Team Composition
Research shows that culturally diverse teams outperform those with members who have similar characteristics. Diversity is also good for the individual members of a team. It is difficult for a new member to integrate into a team where the members share a characteristic that the person does not. Diverse teams have numerous advantages. However, managing such teams can be difficult due to differences in language, culture, religious beliefs, traditions, working attitudes, and other factors. As Fig Technologies is expanding, it must address diversity in its Texas, Qatar, and Germany offices.
Team Composition
Fig Technologies has offices in three separate locations that have different working cultures and perspectives. Each office consists of ten members, including a contingent from the other two offices. The workers of the Texas office are all American. The team is balanced in terms of gender composition but has seven white people and three black people. The employees actively participate in the decision-making process and are encouraged to air their opinions. The working culture here is individualistic, and the employees’ main goal is usually to get ahead, which sometimes pushes them to work even eighty-hour weeks. The Qatar team is made up of eight men and only two women. Two of the members are expatriates from Egypt. Even though English is the official business language, Arabic is often spoken in the workplace. Additionally, Islam has a significant influence in the business setting. The management style follows hierarchy, and employees are required to obey orders from management without question. The working culture here is collective, and people normally work approximately 48-hour weeks. Business is often mixed with socialization activities. The Germany team has members from four European countries. The team has a strong work ethic, which increases efficiency and enables people to work forty-hour weeks. Traits such as timekeeping and directness are valued. Business is often separated from private life, and social pleasantries are not required in the working environment. The working culture is individualistic. This team is also highly hierarchal, and decision-making is left in the hands of top management.
Assessment Tool
Assessment of assimilation can be determined by interviewing the members sent to the other teams for the exchange program. This method of assessment was chosen because it measures their personal experiences. The interview consists of yes/no interrogatives and qualitative questions. Some of the interview questions are as below.
- Did you feel welcomed in the new team you joined?
- What did you like the most about working in this new team?
- What did you like the least about working in this new team?
- What was the biggest surprise you were met with when working within this new environment?
- Did you face any form of discrimination or hostility from the team?
- What workplace work aspects do you think your new team could borrow from your old team? In other words, what aspect of your original team do you think could be beneficial to your new team?
- What can your old team borrow from your new one?
- Do you feel you adapted well to your new work settings?
- Comparing the two workplaces, where do you think you performed more efficiently?
Assessment and results
The assessment showed that there were disparities between the three teams. These disparities relate to culture, work ethics, and language, among other attributes. Contingents transferred to the Texas team reported that they enjoyed the laissez-faire style of management. The Texas team had the best management style compared to the other two. The Qatar team was the friendliest due to the spirit of teamwork and the collective culture. Contingents sent to this team said they felt welcomed since business is mixed with socialization activities. They were easily able to form interpersonal relationships with members of the Qatar team. Germany was praised for its work ethic. Both Germany and Qatar scored highly in employee satisfaction because of the fewer working hours. However, each team had its own challenges. The individualistic culture of the Texas team proved a challenge to the employees from Qatar and Germany. This culture, coupled with the long working hours, made assimilation hard. In Qatar, the main challenge was language barrier. In professional settings, Arabic was sometimes spoken, leaving the English and German speakers left out. The influence of Islam in the workplace also proved challenging to the contingents. The new team members were sometimes at a loss because of the many rules related to Islamic influence in the workplace. Also, female team members were policed more strictly as compared to their male counterparts. For the Germany workplace, the new members reported that the environment was too cut-throat. Additionally, work and private life were segregated, and the new employees reported that they did not feel welcomed in their new teams. These two cultural attributes complicated the assimilation process.
Approaches for Improving Assimilation
Some of the challenges identified were common to two out of three workplaces, while others were unique to a particular workplace. The first approach that Fig Technologies should take to improve assimilation is increasing workplace diversity (Ray, 2015). Although the three teams were somewhat diverse in gender and heritage composition, they were still significantly homogeneous. For instance, the Texas team was made up entirely of Americans, and the Qatar team was predominantly male and of the Islamic religion. The teams’ homogeneity in terms of gender, religion, and nationality made assimilation hard for new members. Culturally-diverse teams generally perform better than teams where the members are too alike (Miller, 2020). It is also easier for a new employee to assimilate into a diverse workplace. Next, to encourage assimilation, the managers of the team should reconsider their management styles. New employees may find it easier to assimilate if they feel supported by their superiors (Jean-Francois& 2017). This involves allowing and even encouraging employees to participate in making decisions. It shows them that their input is valid. It is easier to assimilate into such a team as compared to one that is managed through authoritarianism. Finally, assimilation can be increased through sensitivity training on cultural diversity. Some of the contingents reported that they experienced hostility. Sensitivity training will teach the teams how to relate with people different than them. In turn, new members would find it easier to integrate into workspaces.
Conclusion
The three Fig Technologies workplaces in the three locations were different from each other. These differences resulted in employees from one place finding it difficult to assimilate into another. This can be mitigated by making the workplaces more diverse. It can also be done by introducing effective management styles and teaching employees on the importance of diversity. It is also important to have diverse teams, but it is equally important to know how to manage this diversity.