Multiculturalism and Creativity

Many multinational organisations wish to develop “global” leaders who can lead across cultures. Beyond the need for international managers in such an organisation is there actually a business case for having multicultural leaders? The business case might be found if the company seeks to improve innovation. Without creativity, innovation cannot happen and apparently, multiculturalism increases creativity. Increase multicultural learning experiences and creativity improves! That’s according to an article in the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin (psp.sagepub.com) called “When in Rome ... Learn Why the Romans Do What They Do: How Multicultural Learning Experiences Facilitate Creativity.” W. W. Maddux, H. Adam and A. D. Galinsky, 2010 36: 731.

The caveat to the research is that creativity (insights, associations or solutions) is only improved when the multicultural experience came from living abroad and adapting to foreign cultures. (International tourism does not count!) Further, to adapt, the individual usually has to be open to experiences in the first place: in particular multicultural learning is the catalyst to increased creativity. The multicultural learning is only achieved when the individual engages in two (or more) cultures simultaneously. This therefore highlights that the way in which the individual “acculturates” to the new environment is important.

Here is a summary of acculturation experiences followed my culturally biased critique (“et alors”).

Multicultural Learning Experiences and Creativity

The authors state that to benefit from increased creativity, only the “bicultural integration” experience is positive whereas there are three other commonly observed experiences which do not have a positive impact on creativity.

Bicultural Integration

The individual identifies with the host country but keeps strong ties to the home country.

Assimilation

The individual identifies with the host country but cuts ties with the home country.

Separation

The individual maintains the home culture identity and rejects the host country identity.

Marginalisation

The individual loses identity with both host and home country.

Et alors?

Large organisations tend to expatriate experts and leaders. Beyond all the usual reasons for expatriation, if the organisation has a strategy to improve innovation, then multiculturalism and its link with increased creativity could be a good business case for developing multicultural leaders and experts. However, the way in which the expatriation (or “multicultural learning experience”) happens is just as important as the idea itself. Without the notion of “bicultural integration” to aim for, many protagonists in a multicultural experience will be drawn to either assimilation or separation, with marginalisation a possible consequence! This is potentially compounded when there is another cultural layer, namely corporate culture. If the corporate culture is ethnocentric (see September blog) then the assimilation/separation continuum can become polarised.

Consider a large organisation with its head offices based in one particular country with the country’s culture being strongly reflected in its global corporate culture. When a local employee from head office goes overseas, the starting point for the acculturation experience is likely to be separation (ie rejection of the host culture) because of the strong links back to the home culture not only individually but on a corporate level. Most of the other expatriates are likely to be from the same culture, the working environment will bear a strong resemblance to the “home” culture (language and working hours etc) and there will not only be personal visits home but working visits home.

Then consider an overseas employee who is expatriated to head office in the same organisation. The starting point for the acculturation experience is likely to be assimilation (ie rejection of the home culture). This might not be intentional on behalf of the individual but given the strong corporate culture which also reflects the host culture, there might be expectations by the hosts that the visitors fully assimilate. If not, there is a high risk that the individual could be marginalised or fall back into a “separation” acculturation experience.

Note that in both cases these are merely hypothetical starting points. The actual experience could be different and indeed possibly result in a creativity-boosting “bicultural integration”. This objective already demands a lot on behalf of the individual in terms of energy and openness, but if large corporations want to benefit from increased creativity then they also need to support the individual in their multicultural learning experience. Creativity will not be increased by simply sending head-office staffers overseas in a globally ethnocentric corporate culture. Likewise if all visitors to head office are expected to fully assimilate to the national (and corporate) culture, then again, creativity will not be increased!