An Immigrant’s experience of Finnish working culture

In today’s highly connected and interdependent world, there are seldom any monocultural societies and this fact makes it imperative to study, learn and be sensitive to cultural aspects of society. As pointed out by (Dahl, 2004) as well, the word “Culture” has been used to describe various quiet distinct concepts. For example, the word of culture is linked to “Organizational culture” as well as “Art and Culture”. We can view this broad usage of the word in two ways. Either it is very loosely defined or it is so relevant to various contexts that its usage becomes imperative to adequately elaborate those concepts.Similar diversity is found in its definition and explanations. Various social scientists encapsulated the concept in diverse ways. For example, (Hall & Hall, 1976) views culture as an invisible control mechanism which works in our ideas/thoughts and reflects in our actions without any conscious decision making. He further states that we remain unaware of this invisible control mechanism unless it is challenged. For example, by being exposed to another distinct and different culture. (Spencer-Oatey, 2000) advances this concept by defining culture on the basis of its functions. Her definition of culture as mentioned in article by (Dahl, 2004) is:

“Culture is a fuzzy set of attitudes, beliefs, behavioral norms, and basic assumptions and values that are shared by a group of people, and that influence each member’s behavior and his/her interpretations of the “meaning” of other people’s behavior” (Spencer-Oatey, 2000).

Further diversity in definition and explanation of cultures comes in views presented by (Hofstede, 1984) who provided a framework for cross cultural communication based on four dimension of culture (individualism-collectivism; uncertainty avoidance; power distance (strength of social hierarchy) and masculinity-femininity) and (Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner, 1998) who presented 7 dimensions of culture.

One view or aspect of studying cultures and cultural diversity is looking at cultural aspects of immigration and mobility. It would not be unjust if we may say that cross border and cross continent mobility has become an increasing trend in modern day world. As United Nations’ estimates, roughly 2 million people annually will migrate from the less developed to the more developed regions of the world until2050.

As (Launikari & Puukari, 2005) highlight, there are multiple reasons/forces leading people to move from one country/continent to other. Studies and better job prospects are amongst the voluntary reasons motivating people to migrate whereas involuntary reasons include movement forced by several political, security and social reasons. Irrespective of the reasons, multiculturalism is today’s social fact which not only needs to be understood both holistically and at macro level but also needs to be explored for social and economic implications it brings to societies and individuals.

At this point of the article, It is important to clarify that Culture or Multiculturalism is not limited to phenomenon of cross cultural movement of people or does not only refer to groups of people who come from diverse social backgrounds, speak different languages or have dissimilar traits. However, for the scope of this document, I am narrowing down the scope of term so that we are able to link it with interview data.

Interview- context and objectives

Interview was conducted with two objectives in mind. First, to have a cross cultural perspective on Finnish working culture and secondly, to utilize my learnings of culture and communication into action. Theoretical context of this interview constituted of theories we learnt and discussed in the course titled “Cultures and Communication” and reading material on the subject. Through this interview, I also wanted to appraise cultural stereotypes linked with Finland such as Shyness, direct communication style and concepts of time- orientation.

Course learnings and Hofstede’s cultural dimensions were used as a guide to conduct and transcribe interview. In order to map interviewee’s responses on Hofstede dimensions, I read and compared Pakistani and Finnish culture under the lens of Hofstede’s dimensions.

If we compare Finland and Pakistan (Interviewee’s country of origin) according to dimensions presented in Hofstede framework (http://geert-hofstede.com/dimensions.html ), we can see considerable differences in at least some dimensions. Following chart describes an overview of comparison between two countries.

(http://geert-hofstede.com/finland.html )

My second concern/interest was to map interviewee’s integration in Finland on Cultural adaptation “U-curve”

Lysgaard’s U-Curve is based on the assumption that when people work across cultures, certain cultures traditions and cultural norms are important to be learnt before any productivity begins. Lysgaard’s U-Curve presents cultural adjustments in four stages:

• Honeymoon– When new culture fascinates us and we like everything about it because it is different from own culture.
• Culture Shock– Stress and confusions experienced because of living the new culture on daily basis
• Recovery– Stage of adaption and leaning new ways to behave
• Adjustment– Effectiveness in new culture starts as learnings about culture become second nature.

Timespan of each phase in the curve depends on many factors. Individuals and society both play an important role in minimizing the time of crisis and take appropriate measures such as integration plans and socializing activities in order to be effective in new culture. In Finland, three years’ time is officially spared for integration. In practicality, some people stay at any one phase for much longer times.

Interview and observations

My Interviewee is a 27 years old single Pakistani man who is living in Finland from last 5 years. My interviewee worked and studied simultaneously for four years in Finland but after graduating in September 2014, he is now only working. In his job, he delivers newspapers. Nature of his job and specially timings of his job have played an important role in his views of Finland, Finnish society and Finnish working culture.

We conducted the interview in evening time at interviewees place. Firs thing I noticed was actually the process of meeting and greeting. I have been interviewing some people in Finland and it usually happens like this that you would decide a time which is not on weekends or out of office hours. On the contrary, my interviewee asked me to have tea at his place in the evening. In his apartment, I noticed pictures of his family back home. I asked him about his family and he was very happy to tell me about all of them. This was clearly in line with Pakistani culture which is identified as highly collective on Hofstede model. I asked him what kind of interview situation he would have preferred in case his interviewer was a Finn and he said “it is better to have meetings outside here because inviting homes is not Finnish culture” (R1). So, he was actually constructing meaning of the host culture and reacting to it accordingly.

This is an observation which is not unique to this interview or person. It is generally very common in cross cultural settings that we instantly make few perceptions about the culture and then react/behave according to our own perceptions. Re-encapsulating it, worth asking question related to our behaviors in new cultures is “How should we react and communicate in new cultures?” Though it is human tendency to make our own pictures of situations and react according them, it sometimes useful to limit our imagination and observe things as they are (Facts without emotions). Second explanation of R1 is that interviewee’s perception of Finnish culture in terms of collectivism and individualistic culture is quiet identical to Hofstede’s identifications. Hofstede cultural dimensions grid also identifies Finnish cultures as an individualistic culture where interactions are based on mutual benefit and not primarily on emotions/courtesy.

I asked interviewee about his opinions on group support at his workplace. In his response, he was not very happy with emotional support but was very content with what he called “Emergency support”. Explaining this, he stated that his colleagues would not usually come and ask him how he is doing but if he asks them for help in some matter, then Finns would go an extra mile with him and would make sure they do all they can to help him. On the question of seeking support, he said that Finns usually seek help from Finns and rarely has any of his colleague asked him for help or shared any work related problems. This might also be due to nature of work because in his job, there is not much interaction involved. Therefore, his exposure to his team mates is limited.

I also wanted to find out where my interviewee stands on Lysgaard’s U-Curve. So, I asked him some open ended questions about Finnish working culture in order to map his responses on the curve. He was not briefed on the curve before asking those questions and his natural responses to questions were mapped later on the curve.

In response to queries on his general perceptions of Finnish culture, he was bit skeptical. He had differentiated opinions on the way things were managed in his work and studies. He was certainly out of Honeymoon period but on the basis of his stress related with adjustments in Finnish culture, I concluded that he is at some level of cultural shock though he has been in Finland for five years. I tried to explore this more by asking him about his lifestyle and daily routines. In discussion on this topic, I found out that he had not been able to learn Finnish language due to his tough work and study routine and therefore, did not have any Finnish friends. His work does not involve any extensive socialization and therefore, he reverted back to his own culture by creating a circle of friends who share the same back home culture, values and norms. This way, he has created his own comfort zone which keeps him unexposed to the society in which he is living.

Conclusions

In this document, I tried to do three things. In the first section, I tried to analyze different definitions and explanations of culture in general and specifically, working culture with a view on immigration. Secondly, I attempted to compare two distinct cultures (Host and guest cultures) according to Hofstede’s cultural dimensions and grid. I made these comparisons to utilize understandings from it to my interview and to map interviewee responses on cultural comparisons. Lastly, I attempted to link my interview responses to cultural dimensions and Lysgaard’s U-Curve.

I found out that at least my interviewee was aware of cultural differences though he never had made any conscious effort to understand or classify Finnish culture. It is not a unique finding or observation but it reinforces concepts of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions. My analysis suggests that Culture and working culture are not only something we learn but also something that we realize. We are creating cultural perceptions and reacting on those all the time irrespective of a conscious understanding. If a conscious understanding of these dimensions can be developed in minds of immigrants (At least student immigrants), integration can be made easier and more effective.

Second finding was related with U curve. It was interesting to know how an individual can be trapped in cultural shock and never recover from it. So, cultural shock is not only a function of time but also depends on several other individual and societal factors such as finding a conducive environment and right people. From cultural shock, one can either move towards adjustment or towards isolation.

References

Dahl, S. (2004). Intercultural research: The current state of knowledge.

Hall, E. T., & Hall, E. (1976). How cultures collide. Psychology Today, 10(2), 66-&.

Hofstede, G. (1984). Cultural dimensions in management and planning. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 1(2), 81-99.

Launikari, M., & Puukari, S. (2005). Multicultural guidance and counselling: Theoretical foundations and best practices in europe.

Spencer-Oatey, H. (2000). Culturally speaking: Managing rapport through talk across cultures A&C Black.

Trompenaars, F., & Hampden-Turner, C. (1998). Riding the waves of culture McGraw-Hill New York.

Author: Waseem Rehmat, Vocational Teacher Education, JAMK University of Applied Sciences