwhatkindofculturalissuestheclientsencounteredthatmadethemcontact

LivingInstituteaswellashowandifthetrainingtheyreceivedhelpedthemresolvetheseissues.

Inthetwofollowingchapters,“CosmopolitanCulture”and“Whenyou’restrange”,wewill

furtherexploreissuesthatseemtohighlightorobscurethesignificanceofcultureinthestories

oftheclients.

Overcomingculture

Inthischapterwewillemploymostbasicformofnarrativeanalysistoshedsomelighton

whatwaystheclientshavefoundthetraininguseful.AccordingtoCzarniawska(1998)a

narrativeconsistsofaminimumofthreeelements:anoriginalstateofaffairs,anactionoran

eventandtheconsequentstateofaffairs.Inthiscasewehavealreadyexploredtheevent,

namelythetrainingdeliveredbyLivingInstitute,sowewillinsteaddirectourattention

towardtheoriginalandconsequentstateofaffairs,i.e.thecausesforandconsequencesofthe

training.Itisworthnoting,however,thattheclientshavenotreceivedtheexactsametypeof

training(seefigure2)andthetimethathaspassedsincetheyreceiveditvariesgreatly,

rangingfromthreeweekstomorethantwoyears.Thismeanstheinformantshavebeenin

verydifferentsituationssincethen,whichreflectsintheirindividualstories.Inthefollowing

wewilllettheclientsdescribetheirperceptionsandexperiencesofthetrainingreceived.

Whatdidtheylikeordislike?Whatdotheyrememberandcanstillrelateto?Whatthingsdo

theyfindimportantandnotthatimportant?Whatwouldtheyhavedonedifferently?Whatare

thethingsthatremainwiththeclientsaftersometimehaspassedby?Whatkindof

knowledgehavetheybeenabletoputtouse?

ManfredwasinterviewedjustthreeweeksafterhehadparticipatedintheDanish

LivingCrashCourse.Duringtheinterviewhewasstillinthephaseofputtingthetraininginto

useandprocessingtheknowledgereceivedduringthetraining.AftermovingtoDenmark

Manfredquicklyencounteredculturalfrictions,despitehavinglivedandworkedinmany

differentcountries.OneofthereasonswhyManfredattendedthetrainingwasthathehada

hardtimecopingwiththeDanishmeetingstructureatwork.Thecustomofhavingmeetings

uponmeetingsuntilreachingconsensusdidnotsitwellwithwhathedescribesashis

“Germanic”managementstyle.Accordingly,histendencytomakequickdecisionsandmove

onmadehisco‐workersfeeluncomfortable.AnotherworkrelatedchallengeforManfredwas


Figure2.Overviewoftheclients

tounderstandthestronglyembeddedelementoftrustintheDanishculture.Hedescribesthat

beforethecoursehehadspenttoomuchtimeandenergyworryingwhenpeopleworked

fromhomeinsteadofin‐office.Hedoubtedthemotivesoftheemployeesandhadconcerns

regardingwhethertheworkgotdoneornot.Afterthecoursehestartedre‐thinkingthisand

adjustedhisstrategies,whilealsochanginghispersonalworkingpracticesbydoinglesslong

hoursattheoffice:

Manfred:“Thecourseactuallyhelped.Ithinkwenowhavefoundamuchbetterbalance,not‘we’,Ihavefounda

muchbetterbalancebetweenoneextremeandtheotherextreme.Soinsteadofhavingfivemeetingsandinstead

ofhavingnomeetingswenowhaveoneortwomeetings,wediscuss,butthenI’mleadingthegroupmore

towardsagroupdecisionwhichisstillwhatIthinkistherightthingtodo,sometimesit’snot,sometimesit’sjust

thattheyhaveaverygoodpoint,so,thathaschanged.”

ThewayManfredtalksabouthisexperiencesitseemsthathehasreallyincorporatedthe

messagefromtheDanishLivingCrashCourseandhehasliterallyusedtheactionplanthathe

sketchedduringthecourse.ThestoryManfredtellsusimplieshehassucceededin


transferringtheknowledgefromthecoursetoeverydaypractice.Heisnotsurewhetherit

wasgoodorbadthathewaitedsuchalongtimebeforetakingthecourse:Ontheonehand,he

alreadyhadalotofexperienceofbeinginDenmark,whichmadeiteasiertoparticipate.On

theotherhand,hecouldseemanyproblemsthathepossiblywouldhavebeenabletoavoidif

hehadparticipatedsooner.Inconclusion,hesaysthecoursehelpedhim“calibratehis

expectation”,helpinghimgoaftergoalsthathecanactuallyreachratherthanstickingtoold

ideals.

Approximatelyfourmonthsbeforewemethim,ThomasreceivedCulturalAwareness

trainingaspreparationforashortbutimportantbusinesstriptoAsia.Hewaslookingfortips

andguidelinesonhowtocommunicatesuccessfullywithhisAsianbusinesspartnersinorder

toreachamutualagreementduringhisshortvisit.HeheardfromcolleaguesthatLiving

Institutehadprovidedcross‐culturaltrainingforemployeesofMicrocatorpreviously.Since

heneverhadtraveledinAsiabefore,Thomasorderedthecourse,wantingtoavoidthemost

commonmistakesofWesternbusinesstravelers.Hisaimduringthetrainingwastogetas

muchinformationaspossible.SincehehadneverbeeninAsiabeforehehadagreatnumber

ofquestions,butitalsomadeitdifficultforhimtopredictpotentialproblems.Hereceived

traininginthebasicculturaldifferencesbetweenAsiaandDenmark,buthewasespecially

interestedinbusinessrelatedmatters.HewantedtolearnhowtoshowrespectfortheAsian

businesspartners,whichhealsodid:

Thomas:“Iwantedtoknowexactlyaboutbusinessrelations.Howdoyoudoandwhatcanyousay:touching,

clothing,sayinghello;goodbye.Whateverhowyoucanbehavetoshowalittlebitofrespect,likenottosayhello

withthelefthandandstufflikethat.Smallthings.Bringasmallpresent.Yes,itwasveryspecificstuffIasked

about,becauseIhadalimitedtimeandIwasgoingtwodayslaterorsomethingsoIneededtoknowthesmall

things.”

Afterourinterview,ThomaswasgoingtogobacktoAsiaasecondtime,thistimetaking

DanishmanagersworkingwithAsianteamswithhim,managerswhohaven’treceivedany

trainingfromLivingInstitute.Hetellsusheisalsoguidingandtryingtotraintheother

managershimself.Heseesthisasareturnoninvestment,beingabletoforwardthemessage

toothers.Whileherecognizeshewillnotbeabletogivethemthesamelevelofdetail,butcan

helpthemwiththebasicsofculturalawareness,preventingthemfrommakingthemost

commonmistakes.

AnneandhercolleagueshadtakenpartinaworkshoponDanishandAmericanworking

cultureapproximatelysixmonthsbeforetheinterview.Thereasonforthiswasthat


controversiesbetweenthemembersoftheteamsintheUSandDenmarkhadbecome

commonplacesinceNordhealthinstigatedaglobalizationprocess,forcingthedivisionsto

workmorecloselytogether.Thereweredifferencesincommunicationstyle,whichledtoa

largeamountofchagrinandfeelingsofdistrustbetweenthetwoteams.Annehadjust

experiencedasimilarsituationinherpreviousworkplaceandsawtherewasneedforanopen

discussionabouttheculturaldifferencesofthetwodivisions.AnnefoundoutaboutLiving

InstituteontheInternetandaftercontactingthemanagingdirectorshebecameconvinced

thatshecouldusethecompany’scompetencies.Agroupconsistingofroughlyfifteenpeople

fromboththeUSandDenmarkattendedawholeday’strainingduringaglobalmeetingin

Copenhagen.

Anneisextremelycontentwiththetrainingsheandtheteamsreceived.Shetalksabout

itasinteractiveandhandson,describingitasanimportantwake‐upcallforpeopleinher

organization:

Anne:“Yes,Ithinkitwasgood,bothagoodtoreleasethebadtensiontherewasinthegroup,butalsoasateam

buildingevent.Itfeltfunny,itwaslikeagame.Wewereplayinggamesatsomestageinthatrespect.Itwaslike

teambuildingeventandthatwealllearnedsomethingfromitandmorethanjustsimplething,butalsoIthink

thatwelearnedintellectually,wegotalotoutofitandIthinkthatitisimportantinthegroupwhereyouhave

veryintellectualpeopleworking.”

Annehadherowntheoriesastowhatmighthavecausedthemisunderstandingsandthe

courseofferedhermoretheoreticalandpracticalperspectivestohelpherdealwithcultural

issuesandguideothersinherworkplace.Duringthetrainingitwaspointedoutthatthe

frictionbetweentheteamswasmainlycausedbydifferencesincommunicationstyleand

expectations.ThewayAnnedescribesit,theknowledgefromthetrainingturnedouttobe

reallyuseful,leadingtosignificantchangesinthecommunicationstyleofbothDanesand

Americans.Shenowplaysacentralroleinthecommunicationbetweentheteams,being

somethingofaninternalinterculturalistintheorganization,oftenbeingconsultedbyherco‐

workersashowtobestestablishcommunicationwiththeAmericandivision.

WemetValerieforaninterviewaboutoneyearaftershehadattendedtheDanish

LivingCrashCourse.Valeriehadbothpersonalandprofessionalmotivesfortakingthecourse.

Mostimportantly,shehadreceivedalotofcriticalfeedbackatworkbecauseofher

managementstyle.ShehadbeentoldonseveraloccasionsthatherGermanmanagementstyle

didnotworkinaDanishcontext.Valerieattendedaone‐dayDanishLivingCrashCourse,

includingdinner,withapproximatelytwelveotherparticipants.Shedescribestheexchangeof


informationandsupportbetweentheparticipantsasthemostrewardingpartofthe

course.ShevaguelyrecallsthepartofthecoursethatfocusedonDanishhistoryandthe

picturesshowingfunnyDanishhabits,likeleavingbabiestosleepoutsideintheircarriage.

Sheexplainsshereallycannotrememberanyimportantkeypointsinallofit,butthatitwas

reallynicetomeettheotherparticipantsandtopreparedinnerwiththemattheendofthe

evening.

AftertheDanishLivingCrashCourse,Valerieaspentlotoftimethinkingaboutcultural

issues,claimingshetriedtoanalyzeandinterpretherownbehavior.Shebelievesshedidher

besttorespectDanishcultureandadjustherownpracticesatworkbygivingfull

responsibilitytotheemployeesandlettingthemworkontheirowninsteadofbeingas

controllingasshehadbeenbefore.Thisdidnotturnoutasshehadhopedandshedidnot

thinkanythinggotdone,thussherevertedbacktoheroldmanagementstyle,notfeelinglike

herselfinhernewrole.Shestartedtothinktheproblemsdidnotstemfromculture,butfrom

thepersonalityofherco‐workersandthussheformulatedasomewhatdenyingattitude

towardcultureasasignificantfactorinhumaninteraction.Thismeansshegetsveryannoyed

whenpeopletellherhowsheshouldbehaveinordertofitintoDanishsociety.

Valeriehasathree‐yearcontractinDenmarkandsheishasalreadydecidedtocontinue

asanexpatriatesomewhereelse.Shedescribesshewillnotbetakingculturaltraining

anymore,sayingitissomethingthatcannotbetrainedbutmustbeexperienced.Eventhough

Valerienowclaimsshedoesnotrecallthekeypointsfromthecourseaswellasadenying

culture’ssignificance,shedidorganizeculturalawarenesstraining,providedbyLiving

Institute,forhercolleaguesatwork.Sheexplainsthisbysayingthatshedidnotwanttobe

theonlyoneintheworkplacethinkingaboutthoseissues,butthatthetrainingdidnotseem

tochangeanything:

Valerie:“No,theonlypositiveeffectIsawoutofthiswerethatwewerestartingjokingaboutourowncultural

behaviors,ourownhabits,likeRitterSportchocolateorwhatever,yeah,somethinglikethis.Itisthefirststepif

youcanmakejokesaboutyourownculture,insteadofbeingtooproudaboutyourbackground,thatyouare

gettingjustangrywhensomebodymakesjokesaboutthis,thisissomethingyouhavetoletgo/…/soitwasthe

positiveeffectIwouldseeoutofthis.Theseniorconsultant,hemadesomejokesandtoldsomefunnystories

andwelaughedaboutthis/…/andhealsomadesomejokesactuallyabouthimself/…/butotherwiseIdidnot

seeanychangesinbehaviors.Imean,youdon’tchangeyourhabits,youdon’tchangeyourbehavior,personality

justbecausefourhoursculturalcourse/…/”


WeinterviewedDianetwoyearsaftershehadparticipatedinaCulturalAwareness

Workshopthatwasorganizedonthreedifferentoccasionsforhercompany’smanagers.

QualityHelphadproblemswiththe“newDanish”employeesleavingtheirworkstationsearly

andnotfollowingtheirinstructions.Themanagershadproblemsmanagingsincetheywere

afraidtobecalledracist,somethingwhichhadhappenedearlierinthefirm,andtheydidnot

knowhowtoactinmanyofthesituationstheywereconfrontedwithineverydaywork.A

CulturalAwarenessWorkshopwasorderedforthemanagerswiththegoaltoenhancetheir

skillsinmanagingthemulticulturalworkforce.

Dianedescribesthatduringtheworkshoptheywereshownimagesandoneseriesof

picturesseeminglycapturedherattention.ShedescribesanimageofMecca,withpeople

walkingaroundtheKaaba,somethingsheconsideredexotic.Thiswasfollowedbyapictureof

aChristmastreeandpeopledancingaroundit.Thisseemstohavemadeastrongimpression

onDiane,illuminatingthepeculiaritiesofherowncultureandthatsheisasdifferentfromthe

“others”.Dianeregardstheworkshopasfunwake‐upcallforalltheparticipants.Accordingto

heritwasveryinteractiveandnotjusta“talkinghead”standinginfrontoftheaudience.

Dianetalksabout“thestayingpower”ofthetrainingonapersonalaswellasonan

organizationallevel.Shedescribesthetrainingmadeherrealizeshewantstolearnmoreand

sheproceededtoeducateherselffurther,turningtothefieldofdiversitymanagement.In

QualityHelpthemanagersarenotjustfacedwithfrictionsstemmingfromnationalculture,

butfromsocialdifferencesaswellandthusshehaspushedforanincreaseinmanagement

strategiesacknowledgingthis.DianewasveryimpressedbyLivingInstitute’sworkshop,but

shefeelshercompanyprobablydoesnotbelongtoLivingInstitute’stargetgroup.

DorishadtakenpartintheDanishLivingCrashCoursetwoyearsbeforeourinterview

andshehascountlessexamplesofeverydayissueswhereherwayofdoingand

understandingthingsclasheswithwhatsheperceivestobeDanishculture.Peoplepushing

herwithoutapologizingsurprisedherandatworkherwayofcommunicatingviae‐mail

causedconfusion,sinceshelikestowritelongandverywellphrasede‐mails,asopposedto

theshortandstraighttothepointstylepreferredbyhercolleagues.Sheseemedtohavebeen

tryingtoorganizeandanalyzetheDanesaccordingtoherowncategories,buttherewastoo

muchthatshewasnotabletomakesenseofwhichmadeherfeelannoyedandconfused,

whileatthesametimebeingcuriousandwantingtounderstand.

WhenshefinallyattendedtheDanishLivingCrashcoursethepiecesseemedtofallinto

place.Shewasreallyimpressedbythecourseandthroughitsheobtainedsomeofthefacts

sheneededtocontinueherinvestigationoftheDanishsociety.Eventwoyearsafterthe


course,Dorisisstillusingtheknowledgegainedtoconstantlycategorizeandanalyzeboth

herownbehaviorandthebehaviorofothers,whichmostofthetimemeans“theDanes”.

Dorisspeaksverypositivelyaboutthecourseandpointsoutshewouldhavebeeninterested

insomeformofcontinuity.TheDanishLivingCrashCoursehelpedhertoreorganizeherown

existingcategoriesandrefitthemtoherrealityinDenmark.ThishasresultedinDorispaying

evenmoreattentiontobehavioraldetails.Sheisevenactingasculturaltranslatorbetween

herSouthAmericanfriendandthemysteriousDanes.

Whilealltheclientshavefaceddifferentproblemsandfounddifferentsolutions,the

trainingreceivedfromLivingInstituteseemstohavefunctionedassortofturningpointforall

ofthem,leadingthemintheirrespectivepathstochange.Formostithasbeenapositive

experience,whileithasbeenmoreproblematicforothers.Whatwecangleanfromthisis

howeverthatculturedoesseemtomatteranditaffectsboththeprivateandprofessionallives

ofLivingInstitutes’customers,regardlessofhowtheythemselveschosetointerprettheir

problems.Itdoesalsoseemlikethewayinwhichtheknowledgefromtrainingsessionsisput

intousedependshighlyontheclients’ownexpectationsandattitudes,emphasizingthe

challengeofmakingpeopleinterpretamessageasintended.

Cosmopolitanculture

Havingdiscussedtheindividualchallengesoftheclients,wearenowgoingtoturnour

lookingglasstoamoregeneralthemeinordertogainfurtherunderstandingofculture’s

influence.WhileallofLivingInstitute’sclientsoperateinatransnationalcontext,some(first

andforemostthecurrentandformerexpatriates)formaspecialcategoryofclientsthatwe,

withsocialanthropologistUlfHannerz’(1996)terminology,chosetocall“cosmopolitans”.

AccordingtoHannerzthisisagroupofpeoplethathasemergedduetothe“new

supernationalrestructuring”oftheWesternworld,aconditionwherenationalbelongingno

longerisemphasized(p.104).Instead,cosmopolitanculturestendtoemergearoundcertain

transnationalworkmarkets,oftenshapedinafashionsuitedforprofessionalsfromWestern

EuropeandNorthAmerica.Cosmopolitanstendtobeofacertaindisposition,beingwillingto

engagewiththe“other”andkeepinganopenmindtowarddivergentculturalexperiences,

whileavoidingcommittingtothem,alwaysknowingwheretofindtheexit.Theyareoften

partofseveralculturalnetworks,bothterritorialandtransnational.

InpracticethismeansthatmanyofLivingInstitute’sclientsoperateinaculturalsphere

wherenationalbelongingdoesnotplayaprominentrole,whereEnglishisthe“official”

languageandwheretransnationalmobilityishigh.AprimeexampleofthisisManfred,whose


familywillsoonrelocatefromColombiatoSpain.EventhoughhewillstayinDenmarkhe

stillsaystheyaremoving“here”,thedistancebetweenCopenhagenandBarcelonabeingof

littlesignificancetohim.AnotherexampleisValerie,whothoroughlyenjoysworkingina

transnationalcontextandmeetingpeoplefromallovertheworld.Infact,herexperienceof

workingtransnationallyhasplayedacentralpartinherrealizationofculture’sinsignificance:

Valerie:“Thereisnoculturaldifferencevisibleanymorefrommypointofviewandrecentlyactuallysome

events,likeforexamplewehadaglobalsalesmeetingfromourcompanyinIceland.Therewereseventypeople

fromthirty‐fivecountries,soabouttwopeoplefromeverycountryinaverageanditwassointernationalandso

greatandwewerealltalkingEnglish,wewereallnotonourownplayground,nobodycamefromIceland,soit

wasreallyagoodplatform/…/”

Thisperspectiveisbasedontheassumptionthatcultureissomethingintimatelytiedto

nationalbelonging,whichValerieandhercolleagueshavetranscended.Inthiscaseitseems

likeValeriedecidedonculture’sinsignificanceafterattendingtheDanishLivingCrashCourse,

otherwisethisperspectivemighthavepreventedherfromseeingtheusefulnessofcultural

trainingaltogether.ForLivingInstitutethismayprovideachallengesincethecompanymay

haveshowtoclientswiththisdispositionthattheyarestillculturallybound.Atthesametime

itcouldprovetobeanadvantageincaseonedoeswanttomakeapointofnationalitynot

alwaysbeingthemostprominentfactorinthegenerationofculturalfriction.

Whilehedoesnotoutrightdenythesignificanceofculture,Thomas’experienceasa

cosmopolitanhasgivenhimaperspectivethatmightalsoproveproblematicforLiving

Institute:

Thomas:“No…Ihavebeentravelingalotreally,reallybusinesstravelingalotsoformeitwasjustanother

businesstravelandIamnotIhavebeenbusinesstravelingsomuchthatIreallydon’tcarewhereIamgoing.Itis

justabusinesstravel.Itisjustanotherhotel,airportandtaxiandIhavebeendoingallthemistakesofbusiness

travelinglike,‘Okay,nowIamgoingmaybefivetimestothiscountrysoIneedtoknoweverythingaboutthe

countryandthecityandallthat’andIdon’thavethetimetodothatanymoresoitisjustabusinesstravel.It

soundssad,littlebitsad,butitisnofundoingbusinesstravel.”

Extensiveexperienceofoperatinginthetransnationalarenahaslefthimsomewhatjaded,

simplynotthinkingthatthatitisworththeefforttobecuriousandinquisitive.Hehashad

enoughofbeingacosmopolitananditmightprovetobeachallengetogetsomeonewiththis

perspectivetoembraceamoreopen,anthropologicalapproachtoculture.However,beingan

experiencedcosmopolitanmightalsohavetheadverseeffectasinthecaseofManfred,who


arguablyisthe“most”cosmopolitanamongtheclientinterviewed.Inhiscasetheextensive

experienceofworkingindifferentculturalcontextshelpedhimunderstandthathehadcome

upagainstchallengeshecouldnotsolvewithoutdeeperunderstandingoftheunderlying

causes.

Whenyou’restrange

Thecosmopolitansdescribedinthepreviouschapterareinasenseathomeanywhereinthe

world,buttherearealwayssituationswherenowherefeelslikehome,whenyoufeelleft

outside,whenyoufeelstrangeandestranged.Insomeshapeorformthisismanifestedinall

oftheclients’stories,albeitindifferentways.Tosomeitisaquestionoffailedcommunication

atwork,whileitforothershasbeenapersonalcrisis.Inessences,itissituationslikethese

thatLivingInstitutewantstohelpitsclientsavoid,oratleasttohelpthemhandleandget

somethingoutof.However,asmentionedinthechapter“Raisingculturalconsciousness”,

clientsbeingexposedtosituationslikethesearenotnecessarilyabadthingfromLiving

Institute’sperspective.Itisinsituationslikethesethatculturebecomestangible,manifesting

itselfasemotionsandconcreteproblems.Itisalsothroughsituationslikethesethatculture

canbecapturedandmarketedasaproduct.

AccordingtoHofstede,PedersenandHofstede(2002)situationslikethesearetobe

expectedwhenimmersingoneselfinanewculturalcontextandtheycanrangefrommere

culturalmisunderstandingstofullyfledgedculturalshock,astateinwhichfeelingsof

frustrationandconfusionbecomeoverwhelming.Givenenoughtime,mostpeopleovercome

culturalshockandadapttotheirnewsetting,buttime,asalreadymentioned,isoftenascarce

resourceintheworldofbusinessand“ridingoutthestorm”mightnotalwaysbedeemed

profitable.Asaresult,culturalshockmightendupcostingcompaniesalotofmoney,e.g.

throughthefailedintegrationofanexpatriate(Hofstede2001).Thisisoneofthemain

argumentsforcompaniestoinvestinthekindofculturaltrainingLivingInstituteoffers.

However,thisperspectivehardlycapturesthefrustratingandsometimespainfulprocessa

persongoingthroughaculturalshockexperiences.Wehavealsochosentoavoidusingthe

conceptofculturalshockthroughoutthisthesis,speakinginsteadofculturalfrictions,sinceit

putsfocusonthecontextualandinteractiveaspectsofculture,ratherthantreatingitasa

statetowhichonesuccumbs.Thisdoeshowevernotmeanthattheconceptiswithoutuse.

Thefeelingofbeingdistant,bothgeographicallyandculturally,fromwhatisfamiliarcantake

onmanyshapes,likeinthecaseofDoris,whenshefirstarrivedtoDenmarkfromSouth

America:


Doris:“/…/myfirstexperiencewasthefirstdayIcamehere.ItwasFebruary28thanditwassnowingandit

was‐15andIcomefromacountrythatis30degrees.SothefirsttimeIputmyfootoutsidetheairportandI

look,itwasdark,three‐fouro’clockintheafternoon,somethinglikethatandIsaid‘What?’.Ilookedoutside,‘I

wanttogohome!’(laughs).ItwasaverydifficultperiodbecauseatthattimeIdidn’tunderstandmuchofthe

DanishcultureandtobeinDenmark,it’scompletelydifferent.AlthoughIworkedwithDanesinBrazil,itwas

onethingandinanotherenvironmentwherethere’ssun,whereyouhavefun,whereyouleavefromworkatfive

andhaveabeer,butit’snothere.Hereit’scoldandit’smuchmorefamilyrelatedsoyouleaveworkatthree‐

four,youpickupyourkidsandyougohome.Nottimeforbeerwithafriend,onlyifyoubookmonthsinadvance

(laughs).Ifounditreally,reallydifficultinthattime,in2006andIsaid‘Idon’twanttocomehere,Iwanttogo

home/../’”

ValeriedescribesherpreviousexpatriateexperienceinChinawithequallystrongemotion.

UnlikeDoriswhoreturnedtoDenmark,shedecidedtoleavethecountryasaresultofit:

Valerie:“So,yeah,thatwasquitestrangeandafterhalfayearIreallyhappytoleavethecountryagainandwe

hadsomeexperiencealsowhenwereoutsidethenormalareas,theinternationalareaslikeBeijingorShanghai,

soinsmallercitiesandwhenwecameintosupermarketthepeoplewerecrowdingaroundus.Theyhadnever

seenEuropeanpeopleandespeciallywithmyboss,tallman,greyhairandtheywerelookingatthesizeofhis

shoesandtouchingtheshoesandlaughingandrunningawaysoitwasreally(laughs),itwassostrange…an

experience,somethingthatIwasneverthinkingthatIcouldexperiencesomethinglikethis,itwasreallystrange,

butitasreallyfeelinglikeastranger,likeanaliensomewhere/…/”

Storieslikethesecanbefoundrepeatedlyinthenarrativesofcurrentandformerexpatriates

amongtheclients.Inmanycases,likethetwoabove,theculturalfrictionmightseem

overwhelmingwithsmalllikelihoodfortheindividualtoovercome.Thismighttriggera

defensivedisposition,dismissingthe”others”asstrangeandturningtheexpatriatefurther

awayfromwantingtounderstand,focusinginsteadonthestrengthor“superiority”ofthe

individual’sownculture.Usingaphenomenologicalperspectiveonecouldclaimtheremight

beaninheritfearoflosingoneselfinsituationslikethese,wherethelifeworldisturned

upsidedownandthelackofthefamiliarenvironmentsinwhichonefeelsathome,prevents

onefromfeelingathomeintheself.AnthropologistMichaelJackson(2005)claimsthisfearof

“falling”,oflosingsenseofone’splaceintheworld,canseverelyhamperaperson’s

willingnesstoopenuptotheculturalencounter.AccordingtoHannerz(1996)theadaptation

toanewcultureisnoguaranteeforavoidingfeelingsofdisjuncture,somethingwhichisalso

exemplifiedbyValerie:


Valerie:“Yeah,somehow.InoticedthatI’mcomingbackagaintobemyself.ItriedtoplayarolewhenIcame

herefirst,yeah,‘cosIwasreallytoldfromeverysidethat‘Youhavetodolikethis,andyoucannotdolikethat

hereandyouhavetochangethisoneandthisisnotworkinghere’andsoon,andyoustartnottobeyourself

anymore,youstartbeingsomehowanentertainerandsomehowlessofapersonandalwaystryingto…because

ifyouarethestrangeryoualwaystendtobehavetobeacceptedsomehowandthatmakes,justchangeyour

personal,thatdon’tmakeyouauthentic/…/”

Theincorporationofstrangeidealscanbeanotherwayof“notfeelingathome”inoneself.

Needlesstosay,thisoutsetmakesadaptingtoanewculturalcontextfarmorecomplicated

sincetheforeigncultureisregardedasdirectlythreateningone’sownidentity.

Forsome,culturalfrictionshavenotbeenprimarilyapersonalissue,butratheran

organizationalone.InAnne’scaseitmeanttryingtomanagetwoteamswithincreasing

culturalmisunderstandingsbetweenthem,leadingthemintowhatLivingInstitutecallsa

“spiralofdistrust”whereeveryactiontakenchipsawayatthetrustforthe“other”,going

fasterandfastertowardthebottom.ForDianeitwasaquestionofmanagementnotknowing

howtohandleaculturallydiverseworkforcewithoutbeingcalledracist.ForThomas,partof

thechallengewastomaketheAsianexpatriateswithinhisorganizationfeelwelcomein

DenmarkandhelpingthemandtheDanishteamadapttoeachother.Handlingthecultural

frictionsthusbecomesmoreaquestionofleadershipandofemanatingculturalawareness

intotheorganization.Thismightleadtoanothertypeofproblemsinceitnolongeristhetrust

andcuriosityofLivingInstitute’sclientthatisinquestion,buthisorherabilitytosummonit

inothers.Justbecauseapersonknowsaboutthe“locals”andtruststhemdoesnotguarantee

theopposite,which,accordingtoHannerz(1996)mightalsoleadtofeelingsofestrangement.

Itishoweverimportanttoremembermostculturalclashesfacedbytheclientsarefarmore

mundanethantheexamplesgivenhere.Itisalsoimportanttonotetheclients,withfew

exceptions,havebeenabletohandletheirculturalfrictions,findingsolutionsbothontheir

ownandwiththehelpofLivingInstitute.

Another,moreobvious,sourceoffeelingsofdistanceandestrangementislanguage.Not

understandingwhattheco‐workersinthecafeteriatalkaboutcanunderstandablymakeone

feelisolated.Inmostcases,atleastfortheexpatriatesinDenmark,thisismitigatedbythefact

thatmostofthenativesaremoreorlessfluentinEnglish.Anextendedstayinaculturewhere

communicationisnotpossible,likeinthecaseofValerie’sstayinChina,canleadtoextreme

frustration.ForAnnetheproblemwasnotthattheAmericanandDanishteamcouldnottalk

toeachother,butpartofwhatledthemintothe“spiralofdistrust”wasthefactthatthe

DanishteamfeltreluctanttocalltheirAmericansbecausetheydidnotfeelliketheirEnglish


wasgoodenoughfortalkingoverthephone.TheAmericans,inturn,didnotlike

communicatingviaemailandasaresultneitherteamcommunicatedwiththeother.Speaking

thesamelanguageisnoguaranteeforsuccessfulcommunicationeither,somethingwhich

Manfred(whoisfluentinGerman,EnglishandSpanish)hasexperienced:

Manfred:“Byfar,byfarthemostdifficultcountryIeverlivedinwasChileandthatisbecausetheChileans…well

Iguessthefirstmistakewasonme.ThefirstmistakewastobelievethatbecauseIhadlivedinColombiaand

Mexico,ChilebeingaLatinAmericancountry,Spanishspeaking,pieceofcake!Majormistake.It’slikepeople

goingfromGermanytoAustriathinking‘It’sjustadifferentdialect’oryouguysgoingfromDenmarktoSweden,

thereisdifferences/…/Ithinkit’s,overallspeaking,thebiggestriskwhenyougotoanothercountryisthatyou

andthecountrybelievethatbecauseyouhaveacommonlanguageplatform,youwillunderstandeachother.I

thinkthat’sthetrick.ThefacteverybodyherespeaksEnglishdoesn’tmeanthatwewillunderstandeachother,

soIguessthatisanothergoodlearninghere,sothisappliestotheothercountries.”

Believingthatasharedlanguageleavesnoobstacleforclearcommunicationacrosscultural

bordersmightleaveoneopenforanevenbiggerculturalshock,oratleastaculturalsurprise,

whenonetripsandfallsovertheculturalpracticessurroundingalanguage.Itisperfectly

possibletobea“fluentfool”,knowingalltherightwordsbutstillbeingatalossinaforeign

culture(Hofstede,Pedersen&Hofstede,2002,p.18).


CriticalperspectivesonCulture

AfterhavingexaminedthepracticesandideologiesofLivingInstituteaswellasthecultural

frictionsfacedbyitsclients,thetimehasnowcometoexploretheconsequencesofcultural

awareness,puttingthespotlightonthemeetingbetweencompanyandclients.Inthischapterwe

willemployanumberofcriticalperspectivesfordelvingdeeperintorelationshipbetweenLiving

Instituteanditsclients,lookingforhowcultureisputtouseatthecoreoftheenterprise.Inthe

firstsubchapter,“Enactingabalance”,weshallexaminethetheoreticalsplitbetweena

functionalistandconstructivistperspectiveoncultureandhowtheymanifestwithinLiving

Institute.In“Differencesthatmakeadifference”wewill,asthenameimplies,discusswhatrole

differencesplayinthecompany’sdefinitionofculture.Thisisinturnfollowedby“Cultural

currencies”,asubchapterwherewelookcloserattherelationshipbetweeneconomyand

culture.Inthefourth,“Workinprocess”wecomparethecoursesofLivingInstitutetodiversity

management,inordertoshedsomelightonhowculturecanbeworkedwithasaprocess.In

“Learningalesson”,thefifthandfinalsubchapter,wewillsummarizesomeoftheinsights

gainedsofar,discussingtheeffectsofteachingculture.

Enactingabalance

ThereisaninherittensionwithinLivingInstitute,stemmingfromthetwodifferent

frameworksthecompanyemploysforteachingculture.LivingInstitutebalancesbetween

whatDahlén(1997)andLarsson(2010)refertoasafunctionalistandaconstructivistuseof

culture.Thefirstiscommonwithinthetraditionofcross‐culturalcommunication,where

cultureisoftenconveyedthroughcertaincategories,alongthelinesofGeertHofstede’s

(2001)culturaldimensions.Dahlén(1997)claimscontemporaryinterculturalistssuchas

GeertHofstedeandFonsTrompenaarsturnthenotionofculture“intoaseparatingdevice,

distinguishingandclassifyingculturesintermsofdimensions”(p.164).

Thesecondusecomesclosertotheapproachweourselvesuseinthisstudy,treating

cultureassomethingfluctuating,dependentoncontextandpeople.DuringCultural

AwarenessWorkshops,LivingInstituteusesHofstede’sdimensionsofnationalculturesand

valuesystems,whileatthesametimepromotingananthropological,constructivistuseof

culture.Oneofthecompany’sconsultantspraisestheusefulnessofHofstede’s,whileatthe

sametimebeingawareofhislimitationsandmentioningthateverystudentofcultural

science,atleastattheuniversitiesinDenmark,istrainedtocriticizeHofstede’stheoretical

frameworkandthewaycultureispresentedinit.


ThesamediscussionaboutHofstedereturnedinaninterviewwithaformer

consultantofLivingInstitute.Shesummarizeshispopularityinthefollowingway:

“Weareinbusinesswhereyouhavetoolsandtoolsareaskedforwhensolvingtheculturalproblem.Ifyoucould

doitinthetwohourscoursethatwouldbewonderful.IthinkthatiswhyHofstedeissopopular.Imean,hedoes

notgivearecipebuthehasverynicedimensionswhereyoucanseethedifferences,butthewayheisusedvery

oftenisexactlytothedirectionofarecipe/…/”

Hofstede’simpactonthefieldofinterculturalcommunicationisdiscussedbyLarsson(2010),

emphasizinghisfrequentuseamongconsultants.ThispopularityisexplainedbyDahlén

(1997),claimingthe“advantageoftheconceptionofcultureassomethingwithitsown

properties,rathertangible,bounded,atemporal,andinternallyhomogeneous.Ittherebyhas

anadvantageouscommodityform,beingreadilyaccessible.”(p.178).Hofstedeand

Trompenaarsuselargenumbersofcharts,diagramsandtables,somethingthatmakesthem

easytointerpretincontextsapttointerpretingquantitativedata,asmostbusinessdriven

contextsoftenare.ThisisanapproachadoptedbyLivingInstitutetosomeextent,using

chartsofHofstede’sculturaldimensionstoillustrateextremedifferencesinnationalculture.

LivingInstituteusesHofstede’sculturaldimensionsinthesamemanner,employingthemas

toolsfortrainingpurposesinordertoemphasizecategoriesofdifferenceandtocreate

stereotypes,whichinturncanbeusedtomakeculturaldifferencesmoreaccessibleand

tangiblefortheclients.

WhilebeingwellawareofthecriticismdirectedatHofstede,thecompanyputhis

theoriesandotherslikehistouse,albeitputtingitintopracticewithananthropological

touch.UsingDahlén’s(1997)definition,LivingInstitutecouldmostdefiantlybereferredtoas

“interculturalists”,i.e.consultantsinthefieldofinterculturalcommunication.Heclaimsthat

theserarelykeepuptodatewiththecurrentdiscussionsinanthropology,beingtoobusyto

stayabreastandinsteadrelyonoldanthropologicaltheoriesthathavebeentriedandtested.

InthecaseofLivingInstitutehowever,theinterculturalistisananthropologist,mergingthe

constructivistandfunctionalistapproaches.Muchlikeanyculturalanalyst,LivingInstitute

combinesdifferentperspectivesinordertogainadeeperunderstandingoftheissueathand,

beingawareofthelimitationsofdifferentperspectives.Consideringtheanthropological

theoriesLivingInstitutebuildsuponitishardlysurprisingthatmoststaticinterpretationsof

culturecanbenegotiated,nottreatingfunctionalisttheoriesas“truths”butastools.Whether

ornotthisreflexiveapproachispickedupbytheclientsisanotherquestion,whichwewill

explorefurtherinthefollowingchapter.


Thedifferencesthatmakeadifference

GiventhecontextinwhichLivingInstituteoperates,withitshightempo,focusonprofitand

littlespacefortheoreticalextravagances,itishardlysurprisingthatthecultureconcept

providedtotheclientsissomewhatlimitedincomparisontohowitisnormallyusedwithin

anthropology.Oftenthemainfocusisputon“thedifferencesthatmakeadifference”,asthe

seniorconsultantputsit.Asineverysituationwhereoneusescategoriestohelpmakethe

worldeasiertograsp,somethingsaremagnifiedwhileothersbecomeblurred,outoffocus.In

general,theexplanationofcultureprovidedbyLivingInstituteintersectswithHofstedes’s

(2001)categoriesofculturaldifference,toldthroughthestoryoftheDanes.Distributionof

powerwithinthecountry,attitudetowardauthorityandtherelationshipbetweenmasculine

andfemininevaluesareallthemestouchedupontoillustratedifferentpointsofDanish

culture.Lookedatfromfartherawayonecansaythatthenarrativecirclesaroundthethings

thatsetDanesapart,thepeculiaritiesoneneedstoknowifoneisgoingtointeractwiththe

Danes.Inessence,itbecomesastoryaboutdifference,turningcultureintoalistof

distinctionsoneneedstokeepinmind.Hereonecandiscernthefunctionalistperspective

beingattheforefront,lookingforexplanationstothepotentialproblemsthattheclients

mightencounterintermsofculturalbelonging.Onthelevelofdiscourse,thisequatesculture

withdifferenceoratleastassomethingwhichisonlyrelevantwhenitmanifestsitselfas

difference,especiallyasdifferencesbetweennationalterritories.

Theuseofnationalcultureasawayforexplainingculturaldifferencescarrieswithita

numberofproblematicimplications,oneofthemosteasilydiscernablebeingthe

contradictorypotentialitcarrieswithit.TheDanesareheldtobeawellorganized,efficient

peopleatwork,somethingwhichDorisreflectsupon:

Doris:“TheDanesareveryfocused,so,asIsaid,theydon’thavetimetolose,sowhenyouare,between8and3

or8and4,youaretheretoworkandyousticktoyourplan.Ifyouhaveameetingyougotothemeeting,clearly

whatisthemeetingaboutandwhatisexpectedasanoutputandyouhavetoleavethemeetingwiththat.A

Braziliancangotoameetingandtakehoursdiscussingalotofthingsandyoudon’tcomeupwithaconclusion

oryoucomeupwithsomeotherthingsthatarenotwhatyouexpectedtogetoutfromthemeetingsowelosea

lotoftimedoingthree,four,fivethingsatthesametimeandtheDanes,no,theytakeoneandthen‘I’mdoingthis

todayandthisisgonnabetheoutputofthistaskthatIhave.’So,it’sverymuchfocusedandtheBraziliansare

not.”

Manfred,however,doesnotrecognizethisdescriptionofproductivityoftheDanes,insteadhe

findsthemtobeaninefficientpeople.Hethinkstheirmeetingcultureisverytimeconsuming


andwastefulandheisnotyetconvincedthattheDanesareasproductiveaspointedout

duringtheDanishLivingCrashCourse.Theseviewsillustratewhathappenswhencultureis

treatedasapropertyandnotasaprocessofrelationships.Italsopointsoutapotential

problemforLivingInstitute.Asalreadymentioned,pointingoutwhatsomething“is”givesthe

clientanopportunitytodisproveit,potentiallysowingaseedofdistrust.

ThecloserelationshipbetweencultureandnationalityinLivingInstitute’snarrative

carrieswithitawholecomplexofproblems.AccordingtoHannerz(1996)nationalbelonging

hasatendencytoovershadowotherkindsofbelonging,eventhoughitisahighlyincorporeal

kindofbelonging,notdependingonpersonalrelationships.Afactorthatsetsitfartherapart

isthefactthatitmostofthetimeistiedtoageographicalterritory.Sincepeoplemove

around,nationalbelongingandcultureistransportedintoamultitudeofcontexts,all

bestowingnewmeaninguponthem.EthnologistRenéLéonRosales(2005)pointsoutoneof

thelargestrisksofequatingculturewithethnicornationalbelongingisthateveryonesharing

nationalityisseenassharingculture,missingthefactthatbelonginghishighlycontextual,

dependinglargelyonthesituationapersonisin.Makingnationalitytheprincipalexplanation

forculturealsoshadowsotherimportant“genresofdifference”.Classandgenderare

examplesofcategoriesthatarenotclearlyvisibleinthenarrativeofLivingInstitute,

somethingnoticedbyDianewhowentontoworkwithdiversitymanagementsinceshedid

notfeeltheculturalawarenessperspectivecouldhelpheraddressclass‐dependentproblems

withinherorganization.InthecaseofValerie,whoconsequentlydeniestheimportanceof

culture,genderistheonecategorywheresheherselfrecognizestheinfluenceofcultureon

people’sactions:

Valerie:“/…/theotherthingiswiththedifferentviewonwomeninsomecountries.Thisistheonlythingthat

sometimesannoysme,I’mnotrespected,alsonotrespectedinmypositionsoasamanagerthere’snothing

worse‘cosIfeel,butthisisalsoquiteseldombecausethepeoplelivingincountrieslikethisbutworking

international,theyknowabout,thattheyknowthattheycan’tjustignoreme,youknow,theywanttomake

businesswithme.Butanyway,itisjustarepolitetomebecausetheywanttomakebusinesswithusisalso

somethingwhichyoucanfeelandthisisnothonestandthat’swhat’squitenegative,butIdon’tknow.Thismight

beaboutcultureoratleastaboutthecountry,behaviorofthecountry,maybemoreorlessaboutthe

religion/…/”

Unlikenationalbelonging,however,genderandclassareconceptsthatcarrywiththem

certainpoliticalconnotationsthatmightbeproblematictoconfrontcertainclientswithand

onecannothelpbutwonderifthisisonereasonforlettingthesecategoriesstandbackin


favorofthelesscontroversialandmoreeasilyappliedconceptofnationalmembership.

Everydifference,failingormisunderstandingcanhowevernotbeattributedtoculture,oras

theseniorconsultantputsit:

Seniorconsultant:”Thatisalsoimportantforustotellfromtimetotime;‘Well,it’sbecauseofhisculturethathe

isdoinglikethis,itisimpossibletoworkwith’,no,hemightbeanidiot.Hesimplymightjusthaveapersonality

disorder(laughter),ithasnothingtodowithculture!He’sjustanidiot”

Culturepresumesthatwehavesomethingincommonanditcanthereforebeanimprecise

conceptfromtimetotime.Insomecasesitismoreusefultospeakabouttheindividualand

identity.However,identitiesdonotexistoutsideofculture,beingconstructedthroughtheuse

of“culturalprops”andprocessesofdifferentiation(Alsmark,1997,p.11).Iftheindividual

identityistreatedasanalternativetoculturalbelonging,explainingdifferencesbecomesa

caseof“either/or”,turningtherelationshipbetweenindividualandcultureinvisible.This

furtherillustratestheproblemofequatingculturewithnationalbelongingsinceitmakesthe

individual“cultureless”insituationswherethenationalisnotjudgedtobeimportant,asin

thecaseofThomas:

Thomas:“Sotherearesomemajordifferences,butwhatIhavealsotoldtopeoplehere,thatwecanusealotof

timeandwecanusealotofexcusesandcallthemculturethingsbutwhenitcomestoworkingrelationsitisalso

justtwohumansbeingsworkingtogether,likeoneofficedowntherewithanofficeuphere,sowecannotput

everythingintotheculturebasket.Therearesomeculturethingsandthenwecometojusthumanrelations,

businessrelations.”

ForValeriethisisexpressedevenstrongerandshechallengestheexplanatorypowerof

cultureonadiscursivelevelsincethenationalconnotationsheassociateswithculturedoes

notexplaintheproblemsshefacesinherworkplace.Insteadofworkingasanexplanation,

sheperceivescultureasascapegoat,somethingpeoplehidebehindwhentheyarenotwilling

totakeindividualresponsibility:

Valerie:“Yeah,finallyitwasjustnothingdone,soitdidnotworklikethis.ThetaskIgavewithcompletefreedom

werenotsolvedintheendlikeIaskedforit,soIdon’tknowifthisisnowDanishornotDanishorwhatever,this

isjustnothingrelatedtothecompanyandit’sjustabouthowpeopleworktogetherandhowpeopleareableto

workorhowtheirattitudeofworkis,whichisalwayscomingfromtheirpersonalityanditalwayscomesbackto

personality.”


Naturallycultureisnotalwaysafruitfulconceptforinterpretingtheworld,butwhenone

equatesculturewithnationalityorputsitasanoppositeofindividualidentityonelosessight

oftheculturaldimensionthatispresentineverythingmadebyman.

Thisbringsusbacktothesplitbetweenafunctionalistandconstructivistperspectiveon

culture.WhatLivingInstitutedoesisproducecertainlogicsofdifferenceandbelonging,based

onaconstructivistapproachbutexpressedthroughafunctionalistone.Thecompanyis

largelydependentontheexplanatorypowerthattheformercarries,butkeepsthecomplex

understandingofthingsasoneofitscorevalues.Whenitcomestoexplainingcultural

differencehowever,thefunctionalistapproachappearstobedominant.AccordingtoLarsson

(2010),thereisalwaysaninheritriskwhenusingstereotypesfordescribinganational,

regionalorethniccommunityortreatingcultureassynonymouswithethnicityornationality

inapedagogicsituation,sincethereflexivenuancesareeasilylostinthetransferalof

knowledge.Thestrongdiscursiveconnectionbetweennationalityandculturehasatendency

toovershadowothercategoriesofculturaldifferenceinthestoriesoftheclients.Withouta

moreintersectionalperspectiveondifference,assuggestedbydelosReyesandMartinsson

(2005),thereisariskoflosingtrackofhowdifferencesarecreatedinspecifichistoricaland

geographicalcontextsandofthewaysinwhichtheyareboundtothepowerrelationsthat

existthere,insteadtreatingthemasstaticproperties.

Culturalcurrencies

LivingInstituteisinthebusinessofwhatGoldschmidtSalamon(2005)referstoas“turning

valuesintovalue”(p.48),whichmeansturningtheoftenephemeralandcontextuallybound

conceptofcultureintosomethingthatcanbepackagedandtraded.Incidentally,thisisdone

byhighlightingthevalueofvalues,illustratedbyhowtheseniorconsultantduringaDanish

LivingCrashCourseexclaims“Itisworthmoney!”whentalkingabouttheroleoftrustin

Danishculture.TheprimaryframeofdiscourseLivingInstituteoperatesinisthatofbusiness,

withculturemerelybeingatoolforincreasingvalue.Culture’splaceintheworldofbusiness

ismotivatedbyitspotentialforraisingprofitsandpreventingfailure,theeconomicaspectof

culturebeinganodalpointaroundwhichallotherdefinitionsoftheconceptareorganized:

“Culturematters…forthebottomline”,beingtheimplicitmessageofLivingInstitute’sslogan.

Naturally,thislimitsthemeaningsLivingInstitutecaninscribeintothecultureconcept:

Seniorconsultant:“Ilearnedthatwhatmatterstothesepeoplearethebottomline;‘Howcanwemakemoney

outofthis?Andifitisnotrelevantforbiggerresults,thenit’snotrelevantforus’,andthat’sjusthowyouhaveto


dobusinesswhenyou’reinbusinesslife,sothatmakesmeveryfocusedonhowcanthisbemademore

efficientandbetterandhowcanweavoiddisastersandmisunderstandingsandallthat,it’smuchmorefocused

onthatnowthanitwasinthebeginning.”

Evenwhencultureistaughttoimprovetheclients’privatelifeitisdonewithinthebusiness

discourse.Ifanexpatriatecannotnavigatethecultureinwhichhe/sheliveshe/shewillsuffer

fromculturalshock,withprivatelifethusthreateningtheprofessional.However,the

expatriate’sintimateconnectionbetweenprivateandprofessionallifealsoillustratesanother

importantaspectoftheculturethatLivingInstituteteaches.Whilethesignificanceofculture

ismotivatedineconomicalterms,itseffectsmightreachfarandwideoutsidethediscourseof

business.WhileacompanymightpayLivingInstitutetotrainoneoftheirexpatriatesinorder

forhimorhertoaccomplishamission,thetrainingislikelytogiveheorshecompetences

thatmakehisorherprivatelifeinaforeignculturemucheasieronbothanemotionaland

practicallevel.UnderthebestconditionsLivingInstitute’straininggivessomethingbackto

theclientthatcannoteasilybemeasuredinmoney,a“qualityoflife”forlackofabetterterm.

Culturebecomesanpracticaleffect,helpingtheclientorganizeandmakesenseofthenew

context,recognizingitsinheritlogicsandcategories,highlightingthemostbasiccurrencyof

culture;tounderstandthemeaningof“order”inagivensetting.

Toshedmorelightonwhatisbeingtransferredwhenthetrainingisboughtwewilluse

Bourdieu’smetaphorof“capitals”.Amongsttheclientsinterviewed,theproblemdoesnot

seemtobealackofcapitals,sincetheyallarewelleducatedwithlargesocialnetworksand

employersthatseeminglydonothesitatetopayforpriceyculturaltraining.“Class”which

Bourdieuoriginallyexaminedthroughthecapitalmetaphor,isnotacategorythatseemstobe

activehere,sowhatkindofcapitalisLivingInstitutedealingin?Formostoftheclients,the

aimofthetrainingisnottoincorporatenewculturalhabitsbuttogainthecompetenceto

recognizeandberecognizedinaforeignculturalspace.Theproblemcouldbeinterpretedas

thefailuretotransformtheculturalandsocialcapitaltheypossessintosymbolicalcapital,

renderingthempassive.AccordingtoBourdieu(1999)thecapitalsonepossessesmustbe

acknowledgedbysocialactorswhohavethecompetencetorecognizeandevaluatethem

beforetheycanbeascribedavalueandgivetheowneranyadvantagesorbetransferredinto

otherkindsofcapital.WhatLivingInstitutedoes,inexchangeforeconomicalfund,istogive

itsclientstheculturalcompetencetorecognizeandcommunicatewithactorslikethese,in

effecttransformingeconomiccapitalintosymbolicandgrantingthemgreatermobilityinthe

socialfield.Forthistobepossiblehowever,theclientmustrecognizeandacknowledgeLiving

Institute’sauthority,turningthecompany’sculturalcapitalintosymbolicvalue.


Wantingtoavoidsome,butnotall,theconnotationsofBourdieu’sculturalcapitalone

couldclaimLivingInstitutedealsinaculturalcurrencywhereaninitialeconomicpayment

guaranteesasubstantiallylargerreturnofinvestmentinthefuture.Thiscurrencyisan

amalgamationofsocialandculturalcapitalthatallowstheclienttotransformthecapitalheor

shealreadypossessesintosymboliccapitalinthegivencontext.Itisimpliedtheeconomic

investment,overtime,willpayforitselfmanytimesoveratthesametimeasitprovidesa

higherqualityoflifetotheclient.Whileoneshouldalwayskeepinmindthattheseare

metaphorsandnotempiricalpositions,theydoshedsomelightonhowLivingInstituteand

itsclientsnegotiatepositionsinthesocialfield.

Theuseofthebusinessdiscoursecanalsobeinterpretedintermsofcapital,sinceitis

bygivingtheLivingInstitute’sculturalcapitalaneconomicveneerthatitcanobtainsymbolic

valueandbemadeactiveinthecompany’sfieldofbusiness.Thecompanyisinapositionof

power,dictatingtheconversionratebetweeneconomicandculturalcurrencies,butitneeds

tousetherightsignsandlanguagetoreceiverecognitionfromitscustomerbase.Thisgoesto

showthatwhatiscentralinacompany’sdiscourseisnotnecessarilyacorevalue.Naturally,

moneyisimportanttothecompany,butitisnotheldabovetheidealsofdeliveringaunique

highqualityproduct.CultureisthebusinessofLivingInstitutebutthatdoesnotmeanthat

cultureisonlybusinessanditdoesnotmeanthatitissomethingaddedasanafterthought,

beingsomethingpermeatingfromwithinratherthanmere“icing”onthesurface.

Workinprocess

Diane,ourinformantfromQualityHelp,describedhowtheCulturalAwarenessWorkshopwas

thefirststeponthecompany’spathtowardincreasedcorporateresponsibilityandamore

activeapproachtomanagingdiversityintheworkplace.InQualityHelp’scase,knowledge

fromtheCulturalAwarenessWorkshopwasusedtofurtherinvestigatetheroleofculturein

organizationalinteraction,leadingtothediversitymanagementstrategy.Thisilluminatesa

weaknessofLivingInstitute.Whiletheinitialtrainingservedasinspiration,thecompanywas

notcontactedforthecontinuousworkwithculturalissuesinQualityHelp,beingseenastoo

focusedonnationalcultureaswellasaproviderofeventsratherthanasafacilitatorfor

processes.Theremaybeadiscrepancyherebetweenhowthecompanydefinesitsproducts

andhowtheclientsviewthem.ThefollowingdefinitionofCulturalAwarenessWorkshopis

fromLivingInstitute’swebsite:


“CulturalAwareness”‐forpeopleworkinginterculturallybyapplyingbasictoolsyouwillbeabletounlockany

givenculture–swiftlyandefficiently.Aworkshopforemployeesworkinginaninterculturalenvironment.

Duringtheworkshoptheparticipantswilllearnhowtobridgeculturalgaps,gaininsightstoandoperate

efficientlyinunfamiliarculturalsettings.Theparticipantswilllearnhot(sic!)touseandapplybasic

anthropologicaltoolsthroughexperimentalexercises,fieldwork,cases,debatesandpresentations.”

TheCulturalAwarenessWorkshopsfocusongivingtheoreticalandpracticaltoolsforworking

withpeoplefromdifferentnationalitiesinatransnationalcontext.Theemphasisisoncross‐

culturalism,nationaloriginandonmisunderstandingsorfrictionsthatthesecategoriesmight

causeinabusinesscontext.

Asdescribedbefore,LivingInstituteusesauniqueanthropologicalapproachandthe

CulturalAwarenessWorkshopsaredividedinthreephases:culturalawareness(togivethe

participantsanimpressionofwhatcultureis),culturalmapping(showingthecultural

differencesthatmakeadifference)andfinallytomaketheparticipantsopentheireyesand

learnaboutthemselvesinrelationtotheothers.Allthesestepsaremoreorlessinterwoven

withnationalculture,butculturalfrictionscanarisefromother“genresofdifference”aswell,

suchasgender,age,ethnicity,classandeducation.Itmightbethattwopersonsfrom

cosmopolitancitiesthathavesimilareducationalbackgroundbutdifferentnationalitieshave

moreincommonthanafarmerfromthecountrysidehaswithacompatriotlivingurbancity

lifeinthesamecountry.Theseotherfactorsandthewaythattheyareaffectingbehaviorand

worldviewsaretoneddowninLivingInstitute’snarrative.Thesewerehowevertheissues

thatQualityHelpwasstrivingtomanage,beinganexampleofwhatMorBarak(2005)calls

“intranationaldiversity”(p.29),i.e.adiverseworkforceoperatingwithinonecountry,as

opposedtothetransnationalcontextmostofLivingInstitute’sclientsoperatein.

AccordingtoKandolaandFullerton(1998)andWrench(2007)diversitymanagementis

abusinessstrategywhichwasdevelopedwiththeaimtogetrepresentativesofnormally

excludedminoritiestobeincludedinemploymenttoahigherdegree.Theauthorscontinue

pointingoutthatthestrategyissaidtodifferfromothercommonemploymentstrategiesin

numberofways:Itsgoalistoimprovecompetitivenessandefficiencyintheorganization.It

aimstoemphasizetheimportanceofrecognizingculturaldifferencesandmakingallowances

inpoliciesaroundthese.Itistoencourageculturaldiversity,whichmakesitpossiblefor

peopletoworkincreativeandproductiveenvironmentsusingtheirfullcapacity.Itissaidto

beapositivemanagementstrategycomparedtoatraditional,morenegativeapproach

focusedonavoidingcertainanti‐discriminationlaws.Andfinallyitshouldcontainaprofound

elementofactivelymanagingthediversitytoaddvaluetotheorganization’sefficiency.So,


whatisdiversityinthiscontext?AccordingtoWrench(2007)thereisanongoing

discussionandanumberofdefinitionsonwhatdiversityisinorganizationalpolicies.The

maindimensionsaresex,age,´race´andethnicity,butthereareothersinterpretingdiversity

intighterormorelooseterms.

Diversitymanagementintersectswithculturalawarenessintheactiveintentionto

recognizeculturaldifferences,addressthedifferencesandincreasegeneralcultural

knowledgeandunderstandingamongpeople.WhatdiffersisLivingInstitute’s

anthropologicalapproachtothetraininganditsfocusontransnationalcontexts,asopposed

todiversitymanagement’sfocusondiversitywithinanorganization.Theemphasison

nationalityisreplacedwithafocusonotherdimensionsaffectingthesocialinteractions,such

assex,ageandethnicity.Diversitymanagementisalsoregardedasaprocess,asopposedto

theclearlydemarcatedeventsdeliveredbyLivingInstitute.Bymakingthiscomparisonwe

wanttospotlighthowtheissuesaddressedbyLivingInstitutecanbetackledinadifferent

way.TheexampleofDianeandQualityHelpmightbeextreme,butonecouldsaythatallofthe

clientsinterviewedinstigatedsomekindofculturalprocess,privateororganizational,after

attendingLivingInstitute’straining,withoutthedirectinvolvementofthecompany.While

thistosomedegreeprovestheimpactofthecompany’smessage,italsoraisestheissueof

LivingInstitute’sseeminglackofcontinuouscontactwithitsclients.Thisalsomakesit

relevanttoexaminethewaysinwhichLivingInstitute’sknowledgeflowsintoother

organizations,oftenenteringatamanageriallevel,nodoubtaffectingmanagerialstrategies.

Severaloftheclientsclaimtofunctionaswhatwechosetocall“champions”,spreadingthe

wordofculture’simportanceintheirrespectiveorganizationsandfunctioningascultural

translatorswhereneedbe.Therelationshipbetweenthesingleeventandtheprocessalso

mirrorsthediscussionsurroundingtheconceptofcultureitself,raisingthequestionifculture

canbeunderstoodasanisolatedentityorifithastobetreatedasanever‐evolvingsetof

relationships.

Learningalesson

Managingdirector:“Yes,the‘do'sanddon'ts’,everytimewhenIamapproachedbyaclientwhowantsto…like

theguywhojustcalled,theyallsayand‘Wewanttools!’,‘Ithastobeapplicable!’Myfirstansweristhat‘Thefool

withthetoolisstillafool!’.”

ThroughoutthisstudywehavelookedathowLivingInstitutepackages,promotesandsells

cultureasacommodity.Thecompany’sgoalistoprovideaprofoundtheoreticaland


methodologicalframeworktotheclientsinorderforthemtounderstandhowculture

affectsthemandthushelpthemovercomethechallengesofoperatinginacross‐cultural

context.InlinewithLivingInstitute’sideals,theclientswehaveinterviewedseemtothink

thetrainingheldhighquality.However,competentteachingdoesnotnecessarilytranslate

intosuccessfullearning,inthesensethattheclientsdonotnecessarilyincorporatethe

understandingforculturethatLivingInstitutepromotes.Howtheclientschosetointerpret

theknowledgereceivedandtranslateitintopracticeoncebackintheireverydaycontextis

outsideofthecompany’scontrol.Thesamekindofcoursecantriggervastlydifferentkindsof

reaction,aswehaveseen,rangingfromValerie’sdenialofculture’simportancetoDoris’nigh

anthropologicalapproach.DrawinganoutlineforwhatLivingInstitutesellshasbeen

relativelyeasy,butwhatisitinactualitythattheclientsbuy?

Asmentionedin“Culturalcurrencies”,LivingInstitute’sbusinessmodelbuildsuponthe

ideathatyouhaveto“spendmoneytomakemoney”,encouragingpotentialclientstoinvest

inits“culturalcurrency”inordertomakeexistingassetsactiveinanewcontext.Byusing

profitabilityasthemainargumentforculturaltraining,LivingInstitutegivestheirown

productlegitimacywithinthefieldofbusiness.Thispositionisconsolidatedfurtherbythe

formatinwhichthetrainingisprovided.Thetrainingevents’focusontheparticipantsturns

themintopedagogicsubjects,creatingasocialspacewithacommongroundforidentification.

Byinscribingitselfinmemorytheeventcontinuestoexistfortheclients,materialized

throughtheculturalfrictionstheyfaceintheireverydaylives.However,memoryisunreliable

andthustheeffectsofaneventareunpredictableovertime.Theorganizer,LivingInstitutein

thiscase,canonlyhopethelessonsoftheeventtransformintoembodiedpracticeandeven

thenonecannotguaranteethewaysinwhichitispracticed(Ristilammi,2000).Living

Institutefollowsthistrainofthought,regardingthetransformationintopracticeasthekey

foracontinuedculturalawareness:

Seniorconsultant:“Well,Ithink,forpeopletorememberwhatI’vetaughtthemtheyneedtodoit,theyneedto

gooutthere.Justsittinginanofficeandnotreallydoinganykindofcross‐culturalwork,thenIthinkitwillbe

difficultforthemtostick,soitisimportantforusthattheydogivethemselvesthosechallengesallthetime.”

ThisinturnmeansoneofthecentralmissionsforLivingInstituteistoprovidetheconfidence

fortheclientstoenactthetraining,turningtheculturalcurrencyintoanembodiedpractice.

AsBourdieu(1999)pointsout,theconnectionbetweenthesymbolicandeconomiccapitalis

oftenvague,eventhoughitmightappearotherwise.Inthiscaseitmeansthecultural

currencyclientsbuyfromLivingInstituteishighlydependentontheirowncapabilityto


transformitintosymbolicvalue,renderingitactivethroughpracticaluse.Howandifthis

happensishardforustosaysincewehavenotbeenabletoobservetheeverydaypracticesof

anyofLivingInstitute’sclients.However,followingthislineofreasoning,thesymbolicvalue

ofthetrainingmustberecognizedbytheclientinordertoberenderedactiveandthusbe

perceivedasuseful.

ReturningtoHofstede(2001),heclaimsthetrainingofinterculturalcompetenceis

possible,albeitinalimitedway.Accordingtohim,theacquisitionofinterculturalproficiency

passesthroughthreestages:Awareness,knowledgeandskills.Thefirststep,awareness,

translatesintoafundamentalrecognitionofpeopleexistingwithinculturalframeworks,

includingoneself.Thisinturncanbetranslatedintoknowledgeofparticularculturesand

theirsymbols,ritualsandthelike.Knowledgeandawarenesscanbetaught,buttoacquire

skills,onemustputthesecompetencestopracticaluseandseewhattheymeaninalived

context,muchinthesamewayasLivingInstituteclaimstheirtrainingonlybecomesactivein

use.Assumingthisperspective,onecandiscernapotentialchallengeforLivingInstitute,

rootedinthecompany’suseofitsclients’ownexperiencesinthetraining.

Byprovidinganenvironmentinwhichtodevelopculturalawarenessalongwithcultural

knowledgedeemedvaluable,LivingInstituteprepareitsclientsforgoingoutinthe“real”

worldtodeveloptheirculturalskills.However,manyoftheclientshavealreadyoperatedin

cross‐culturalcontextsforanextendedperiodoftime,havingdevelopedtheirownsetof

skillsforhandlingculturalissues.Thesuddenintroductionofanalternativeperspectiveof

culturemightseemincompatiblewithanalreadyfunctionalsetofskillsandmaythreatenthe

assumptionsonwhichtheyarefounded,thusriskingtoberejectedortweakedintofitting

existingpractices.Ontheotherhand,theintroductionofculturalknowledgeandawareness

mayhavegreatexplanatorypower,assistinginthesense‐makingofunreflectedpractices.

Conversely,culturaltrainingforsomeonelackingexperiencefromthecross‐culturalfieldis

notaslikelytochallengeexistingskills,butatthesametimeitwillnotsolveanyexisting

problemsandthusitsusefulnessmightnotbeevidentfortheclient.Thisalsoillustrates

anothercontradictorypropertyofculturalawarenesstraining.Asdiscussedearlier,culture

mainlybecomesvisiblewhenitmanifestsitselfasfrictiongeneratedbyculturalissues,the

goalofculturalawarenesstrainingbeingtominimizeissueslikethese.Intheorythismeans

thatwhenworkingoptimally,culturalawarenessskillsareinvisibletotheuser,helpinghim

orhernavigatepointsoffrictioncarelessly.Usingconcreteexamplesthatmovetheclients’

perceptionscanthushelptoserveasamanifestationforculturalawareness—Anne’sstoryof

thepicturesofKaabaalongwithaChristmastreebeingaperfectexampleofthis.Thisalso


providesachallengeforanybodywantingtoevaluatetheeffectsofculturaltrainingsince

onecannotbecertaintheinformantsarefullyawareoftheusefulnessofthetrainingthey

havereceived,notseeingthe“non‐frictions”.

Onseveraloccasions,representativesfromLivingInstituteexpressanxietyconcerning

whethertheclientswillactuallyunderstandthepedagogicpurposeof,forexample,

stereotypesandnotjusttakethematfacevalue.However,whenstudyingtheclients’

narrativesitbecomesapparentthecultureanalyticalconceptsofLivingInstitutetoagreat

extentareincorporatedasexplanatorydiscoursesratherthanasanalyticaltools.Onecan

choosetointerpretthisinseveralways,dependingonifonewantstopointoutthepositiveor

problematicaspectsofthecompany’straining.Atfirstglance,itmightseemlikethecultural

awarenessoftheclientsisnotextensiveenoughtousetheconceptsinthewayintendedby

LivingInstitute.Inthesamevein,onecouldalsoregarditasafailureonthecompany’spart,

nothavingsufficientlyinformedtheclientoftherelativisticaspectsofdifferentcultural

concepts.Ontheotherhand,onecannotdenytheimpactLivingInstitute’sdiscoursehashad

ontheindividualclients’narratives.Manyconceptspresentedbythecompanyreturninthe

clients’stories,helpingthemtomakesenseoftheireverydaylivesandproblemsthey

encounter.EveninthecaseofValerie,whohasrenouncedculture’ssignificance,onecantrace

conceptsfromLivingInstitute’straining,albeitunderadifferent“flag”,re‐framedas

“personality”.Thisgoestoshownodiscoursecanevertotallydefineanddominatemeanings

andthatpeoplecanputdiscoursestouseinordertosuittheirownneeds.Discoursemay

functionasarepertoireforpersonalnarratives,butpeopleusethemactively,notjust

carryingthempassively“ontheirbacks”(WintherJörgensen&Phillips,2000).Accordingto

Ristilammi(2000)thesignificanceofanyformofeventisonlyrealizedwhenrecognizedbya

thirdparty,notpresentattheeventitself.Ineffect,thismeansthepoweroverdefinitionof

thediscoursepromotedbyLivingInstituteislimitedtoitsusefulnessintheclients’everyday

practices,despiteitsscientificauthority.


Conclusions

Inthis,ourfinalchapter,wewillsummarizeandconcludeourfindings.In“Strikingabalance”

wediscussthechallengingbalancingactsthatLivingInstituteperforms,aswellasthe

consequencesthishasfortheconceptofculture.Thisisfollowedbyanumberofsuggestionsfor

LivingInstitutein“Insights”.Finally,in“Applyingoneself”,wetouchuponthesignificanceofthis

studyforthefieldsofappliedculturalanalysisandinterculturalcommunication.

Strikingabalance

Theaimofthisthesishasbeento,throughthestudyofLivingInstituteanditsclients,shed

somelightonhowtheconceptofculturecanbepackaged,soldandtaughtinthemarketplace

andhowitistransformedintheprocess.Inthefollowing,wewillgiveabriefrecountofthe

theoreticalframeworkonwhichthecompany’sproductisbased,howthisknowledgeis

packagedandhowitwasreceivedbytheinterviewedclients.Thiswillbefollowedbyan

outlineoftheissuesweperceiveascentralforunderstandingthecompanyanditschallenges,

intheshapeoffive“balancingacts”.Finallywewilldiscusswhatweperceiveasthe

consequencesfortheusesoftheconceptofcultureinsuchasetting.

LivingInstituteisacompanythatbycombiningtheoreticalperspectivesfrom

anthropologyandcross‐culturalcommunicationstrivestodeliveracomplex,yetaccessible

understandingofculturetoitsclients.Theanthropologicalperspectiveisusedtourgeclients

togodeeperandtrytounderstandculturaldifferencesinordertoresolveculturalfrictions.

Theoristsincross‐culturalcommunication,suchasHofstede,provideculturalmodelsthat,

becauseoftheirextensiveuseofquantitativedata,areeasytoadapttothebusinesssettingin

whichthecompanyoperates.Typically,theLivingInstituteemploysathree‐stagemodelfor

conveyingthistotheclients.Thefirststep,“culturalawareness”,aimstogivetheclientsan

understandingofwhatcultureisandwhyitmatterstothem.Thesecondstep,referredtoas

“culturalmapping”,providesanoutlineofthefactorsonwhichpeoplefromdifferentnational

culturestendtodiffer,pointingout“thedifferencesthatmakeadifference”.Duringthethird

stepthecompanytriestomaketheclients’ownculturesvisibletothem,helpingthemsee

thattheyareas“different”asthe“others”.Throughthecombinationofthesethreesteps,

LivingInstitutedeliversamixtureoffunctionalist“facts”aboutcultureandencouragesclients

tobecurious,exploratoryandanalyticalratherthanjudgmental.

Forclientsthisthree‐stagemodeltranslatesintobothlisteningtolecturesand

participatingactively,forexample,bysharingtheirpersonalexperiencesofculturalfrictions.

Inordertomakeitsmessageevenmoreaccessibletoclients,LivingInstitutealsoemphasizes


theimportanceofkeepingthetrainingentertaining,claimingpeoplearemoreopento

challengingconceptswhentheyareconfrontingthemwithalaugh.Toconcretizeculture,

LivingInstitutefocusesonDanishculture,lettingthestoryabout“theDane”workasbotha

sourceofinformationaboutDanishsocietyandareflectivesurfacethatmakestheclients’

ownculturesvisible.

Theclientsinterviewedforthisstudyhaveunanimouslypraisedtheirtrainingaswell

executed,havingfounditengagingandinformative.Whilesomehaveexpressedcomplaints

concerningdetails,likeThomasandManfredwhodidnotthinkthesessionsweresufficiently

businessoriented,mostclientsclaimtobesatisfied.Thedegreetowhichtheclientshave

perceivedthetrainingasusefulvariesasdothewaysinwhichtheyhaveputittouse.One

thingthatunitesalloftheclientsisthetrainingtheyreceivedhasinstigatedsomekindof

process,eitheronapersonaloranorganizationallevel.Thethreeexpatriates,Manfred,

ValerieandDoris,allviewedtheireverydaylivesdifferentlyafterhavingreceivedtraining:

Theymadenewsenseofthethingstheysawaroundthem.Manfredclaimsthatthetraining

helpedhimtoadjusthisexpectationsandchangehismanagementstyle,leadingtodecreased

frictioninjustthreeweeks.ForValerie,itledtoanincreasedsenseofculturalfrictionand

thusshehasdecidedtodisregardculture.Sheneverthelessfoundthetraininggoodenoughto

organizeasessionforherco‐workers.ForDoris,itturnedouttobeapleasurableexperience,

turningculturalawarenessintoatoolforexploringandexplaininghersurroundings.For

Thomas,AnneandDiane,theworkshopswerethestartofaprocessthatcametospread

throughouttheirrespectiveorganizations.ForThomas,thetrainingwasfirstandforemosta

preparationforabusinesstriptoAsia,buthewasabletousewhathelearnedtoteachhisco‐

workerssomethingabouttheimportanceofculture.ThetraininggaveAnneandher

colleaguesthetoolstobridgethegapbetweentheDanishandtheUSdivisionsinher

company,facilitatingcooperationbymakingtheirculturaldifferencesvisibletothem.For

Diane,theworkshopbecameaneye‐openerthatledtoacompany‐wideturntodiversity

management.

BycreatinganextensiveethnographyofLivingInstituteanditsrelationstoitsclients,

wehavebeenabletoidentifyanumberofproblematicissuesthatwerelatetothehandlingof

cultureasacommodity.Onepointwehavehadoccasiontoreturntorepeatedlyinourstudy

isthenarrowpathLivingInstitutetreadsbetweenafunctionalistandaconstructivist

approachtocultureinrelationtoitsclients.Thisishoweverjustoneofseveralsimilar

balancingacts(seefigure3)thecompanyperforms,constantlyoscillatingbetweendifferent

approachesandinsomeinstanceskeelingovertooneside.Below,welookmorecloselyat


Figure3.Balancingacts

fivebalancingactsweperceivetobecentralforunderstandingthecompany,illustrating

manyofthechallengesofdealingwithcultureingeneralandtheteachingofcross‐cultural

communicationinparticular.

Event–Process:Inasense,whatthecompanysellsisanintenseexperience,limitedin

spaceandtime.LivingInstitute’sintentionistomaketheeventawake‐upcallforcultural

awareness,butoncetheeventisoverandtheclienthaswalkedoutthedoorthecompanyhas

verylittleinsightintowhatknowledgetheirclientstakewiththemorhowtheyputittouse.

WhileLivingInstituterathereasilycanreachbackwardintime,incorporatingtheclients’past

experiencesintoaculturalnarrative,itismuchmoredifficultandchallengingtomoveinto

theirfuture,retainingapresenceintheirdailyinterpretationsofcultureandtoensurethey

maintainthe“right”mindset.AlthoughtheactionplanpresentedtotheclientsattheDanish

LivingCrashCourseisonewayofdoingthis,theuseofastrongexplanatorydiscourseis

another.Thereisnoguaranteetheculturalawarenessperspectivewillsurvivebeyondthe

practicalproblemsoftheactionplananddiscoursesmightbecomeunreflectedexplanations

ratherthananalyticaltools.

Foralloftheclients,thetrainingsessionhasbeenthestartofsomekindofprocess,but

foramajoritytheendoftheeventhasalsomarkedtheendoftheirrelationshipwithLiving

Event Process

Theory

National

Private

Functionalism

Entertainment

Intersectional

Professional

Constructionism


Institute.Theclientshavebeensetontheirrespectiveways,butinmostcasesthereseems

tobeaneedforfurtherguidance.SomeoftheclientshavenotconsideredgoingbacktoLiving

Institutesincetheyhavenotperceivedthecompany’sareaofcompetencerelevantforthem

anymore;insteadtheyhavelookedforknowledgeinotherplaces.Othershavecontemplated

returningtoLivingInstitute,buthavenothadthetimeorresourcestodoso.WhileLiving

Institutedoeshaveacontinuousrelationshipwithsomeofitsclients,thecompany’swork

oftenconsistsofarrangingsessionsfornewincomingandoutgoingexpatriates,ratherthan

beingpartofanongoingprocess.Atensionresidesherebetweenwhatcanbeseenasasingle

eye‐openingeventloadedwithmeaningandthelong‐termexperientialprocessofcultivating

culturalawarenesspresentineverydaypractices.LivingInstitutedependsonthestaying

powerofitsmessageratherthanonamaintainedpresenceintheclient’sorganization.The

questionisifthecomplexunderstandingofculturethatthecompanyadvocatescanbe

successfullyconveyedthroughasingleevent,orifamoreprocessualwayoflearningis

necessarytobecometrulyeffective.Thismirrorsthewayinwhichcultureoftenbecomes

objectifiedwhenpackagedandsold,asdiscussedbyO’Dell(2009),inrelationtotheculture

analyticalperspectiveoncultureasanever‐evolvingprocess.

Theory–Entertainment:ScientificvalidityandreasoningarecentraltenetsatLiving

Institute.Atthesametime,thecompanywantstoavoidbeingoverlytheoreticalandtofocus

insteadondeliveringculturalawarenessinamoreentertainingpackage.Atfirstglance,this

mightseemcontradictory,butourstudyofLivingInstituteshowsthetwoapproachescan

functioninconcert.Throughtheuseofparticipantexperience,jokes,pictures,moviesand

anecdotes,thecompanyisableteachtheoreticalconceptsinanimplicitway,immersingthem

inentertainingtropes.Theambitionto“edutain”ismorethanjustawaytodeliverthe

messageinanappetizingmanner.Asmentionedabove,italsobuildsontheassumptionthat

oneismorereceptivewhilehavingfun.Thereisofcoursealwaysariskofthe“fun”

overshadowingtheseriousnessoftheissueathand,incasetheclientdoesrecognizethe

impliedrelevance,thusturningthetrainingsessioninto“pure”entertainment.Thechallenge

thenbecomestoprovoketheclients,makingsuretherideisnottoosmooth.Thenagain,the

consultantsatLivingInstituteseemtoexcelatthistask.

ThefactthatLivingInstitutehandlesthisbalancingactwithgreatskillmakesit

somewhathardertodiscernthantheothers;thelackoffrictionmakingitslipbywithout

notice.Ifnotmanagedsowell,itcouldeasilyresultintrainingbecomingtoodulland

inaccessible.Orthetrainingcouldenduptoolightweight,withoutpracticalrelevance.Thisis

abalancingactthatanyonewhostrivestoworkwiththeoreticalconceptsoutsideacademia


mustface.Eventhoughitmightnotalwaysberelevanttospeakabout“entertainment”,it

highlightstheimportanceofaddressingtheaudienceinamannersuitabletothem.

National–Intersectional:ThewayLivingInstituteusescultureputsheavyemphasis

onnationaloriginbothasasourceoffrictionandasanexplanatoryfactorfordifferences.The

CulturalAwarenessWorkshopsaimtogiveparticipantstoolsforworkingwithpeoplefrom

variousnationalities.TheDanishLivingCrashCourse,forexample,circlesaroundthe

peculiaritiesofDanishculture.Hofstede’s(2001)dimensionsofculturaldifferenceare

broughttotheforetoillustratechallengestheclientsmightfacewhentheyenteraspecific

nationalculture.Wefindthistobeproblematicsincenationalbelonginghasatendencyto

overshadowotherkindsofbelongings,renderinginvisibleotherwaysinwhichpeopleare

similarordifferent.Intheclients’stories,nationalcultureoftenistheprimarytoolwithwhich

differencesareexplained.Thismayresultinthatissueswhichcannotbeexplainedbywayof

nationalculturenotbeingregardedasculturallydependentbutas“mere”individual

differences.WhilethisdemonstratestheexplanatorystrengthofLivingInstitute’scultural

discourse,italsoilluminatesthepotentialdownsideofthisstrongdiscourse.If

wholeheartedlyconsumed,itmayleadtosomeclientsincorporatingtheseexplanationsas

“truths”aboutthe“other”aswellasofthemselves.

WhileLivingInstituteclaimsitwantstodeliveracomplexunderstandingofculture,the

heavyfocusonnationalbelongingmakesthisbalanceseemabitlopsided.Onemusttakeinto

considerationthatLivingInstituteandother“interculturalists”maketheirlivingfromcultural

frictionsandthatitconsequentlymightbeintheirinteresttofocusondifferences,especially

thosethatareeasiertotalkabout.Nationalityisarelatively“safe”culturalcategorythatlacks

manyofthemoresensitivelypoliticalconnotationsofclassorgender.Onemustalsobearin

mindsomeofthecompany’smorecosmopolitanclientsneedabitofconvincingbeforeeven

recognizingthesignificanceofthisrelativelysafecategoryofnationalbelonging.Theuseofan

intersectionalperspectiveonculturemighthoweverbebeneficialforanyonewantingtoshow

that“culturematters”withoutgivinganoverlysimplifieddefinitionoftheconcept.By

applyingotherperspectivesonculturaldifference,onecanindicatethehighlycontextual

dependencyofculture,illustratinghowculturaldifferencecanexistwithinanation,for

example.

Private–Professional:LivingInstituteoperatesintheworldofbusiness,promoting

culturalknowledgeasatoolforsuccessinthetransnationalmarket.Theimplicitmeaningof

theslogan“culturematters”isthatitmattersintheworldofbusiness.Evenwhencultural

awarenesscanimprovetheclients’privatelife,itisimplicitlymotivatedbybusinessprofits.


Anexpatriatesufferingfrom“culturalshock”,withoutafunctioningsociallife,willnotbe

abletowork.Culturalawarenessbecomesatoolforresolvingproblematicsituations—a

strategichammerforbeatingdownnailsonewouldotherwisehurtoneselfupon.WhileLiving

Institute’strainingmainlyisfocusedonenhancingclients’businessskills,thisisachieved

throughtheexplorationofeverydaysocialsituations.Personalexperience,professionalor

private,isusedtoillustratetheeffectsofculture,transformingthemintoapartofacultural

narrative.

Ourpointhereisthatwediscernapotentialtensionbetweenthelevelofdiscourseand

livedexperience.WhilethesignificanceoflearningculturalawarenessbyLivingInstituteis

warrantedthroughitseconomicnarrative—whichsaysthetrainingwillbeusefulina

businesscontext—itseffectsstretchfarandwideoutsidetheworldofbusiness,afactwe

believemaybecomeobscured.Asweunderstandit,theknowledgegainedmighthelpresolve

issuesatwork,butitmayjustaswellhelptheclientfindnewfriendsorhelpsortouta

romanticrelationship.Naturally,LivingInstituterealizes,andteaches,thatitsclients’private

experienceswillinfluencetheirworklives.However,weseeadangerrelatedtothe

company’smarketingstrategythatrunstheriskofreducingtheemotionalstrainofcultural

frictionsintoadiscourseofbusiness.Ultimately,thisalsoillustratestheambivalenceof

severalclientswhoaskedformorebusinessrelatedtoolswhilesimultaneouslypraisinghow

thetraininghelpedthemresolvepersonalissuestheyhadbeenbroodingupon.Itseemslike

theculturalawarenessismorethanamerehammer,butthatitsotherusesmightnotbe

entirelyobviousforthepersonholdingit.

Functionalism–Constructionism:Asourfinalbalancingactwereturntothe

relationshipbetweenthefunctionalistandconstructivistapproachestoculture.Thesetwo

theoreticalbranchesmightseemincompatible;buildingonentirelydifferentassumptions

aboutculture’smeaningaswellascommunicatingthroughdifferent“languages”.ForLiving

Institute,however,theyfunctionmoreastoolsthanasepistemologicaltruths,servingspecific

purposesintheteachingofculturalknowledge.Thecompanyaimstodeliveracomplex

understandingofcultureinanaccessiblepackagebydrawingonconceptsfromboth

traditions.Theconstructivistapproachbyitselfmightappeartooacademicandmultifaceted,

withoutobviousapplicability.Thefunctionalistapproach,whileaccessible,runstheriskof

creatingasimplisticandstaticnotionofculture,toodistantfromthecompany’sidealsof

culturalawareness.Inawaythiscouldalsobeexplainedasthebalancebetweenidealsand

practice.WhileLivingInstitutemightpromoteaconstructivistperspectiveonculture,italso

mustconsiderwhatactuallyworksinrelationtotheclients.Thegoalistodeliverawareness


andknowledge,nottopreachtheoryfortheory’ssake.Thefunctionalistapproachcanthen

beinterpretedasaTrojanhorseofsorts,givingafamiliarshapetoanunfamiliarmessage

throughtheuseofbusiness‐orientedlanguageandimagery.

Yetanotherwaytointerpretthisbalancingactisasfindingthebalancebetween

deliveringexplanatoryoranalyticalconcepts.LivingInstituteendeavourstoavoidgivingthe

clientssimpleanswers,encouragingthemtoexploreandanalyzeforthemselves.Thereisno

guaranteetheclientswilluseanalyticalconceptsasintended,insteadviewingthemas

explanatoryexamples,aswehaveseenonseveraloccasionswherediscourseshavebeen

internalizedunreflexivelyandstereotypeshavebeentakenatfacevalue.

So,whataretheconsequencesfortheconceptofculture?WhileLivingInstituteprides

itselfonemployingacomplex,anthropologicalunderstandingofculture,muchofthe

complexityseemstogetlostduringitstransferaltotheclients.Culturebecomesmoreorless

synonymouswithnationalbelonging,overshadowingmostotherkindsofdifferencesand

belongings,alternativelyleadingtothemnotbeinginterpretedasculturallydependent.This

alsoobscuresthepotentialpowerrelationsresidingintheconceptofculture,turningcultural

differencesintomerequestionsofovercomingcommunicationproblems.Thefunctionalist

approachtocultureemployedbythecompanyfurtherreducesthisintospecificcategoriesof

differenceinnationalculture,meaningthatwearedifferentbutinthesameways.According

toÖhlander(2005),thisisawayofobjectifyingculture,turningitintoacategory

independentfromhumanexistence,whichisproblematicsinceitobscuresculture’s

contextualdependency.

Webelievethisreductionofmeaningtobehighlydependentonthebusinesscontextin

whichLivingInstituteoperates.Themessagehastobeadjustedtotherulesthatapplyinthe

businessworld,whichinmostcasesmeansithastobequicktoaccessandeasytoapply.To

retainaleveloftheoreticaldepth,LivingInstitutehaschosenthewayofthe“edutainer”,

creatingahybridofseriousproblemsandhilariousexamplesintheprocess.Theprominent

useofnationalcultureasasourceofexplanationislikelyalsoanoutcomeofthechallengeof

packaging,itbeinganuncontroversialsourceoffrictionthateveryonecanrecognizeandeven

laughat:“Oh,that’sjusttypicallyDanish!”Tobeappetizing,culturemustbeuseful,whileat

thesametimenotbeingthreateningandthusemphasisisputonthenationalandthewaysin

whichitmightcausearuckus.Thisalsoleadsustoanotherquestion:Iscultureacommodity

whereitispossibletoseparatecontentfromitswrappings?Theuseoftheclients’previous

experienceandemphasisoncreatingpositivenewonesasameansofconveyingcultural


knowledgeblursthelinebetweenmessageandenvelope,turningcultureintosomething

thatisexperiencedasmuchasitislearned.

Thefrequentuseoftheclients’ownexperiencesalsoturnsthemintoculturalbeings,

helpingthemseetheirownculturalbaggage.Tolearncultureisnot(only)tolearnaboutthe

wayspeoplediffer“overthere”,buttorecognizewealldifferandweallaresomewhat

peculiar.Whiledesigningthecoursesforeasyaccess,LivingInstituteseemstosteeraway

fromsimpleanswers,insteadstrivingtocultivatetheclients’curiosities.Bynotgivingallthe

answersandtellingthewholestory,thecompanyleavesspacesforinterpretationand

explorationopentotheclients.ThefinalandperhapsmostimportantthingLivingInstitute

doestocultureistoputitontheagenda.Byclaimingculturematters,thecompanymakesit

matter.Whilehelpingitsclientsreachculturalawareness,LivingInstituteinstillssomething

moreintothem,helpingthemnotonlytorecognizebutalsotoexploreandmanipulate

culturalfrictions,deliveringaculturalconfidenceofsorts.

Insights

FormerclientsofLivingInstitutehaveprovideduswithvaluableinsightsintotheir

experiencesbefore,duringandafterparticipatinginthecompany’strainingsessions.Wehave

analyzedandproblematizedthisinformationthroughoutthisthesisandaspartoftheprocess

wehavebeenabletoidentifyanumberofproblemareasandpotentialswebelieveare

relevantforthefuturedevelopmentofLivingInstitute.

Definingculture–TheconceptofcultureisatthecoreofLivingInstitute’senterprise.

Despitethis,thereseemstobesomeconfusionamongtheclientsastowhatcultureactually

meansandinwhatwaysitaffectsthem.WebelieveLivingInstitutewouldbenefitfromusing

aclearerandmoreinclusivedefinitionofculture,helpingtheclientsseeitisnotonly

nationalitythatinfluencesthemasculturalbeings.ThiswouldpotentiallyalsobroadenLiving

Institute’srangeofproducts.Sincethecompanydealsinculture,abroaderdefinitionwould

alsobeastatementforawiderrangeofcompetence.

Process,coachingandfollowups–Foralloftheclients,thetrainingreceivedfrom

LivingInstitutehasbeenthestartofapersonalororganizationalprocess.LivingInstitute

wouldbenefitfromimprovingitscapabilitytoharnessthiscatalyticeffect.Personalcoaching,

follow‐upmeetingsorprocessualworkwithentireorganizationsarecalledforandLiving

Instituteneedstomaketheclientsawaretheycanprovidetheseservices.Thiscouldrange

fromworkingwithfully‐fledgeddiversitymanagementtoopeningahotlineforcultural


emergencies.AcontinuouscollaborationwouldalsobeanopportunityforLivingInstitute

todeliveramorecomplexunderstandingofcultureovertime.

Culturalchampions–Manyoftheformerclientsturnintoculturalactivistsintheir

ownorganizations,becomingeverythingfromthedrivingforcebehindprocessesforcultural

changetotheco‐workers’culturalgo‐toguy.Couldthepromotionofculturalchampions

becomeaconsciousstrategyforLivingInstitute?Thetrainingdoesnotonlyinstill“cultural

consciousness”,but“culturalconfidence”,“culturalcreativity”andeven“culturalcourage”!By

makingthisevenclearertotheclients,LivingInstitute’sinfluencecouldreachanevenlarger

partoftheclient’sorganization.

ObservingInstitute–LivingInstituteisalreadyapplyingmethodsandtheoriesfrom

anthropology.Thiscouldbetakenastepfurtherthroughtheuseofquickethnography,

allowingforevenmoretightlytailoredproductssuitedtotheclients’needs.Direct

observationswouldallowLivingInstitutetoidentifytheproblemsthemselvesinsteadofonly

relyingonproblemdescriptionsfromclients.Adeeperrelationwiththeclients’organizations

wouldalsoallowLivingInstitutetoworkonabroaderscale,potentiallymovingbeyond

“culturalawareness”andintoimplementingsolutionsforentireorganizationsovertime.

DanishCrashCourse1,2,3–Someclientswanteasilyapplicablebusinesstools,

otherswanthelpwithsocialissuesandsomejustwanttounderstandwhatisgoingonaround

them.Itcanbehardtoencompassallneedsanddesiresinoneevent,especiallywhenthe

participants’previousexperiencesvary.Athree‐stepmodelDanishLivingCrashCourse

wouldallowtheclientstodecidetheirownlevelofengagement.Thefirststep,directedat

expatriatesfreshofftheplane,couldincludethebasicsfornavigatingDanishcultureand

business.Thesecondcouldbedirectedatclientscomingoutoftheir“honeymoon”,needinga

broaderculturalawarenesstodealwithincreasingfrictions.Thethirdwouldbetakenaftera

longerperiodoftime,onceinitialproblemshavebeenresolved,deliveringamorelong‐term

approachtolivinginaforeignculturalcontext.

Culturalmacaronipictures–AccordingtoRistilammi(2000)eventscontinuetoexist

byinscribingthemselvesintheparticipants’memories.Thiscanbeaidedbytheuseof

souvenirs,aphysicalobjectbecomingarecurringreminderofwhattheparticipanthas

learned.Inaway,LivingInstitutealreadydoesthisthroughtheuseoftheactionplan,butwe

believethiscouldbeimprovedfurther.Perhapstheclientscouldproducecultural“macaroni

pictures”,assemblingsomekindofphysicalobjecttheycantakehome,showtheirfamilyand

putuponthefridge.ThiscouldbeonewayforLivingInstitutetoretainapresence

throughouttheclient’sculturalawarenessprocess.


Applyingoneself

Needlesstosay,thewritingofthisthesishasbeenachallengingexperiencesincewe

ourselveshavebeenjugglinganumberofbalancingacts,themostprominentonebeingto

writeanacademicthesisatthesametimeastryingtocreateapplicableknowledgeforLiving

Institute.Obviously,thetwoarenotmutuallyexclusiveopposites,butattimesonepurpose

hasobscuredtheother.Inessence,itbecomesabalancebetweenbeingcriticalandbeing

creative,identifyingproblemsaswellaspotentials.“Applying”istoalargeextentaquestion

oftoningdownthescientificdiscoursewhileretainingtheknowledgecreatedthroughit.

Fromthisperspectivescientificvalidityalsobecomesamoreproblematicconcept.Ofcourse,

the“applying”shouldnotgoagainstscientificfindings,butonehasacertainfreedomof

interpretingconsequencesandsuggestingfuturecoursesofaction.

Asculturalanalysts,wearenaturallyinterestedinthewaysinwhichcultureisputto

use,especiallywhenitcarriestheanthropologicalconnotationsutilizedbyLivingInstitute.

Consequently,thisleadstoastingofdisappointmentwhenonefailstoseethepromised

complexityanditiseasytoappropriateacriticalstance.However,whencriticizingLiving

Institutefordeliveringasimplifiedconceptofcultureonemustalsorememberthiscriticism

comesfromabiasedposition.Asculturalanalystswehavehadseveralyearstodevelopour

culturalawarenessandweshouldknowbetterthananyonethatitisquitenaïvetobelievean

equallycomplexunderstandingofculturecanbetaughtandlearnedfromscratchduringan

hour,adayorevenaweek.Cultureandculturalawarenessareprocesses.WhatLiving

Institutedoesishelpinstigatethem.

Aswealreadyhavementioned,thisstudycouldhavebenefitedfromtheopportunityto

performparticipantobservationsintheclients’organizations.Theproblemtogainaccess

reflectssomeoftheissuesfacedbyLivingInstitute,demonstratingthechallengeoffindinga

placewithinthefast‐pacedworldofbusinessasanacademic.Directaccesswouldhavegiven

usabetterviewofhowculturalfrictionsaregeneratedintheirday‐to‐dayroutinesanda

deeperunderstandingofhowLivingInstitutecouldfitintotheseroutines.Closerobservation

wouldalsohaveallowedustoacquaintourselveswithhowtheclients’culturalskillsareput

intopractice,somethingwhichwecannotaddresswithcertaintyfromthedatawehave

collected.Therelationshipbetweenwhatpeoplesayandwhattheydoisoftencomplex,as

anthropologistDanielMiller(2001)pointsout.Often,thatwhichpeoplesayisfarmore

reflexiveandcriticalthanwhattheythenactuallydo.Ontheotherhand,onecouldarguethe

discourseofculturalawarenesstosomeextentisitspracticeandthatitisthroughlanguage

thatwecaninterpretandunderstandculture,asLivingInstitute’suseofparticipant


experiencesseemstoindicate.Nevertheless,inafuturestudyitwouldhavebeen

interestingtogetclosertothestudentsofinterculturalcommunication,especiallythe

expatriates,togainabetterunderstandingofhowcultureactuallyinfluencesthemandhow

theychosetotackletheseissues.FurtherstudiesofconsultanciessuchasLivingInstitute

wouldalsoberewarding,bothfortheconsultantsthemselvesandfromanacademicpointof

view.

InaccordancewithEhnandLöfgren(2009),webelievethereismuchtogainfroma

closerrelationshipbetweenacademiaandpracticingconsultantsandthatcollaborationhas

greatpotentialforthedevelopmentofnewskillsandmethods.Theutilitarianapproachto

theoryandmethodsonehastoadoptwhenapplyingacademicskillscanbeagoodreminder

oftheiractualpurpose—tohelpusmakesenseofthecomplexworldinwhichwelive.The

balancingactsLivingInstituteperformsarealsorelevanttoconsiderforanyonewantingto

applytheircultureanalyticalskillsoutsideofacademia.Strikingabalancebetween

theoreticaldepth,applicablesuggestions,methodologicalapproachesandrelevantlyadapted

communicationisnoeasytask,butitisonlybyconsciouslyperformingthesebalancingacts

thatwecanhopetoapplyourselveswhileretainingtheperspectivesthatmakeusunique.

Thereis,however,africtionbetweentheworldofacademiaandthatofconsultancy,

especiallyinthefieldofinterculturalcommunication.Thedisciplineseemstohavelosttouch

withitsanthropologicalrootsatthesametimeasanthropologistsseemunwillingto

contributetothediscussion,asDahlén(1997),Larsson(2010)andtheseniorconsultantall

pointout.Onereasonforthis,accordingtoHannerz(1996),mightbetheomnipresenceof

culture,resultingina“devaluation”oftheconceptandthusaneedto“guard”theirown

definitions.Thelackofanthropologistsandotherculturalanalystsparticipatinginthedebate

ordevelopmentofthefielddoesnotseemtobeaveryconstructiveapproach.Ifproponentsof

aconstructivistapproachtoculturesteerclearofthefield,thefunctionalistapproachisleft

unchallengedtodefinethewaysinwhichculturalawarenessistaught.Aswehaveshownin

thisthesis,theteachingofculturebringswithitmanyproblems—butaswealongwithLiving

Institutehopetohaveproven,thereismuchthatculturalanalysiscancontributetothefield

ofinterculturalcommunication.Afterall,weallagreethatculturematters.Thequestionis

justwhogetstodefinewhatthatmeans.


References

Alsmark,G.(1997).Inledning.InG.Alsmark(Ed.)Skjortaellersjäl?:kulturellaidentiteteritidochrum.Lund:StudentlitteraturArnstberg,K‐O.(1997).Fältetnologi.Stockholm:CarlssonsBokförlag.Bourdieu,P.(1999).Praktisktförnuft:bidragtillenhandlingsteori.Göteborg:Daidalos.Czarniawska,B.(1998).Anarrativeapproachtoorganizationstudies.ThousandOaks,Calif.;Sage.Dahlén,T.(1997).Amongtheinterculturalists:Anemergentprofessionanditspackagingofknowledge(Doctoraldissertation,StockholmUniversity,1997).Davies,C.(2008).ReflexiveEthnography:Aguidetoresearchingselvesandothers.London:Routledge.deLosReyes,P.&Martinsson,L.(2005).Olikhetensparadigm:Intersektionellaperspektivpåo(jämn)likhetesskapande.Lund:Studentlitteratur.duGay,P.,&Pryke,M.(2002).Culturaleconomy:anintroduction.InP.duGuy&M.Pryke(Eds.),CulturalEconomy.London:SAGEPublicationLtd.Ehn,B.,&Löfgren,O.(2001.)Kulturanalys:Ettetnologisktperspektiv.Malmö:GleerupsUtbildingAB.Ehn,B.,&Löfgren,O.(2009).Ethnographyinthemarketplace.CultureUnbound,1,31–49.RetrievedMay8,2010,fromhttp://www.cultureunbound.ep.liu.se/v1/a04/Fägerborg,E.(1999).”Intervjuer”.InL.Kaijser,&M.Öhlander(Eds.)Etnologisktfältarbete.Lund:Studentlitteratur.Geertz,C.(1973).TheInterpretationofCultures:Selectedessays.NewYork:BasicBooks.Gemzöe,L.(2003).Feminism:Stockholm:BildaFörlag.GoldschmidtSalamonK.L.(2005).Possessedbyenterprise.InO.Löfgren&R.Willim(Eds.)Magic,CultureandtheNewEconomy.NewYork:Berg.Hall,E.T.(1973).Thesilentlanguage:Ananthropologistrevealshowwecommunicatebyourmannersandbehavior.NewYork:AnchorPress/Doubleday.Hannerz,U.(1996).Transnationalconnections:Culture,people,places.London:Routledge.Hofstede,G.(2001).Culturesconsequences:Comparingvalues,behaviors,institutionsandorganizationsacrossnations(2nded.).ThousandOaks,Calif:SagePublicationsInc.Hofstede,G.,&Hofstede,G.J.(2005).Culturesandorganizationssoftwareofthemind:Interculturalcooperationanditsimportanceforsurvival(2nded.).NewYork:McGraw‐Hill.


Hofstede,G.J.,&Pedersen,P,.&Hofstede,G.(2002)Exploringculture:Excersises,stories,andsyntheticcultures.Yarmouth,ME:InterculturalPress.Jackson,M.(2005).Existentialanthropology:Events,exigencies,andeffects.NewYork:BerghahnBooks.Kandola,R.,&Fullerton,J.(1998).Diversityinaction:Managingmosaic(2nded.).London:CharteredInstituteofPersonnelandDevelopment,CIPDHouse.Larsson,I.(2010).Attbyggabroaroverkulturgränser:OmSvenskarskommunikationmedicke‐svenskarvidarbeteutanförSverige(Doctoraldissertation,LundUniversity,2010).LéonRosales,R.(2005).Likhetstecknetslogik.InM.Öhlander(Ed.)Bruketavkultur:Hurkulturanvändsochgörssocialtverksamt.Lund:Studentlitteratur.Löfgren,O.&Willim,R.(2005).Introduction:TheMandrakeMode.InO.Löfgren&R.Willim(Eds.)Magic,CultureandtheNewEconomy.NewYork:Berg.MacKinnon,C.(1982).Feminism,Marxism,methodandthestate:Anagendafortheory.Signs.JournalofWomeninCultureandSociety(Vol.7,no.31).Miller,D.(2001).Thedialecticsofshopping.Chigaco:UniversityofChigacoPress.Moeran,B.(2005).Thebusinessofethnography:Strategicexchanges,people,andorganizations.Oxford:Berg.MorBarak,E.M.(2005)Managingdiversity:Towardagloballyinclusiveworkplace.California:SagePublications.O’Dell,T.(2005).Experiencescapes.InT.O’Dell,&P.Billing(Eds.)Experiencescapes:Tourism,cultureandeconomy.Copenhagen:CopenhagenBusinessSchool.O’Dell,T.(2009).What’stheuseofculture?CultureUnbound,1,15–29.RetrievedMay8,2010,fromhttp://www.cultureunbound.ep.liu.se/v1/a04/Palmenfelt,U.(2000).Perspektivpånarrativitet.InU.Palmenfelt(Ed.)Aspekterpånarrativitet.Åbo:NNFPublications.Ray,L.,&SayerA.(1999).Cultureandeconomyaftertheculturalturn.London:Sage.Ristilammi,M.(2000).Culturalbridges,events,andthenewregion.InP‐O.Berg,&A.Linde‐Laursen,&O.Löfgren(Eds.)Invokingatransnationalmetropolis.Lund:Studentlitteratur.Skeggs,B.(1997)Attblirespektabel.Uddevalla:BokförlagetDaidalos.Sunderland,P.,&Denny,R.(2007)Introduction.InP.Sunderland,&R.Denny(Eds.)Doinganthropologyinconsumerresearch.WalnutCreek:WestCoastPress,INC.Trompenaars,F.,&Hampden‐Turner,C.(1998).Ridingthewavesofculture:Understandingdiversityinglobalbusiness(2nded.).NewYork:McGraw‐Hill.


Wrench,J.(2007).Diversitymanagementanddiscrimination:ImmigrantsandethicminoritiesinEU.Hampshire:AshgatePublishingLimited.WintherJørgensen,M.&Phillips,L.(2000).Diskursanalyssomteoriochmetod.Lund:Studentlitteratur.Öhlander,M.(1999).Deltagandeobservation.InL.Kaijser,&M.Öhlander(Eds.)Etnologisktfältarbetet.Lund:Studentlitteratur.Öhlander,M.(2005).Inledning.InM.Öhlander(Ed.)Bruketavkultur:Hurkulturanvändsochgörssocialtverksamt.Lund:Studentlitteratur.SourcesontheInternetLivingInstitute’swebsiteonculturalawarenessfromhttp://www.livinginstitute.com/kurser_intercultural_crash_en.php

Documents

Striking a Balance - lup.lub.lu.selup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/1736392/file/1736422.pdf · acts like this one in order to make it relevant in the business world while simultaneously