Betwixt or beyond the lines of conflict? Biculturalism as situated identity in multinational corporations

Abstract

PurposeBiculturals are portrayed as “ideal” boundary spanners and conflict mediators in MNC who switch between or transcend multiple cultural and/or organizational. The paper aims to critically analyze the assumptions behind this positive view on dual identity in MNC and provide an alternative conceptualization re‐positioning dual identity as a situated and potentially contested process.Design/methodology/approachThe paper theoretically juxtaposes existing concepts of dual identity in the international business literature with recent advances in research on identity in organization studies and psychology as well as critical perspectives on identity.FindingsA situated approach to biculturalism provides for a greater variety of identity management strategies corresponding to the metaphors of “surfer”, “soldier”, “struggler”, and “strategist” alike, depending on the identity repertoire available, the perceived situation at hand and the interactive processes of identity construction unfolding. From this perspective, the conflict potential associated with dual identity in MNC does not automatically dissolve as suggested by the literature so far, but depending on the situated enactment of dual identity might actually increase, intensify or even re‐direct the lines of conflict.Research implications and limitationsThe paper develops a comprehensive concept of situated bicultural identity processes in organizational contexts, which can serve as a guiding framework of further empirical research on biculturalism in MNC and also provides initial discussions about suitable hypotheses development in this area.Originality/valueThe international business literature so far is dominated by a limited understanding of biculturalism in MNC, strongly influenced by the concept of frame switching in cross‐cultural psychology. The paper introduces an alternative concept of biculturalism as a situated process, which can serve as a framework for further and more varied research on biculturalist identity negotiation in MNC.

Boundary Spanning and Engineering: A Qualitative Systematic Review

“…Of these, national and cultural boundaries are particularly prominent in the literature, as reflected in Abbott et al's () focus on cross‐cultural boundary spanning practices in Chinese software firms and Di Marco et al's () experimental study of cultural boundary spanner roles in engineering project teams. Other representative examples include Au and Fukuda's () study of boundary spanning behaviors among expatriate employees in multinational corporations (MNCs), Reiche's () research on inpatriates, and multiple papers on boundary spanning among bicultural (Blazejewski, ) or cross‐cultural (Yagi & Kleinberg, ) individuals. Discussions of individual identity are often prominent in these and other papers.…”

Multiculturalism within individuals: A review, critique, and agenda for future research

“…Just as research in anthropology and sociology commonly highlight how social network patterns and power dynamics interact with individual agency to shape an individual's multiculturalism (Cederberg, 2014;Netto, 2008;Windzio, 2015), IB research has started to shed light on this with respect to organizational contexts (Blazejewski, 2012;Caprar, 2011;Yagi & Kleinberg, 2011). We see unexplored value in examining cross-level contextual influences on multiculturalism within IB research, so we return to the themes of social networks and power dynamics in our future research agenda at the end of this paper.…”

“…Although IB research on individual-level multiculturalism often examines individual-or team-level outcomes of multicultural skills (e.g. cultural bridging, Hong, 2010), only recently has IB scholarship has begun to take a more agentic view of how employees can strategically enact their multiculturalism (Blazejewski, 2012;Yagi & Kleinberg, 2011). IB scholarship can add further value to research on multiculturalism by extending this agentic perspective to cross-level research questions.…”

Low-intensity conflict in multinational corporations

“…Conflict develops when the implementation of one individual or group's selected alternative impedes on or is hindered in its realization by other individuals or groups' interests (Greer, Caruso and Jehn, 2011;Blazejewski, 2012). Moreover, a conflict exists if two parties' interests and scopes of action collide, and if this collision is perceived by at least one of the actors involved (Jehn, Rispens and Thatcher, 2010).…”