This paper will focus on my intercultural competence change process. Intercultural competence refers to the ability to interact with people from diverse backgrounds in an appropriate and effective manner (Spitzberg & Chagnon, 2009, p.7). The change mirrors an individual development process, which Holton and Holton (2001) describe as new patterns of action, belief, and attitudes (p.286). The increasing workplace diversity informs this change process, since I have to hone skills to appropriately and effectively interact with diverse people. Swanson and Holton (2001) hold that meaningful change must harbor a purpose (p.286). Change should challenge the status quo – a drift from existing conditions, beliefs, or attitudes.
Kurt Lewin’s (1951) classic metatheory – Field Theory – best applies to my change experience. Lewin holds that all behaviors arise from a change of some state in one’s living space and occurs through three steps –unfreezing, changing and refreezing (Swanson & Holton, 2001, p.292). During unfreezing, my goal was to perceive the need for change and understand how lack of intercultural awareness impede effective interaction in the workplace. Better knowledge of the value and urgency of intercultural competence enhanced the motivation to embrace and pursue the change. After unfreezing, I began changing - to learn new behaviors and ways of interacting with diverse people in an appropriate and effective fashion. Proper preparation fostered the change process because humans can voluntarily and willfully perform actions, besides being functionally regulated to do so (Alvin, 2008, p.25). In refreezing, I strived to reinforce, stabilize and solidify intercultural awareness in a new norm.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The strengths of Lewin’s three-step process lie its simplicity, practicability, and power. Lewin provides a very simple, practical and powerful model for understanding the change process. The model helps comprehend the forces (both driving and restraining) and steps for learning and solidifying new desirable behavior. The limitation of this model is the depiction of change as a short-lived process that ends when the new behavior is frozen (Swanson & Holton, 2001, p.293). On the contrary, change is continuous. Due to the dynamic workplace, I have to be more culturally competent to remain effective at work (Spitzberg & Chagnon, 2009, p.7).
Furthermore, Eric Trist’s Sociotechnical System Theory also provides greater insights into my change experience. This theory asserts that work comprises a technical and social system that are interdependent and must be simultaneously optimized (Swanson & Holton, 2001, p.294). The social system resonates most with my change experience as it relates employees to not only the technical system but to itself as well. Changing the social system - developing intercultural competence – helps appropriately and effectively interact with the social system or colleagues.
Moreover, I can draw on the Dialectic Theory to Lewin’s (1951) theoretical framework. In light of Dialectic Theory, organizational change occurs through workplace confrontation and conflict that results (Seo & Creed, 2002, p.223). The increasing workplace diversity arises from dialectic tensions - confrontation among different cultures and conflict that results. Therefore, I have to acquire multicultural skills to overcome the tensions.
In line with Lewin’s (1951) theoretical insight, the individuals (coworkers, family, and friends) and the social world provide the various levels I should consider when analyzing the need for the change and the change process itself. These groups entail the driving forces and restraining forces that push me towards the desired behavior and astray from the behavior, respectively. For instance, colleagues provide a proper context for learning how to reinforce, stabilize and solidify the new behavior (intercultural awareness). However, some peers who espouse conflict perception and attitude toward workplace diversity are a potential drawback to my change process.
References
Allvin, M. (2008). New rules of work: exploring the boundaryless job. The individual in the changing working life, 19-45.
Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science.
Seo, M. G., & Creed, W. D. (2002). Institutional contradictions, praxis, and institutional change: A dialectical perspective. Academy of management review, 27(2), 222-247.
Spitzberg, B. H., & Changnon, G. (2009). Conceptualizing intercultural competence. The SAGE handbook of intercultural competence, 2-52.
Swanson, R. A., & Holton, E. F. (2001). Foundations of human resource development. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Trist, E. (1981). The evolution of socio-technical systems. Occasional paper, 2, 1981.
