From Mono to Multiculturalism

Some cultures might be described as “multicultural” since they appear to be heterogeneous, “open” and adaptive: essentially they are an “umbrella” for many diverse sub-cultures. Other cultures might be described as “monocultural” since they appear to be homogenous, “closed” and unchanging: essentially they are a unique and exclusive group. Given that mono-cultures don’t appear to change, is it actually possible for a mono-culture to evolve into a multi-culture? This question is potentially very pertinent for organisations which appear to be monocultural but wish to be more multicultural (and “diverse”) in order to adapt to a multinational business environment.

Researching the answer took me to an article by Hofsted and McCrae: “Personality and Culture Revisited: Linking Traits and Dimensions of Culture”, Cross-Cultural Research, Vol 38 (1) Feb 2004. The article is about the possible correlations between personalities and cultures and the finding was that “mean personality scores from 33 countries were significantly and substantially correlated with culture dimension scores”. What is interesting in respect of the "from mono to multi-culture" question is the interpretation of the results proposed by McCrae, in particular as to how cultures evolve.

Here is a summary followed by a consideration of further implications (“et alors”).

Cultural Evolution

In attempting to explain the correlation between mean personality traits and cultural dimensions, McCrae suggests two evolutionary theories:

Selective Migration

Individuals move in or out of a social group to “find a niche appropriate for their personality traits”. For example in cultures with high power distance, there are only a few leaders and there have to be a lot of submissive followers. This might suit introverts more than extraverts, hence over time power distance might become correlated with low levels of extrovertism.

Reverse Causation

The suggestion is that “culture may be shaped by the aggregate personality traits of its members and that value systems and their associated institutions can be seen as social adaptations to the psychological environment that a distribution of personality traits represents.” In other words, in terms of evolution, it is the aggregate personality traits of a population that form cultures.

Et alors?

These two theories tend to support the concept of mono-cultures and leave little space for multi-cultures. By the definition of the evolution (in both cases) a homogenous group evolves either by the voluntary self-exclusion of outsiders or by the institutionalisation of aggregate personality traits. In this context, it would seem that a multicultural organisation could only be seen as a loose confederation of various mono-cultures. For organisations looking to become more multicultural, this could have profound implications. First is that whatever the organisation might look like in terms of diverse and different cultures, there will in fact be a “core” culture defined by the aggregate personality traits of those who have the power (which will define and maintain a mono-culture). With particular reference to the first theory, this might go some way to explaining the paradox of why many large multinational organisations have a heterogeneous talent base but a very homogenous “top” talent pool.

The second perspective is that if the aggregate personalities of an organisation tend to be of a particular national origin, then the ensuing organisational culture will reflect that national culture. Further, it can be argued that some national cultures are more “open” to change and diversity by virtue of their low power distance and weak uncertainty avoidance. America exhibits such cultural dimensions and the macro culture is essentially an umbrella of many different sub-cultures; so too are many of its organisations multicultural. On the other hand, continental European countries which exhibit high power distance and strong uncertainty avoidance will be “closed” to change and diversity. Despite visible attempts of an organisation to become multicultural, the personalities constituting the core of many continental European organisations might innately want to define and maintain a mono-culture. In this example, changing from mono to mulitculturalism will only occur if the aggregate personality of the “core” changes to reflect traits which correlate with lower power distance and weaker uncertainty avoidance.