cross cultural poster
CCM- Group 40
TITLE 1.Corporate ‘normality’? Organisations have no clue what it is, around a skilled migrant. Shame. or 2.Corporate ‘normality’? Are organisations just using it to gatekeeper ‘skilled migrants’ for no valid reason? Inequality in the corporate world and how do they justify. or 3. Corporate ‘normality’ sums down to skilled migrants as a ‘risk factor’? Why and what are their reasons?
DESCRIPTION The whole study revolves around the injustice that is played around the skilled
workers especially in an IT professional environment in general for example, Sweden.
There are different points shared on why is this happening and why do professional big organisations tend to do this despite of the migrants having good skills, language etc.
Organisations in this case tend to be selfish to accept people outside their geographical area rather than accepting the skills and knowledge in the field.
Some of the reasons that are specified in the article with regards to why no migrants are like lack of fitting in, local language as a barrier, lack of workplace behaviour, potential problem to current employees, doubts on good performance.
Through some of the real-time answers it is evident that, the statements like ‘I would think of recruiting someone just like me’ and ‘would this person fit in the group’ does not fall under the organisational equality or normality.
When we speak about Sweden, about 70-80% of the jobs are diverted towards friends and contacts.
Though there are few cases of some companies taking the chance with the migrants, there is no position that offers the role that considers their experience in the field until you have worked in Sweden.
The organisations logic and reasons behind shutting migrants away are like, most of the companies consider hiring skilled workers to be a potential harm to the organisation and their lack of ability to fit in the local Swedish environment and culture.
‘Risk relationship’, where the risk factor in this case migrants and object at risk which is organisations are to be evaluated and the highest risk would be eliminated.
Here, the HR practices on why and why not recruiting migrants is discussed and it cuts down to again them not fitting into the local standards and thus considered as ‘risk objects’.
Cultural, ethnic differences are a point of consideration while recruiting migrants, which falls under inequality and not normality.
EVALUATION: I think we completely agree with the whole argument in the text. As
migrants/foreigners ourselves, most of the points in the arguments are something most of us face on a day to day work environments.
As a multi-cultural group, working together, through our experiences, under employment for highly skilled workers is a potential threat to aspiring migrants who travel oceans to create a career and develop their skills.
We think that cultural differences, ethnicity, local behavioural skills, fitting in to a particular group does not fall under acceptance, diversity and normality of any organisation.
As it is mentioned that though the migrants have relevant experience, the companies would only recruit them under a position of a trainee and make them build their career from scratch again is the sad reality in our day to day experiences.
‘Risk factors’, we as migrants with or without experience, have gained good knowledge through our educational qualifications to fit into the professional work environment fully.
In the interviews, the employment of highly skilled migrants are put in such a position to create a relationship between the object at risk in this case organisational normality and the potential risk object, migrant.
If highly skilled migrants are seen as a threat, for a valid reason then it is fair to not employ them to avoid threat to the organisation.
One of the unfair positions offered to the migrants by the organisations just to boost their marketing strategy of diversity is to place the migrants in internship positions or to promote them at a lower level than they enjoyed in their home country despite of their skills and valid experience.
So, yes, we as a group stand by the argument that is against the skilled migrants in most cases, who are considered as potential risks to the companies.
It is high time and a necessity to take steps towards implementing actual risk factors that avoid the growth of company and work more on employing skills workers regardless of their culture and regional background.
CONCLUSION Through the discussion in the article it is seen that, the justification that the
organisations provide for underemployment of migrants is to limit any potential risks to the organisations.
In most of the answers provided by the HR and other colleagues in the article for why no migrants, even with good skills, it is evident that the concept of fitting in to the local environment and standards are considered very important than the skills by itself.
Corporate normality, are organisations just misusing it? Is an an other question that arises through the data provided. Cultural differences, ethnicity, language are some of the points that does not
fall into the process of recruitment when considering for an open work position.
In Sweden, migrants are seen as occupying a low(er) ethnic groups and thus Lowe social status if coming from outside Europe. They also have a lower employment rate and very low matching grade between their education or skills and jobs which is directly connected to underemployment.
It is sad to witness that, the educational value, higher degrees and work experience does not weight any value in a professional work environment because of these factors that do not fall under normality.
The theory of risk is taken as a novel explanation for why organisations refrain from employing migrants.
Power positions in the organisations should take the responsibility to shape the actual normality rules, risk factors and take steps towards shaping the employability opportunities of migrants.
The sad reality, Normality is valued more highly than the diversity that skilled migrants can bring to the organisation indicates the level of inequality present in the society we live in.
Some of the studies have proven that in most cases, migrants fall under the ‘lower local human capital’ where they lack in local work environmental behavioural skills.
So, it is the sad reality of the corporate world towards migrants. All the above mentioned points have a huge impact on the professional lives of foreigners with good skills and these can be addressed only by the government and the heads of the organisations.