Cross-Cultural Communication Failures at Dewey Ballantine LLP

Introduction: Globalization and Cross-Cultural Tension in the Workplace

The final years of the twentieth century witnessed the awakening of globalization — a practice by which territorial boundaries are lifted and the free circulation of merchandise, capital, people, and even cultural, technological, or political values is strongly encouraged. Within workplace environments, this materialized in the creation of a highly diverse workforce. The increased levels of diversity, however, brought about a series of internal problems generally tied to misunderstandings, mistakes, or lack of sensitivity in cross-cultural communication (Pope-Davis, 2003).

Analysis of the Two Incidents at Dewey Ballantine

Such a situation occurred at prestigious law firm Dewey Ballantine LLP not once, but twice, in the course of six months. On both occasions, the company made the news in ways it would not have wanted. In the first instance, the subject of the dispute was a skit performed by Dewey Ballantine employees mocking the firm's closing of its Hong Kong office. The second time, a firm-wide e-mail was sent about puppies that needed a home. The statement that made the news was the plea to not "let these puppies go to a Chinese restaurant" (Tuleja, 2005). Both incidents generated significant turmoil.

The immediate outcome of the first scenario was the cancellation of company parties, which had already outlived their usefulness. In response to the second incident, the company sent apologies for the message and argued that not only does the firm not hold such views, its position is the exact opposite, and that corrective measures would be taken. A proposed measure was sensitivity training. In the end, however, little remained to be done aside from continuing to apologize.

A better understanding of the situation requires a closer look at elements such as the biases of several parties involved, the stakes for various categories of stakeholders, potential reputational losses, and prospective solutions. From the standpoint of the organization, the main issue is characterized as an unintentional lack of sensitivity toward Chinese culture. The skit was offensive and inappropriate: it mocked the accents of Chinese people and created and reinforced stereotypes. The second incident revealed a serious misconception about Chinese cuisine as an integral part of national culture, insinuating that Chinese people routinely consume dog meat. This is not the case; while dog meat may, on rare occasions, be encountered in rural regions of China, it is not found in Chinese households or restaurants anywhere in the world (Tuleja, 2005). In short, the company's formal position is that the two incidents did not represent attacks on the Asian-American community, but were isolated misunderstandings that do not reflect the stance of Dewey Ballantine.

References

Drenth, P.J.D., Thierry, H., & De Wolf, C.J. (2001). Handbook of work and organizational psychology (Vol. 4, 2nd ed.). Psychology Press.

Furnham, A. (1994). Personality at work: The role of individual differences in the workplace. Routledge.

LaGuardia, T.S. (2004). The decommissioning handbook. ASME Press.

Miner, J.B. (2006). Organizational behavior (Vol. 2). M.E. Sharpe.

Pope-Davis, D.B. (2003). Handbook of multicultural competencies in counseling and psychology. SAGE.

Tuleja, E.A. (2005). Dewey Ballantine, LLP: Cultural stereotypes and an interoffice e-mail. In International communication for business. Thomas South-Western.

Wheeler, H.N., & Rojot, J. (1992). Workplace justice: Employment obligations in international perspective. University of Carolina Press.