Dialectical approach to intercultural (communication) competence in the workplace

Key concepts

  • ICC (intercultural communication competence): ability to manage cultural differences in workplace interactions.
  • Dialectical approach: treats intercultural relating as dynamic, relational, and influenced by larger social forces; integrates individual agency with macro-structures.
  • ABC model (Affective, Behavioral, Cognitive): traditional elements of ICC; extended to motivation, outcomes, contexts, and relational aspects; competence seen as negotiation in relationships rather than a fixed trait.
  • Processual and relational: competence emerges through ongoing interaction, not solely within an individual.
  • Macro forces and power: organizational, legal, political contexts shape what counts as competent behavior.
  • Power relations and inequities: gender, race, nationality, language, sexuality, etc., shape workplace intercultural dynamics.

The global workplace context

  • Globalization, migration, and technology create diverse, networked workplaces.
  • Demographic shifts: aging, more women in workforce, global mobility; increased virtual teamwork.
  • Structural inequalities: history and systems of power influence who can exercise competence and how it’s perceived.
  • Neoliberal discourse: can naturalize or justify unequal power relations in global firms.

Traditional ICC models: limitations

  • Eurocentric, ethnocentric, and egocentric biases; culture treated as bounded and static.
  • Overemphasis on individual traits; neglects macro structures and power dynamics.
  • Janusian interculturality critique: simplistic categorization into nations/ethnicities fails in fluid, multi-identity workplaces.

Dialectical approach: core ideas

  • Based on Bakhtin; emphasizes process, change, and contradiction in intercultural relations.
  • Intercultural relating is ongoing and contextually shaped; identities and power positions continually renegotiated.
  • Six intercultural dialectics:
    • individual-cultural
    • differences-similarities
    • past-present-future
    • personal-contextual
    • privilege-disadvantage
    • static-dynamic
  • Distinct from pure social constructivism: foregrounds inequities and macro-contexts as shaping communicative choices.

Illustrative studies (dialectics in action)

  • Park (2013): diversity management can rationalize workplace inequities; Korean employees face promotion barriers despite performance; neoliberal discourse at play.
  • Leonard (2010): white Britishness in Hong Kong contrasted with Mainland Chinese identity; shifting power and identity dynamics affect competence expectations.
  • Kim (2004): Korean managers vs Korean-Americans in a US-based firm; ethnicity, generation, and language create tensions in competence judgments.

Implications for practice

  • Training should move beyond trait lists; incorporate dialectical understanding of context and power.
  • Build reflexivity: acknowledge one's position in social hierarchies and macro forces.
  • Focus on negotiation and relationship-building; align ICC with organizational policies and legal contexts.
  • Design context-sensitive, justice-oriented ICC programs that account for global power dynamics.

Conclusion: theoretical and practical value

  • The dialectical approach links individual competence with macro forces, offering a dynamic framework for ICC in global workplaces.

- Supports a politicized intercultural competence that attends to power, inequality, and social justice.