When Local Meets Global: How Introducing English Destabilizes Translanguaging Practices in a Cross-Border Organization

Abstract

T he diversification of direct investment flows and its rebalance in favor of emerging markets increase the heterogeneity of local environments for multinationals (Jaussaud and Mayrhofer, 2014). This situation raises the question of global players accounting for local specificities and calls for a new understanding of the relationships between global and local dynamics (Mayrhofer and Very, 2013). With this perspective, one should view multinational companies (MNCs) as sites where global and local dynamics co-construct reality instead of approaching globalization and localization forces as separate entities. Languages practices lie at the heart of these "glocalization" dynamics. We know that although the MNC globalization process often entails introducing English as a common corporate language (Luo and Shenkar, 2006; Harzing, Köster and Magner, 2011), MNCs remain multilingual establishments by nature and employees widely speak local languages in several

Implementing the equality, diversity, and inclusion agenda in multinational companies: A framework for the management of (linguistic) diversity

“…Here, proficiency does not equate with 'perfect grammar, an authentic accent, or extensive vocabulary' (Nurmi & Koroma, 2020, p. 8). In MNCs, pluri-lingual competence often manifests itself in practices such as code-switching, that is, 'shifting between languages during interaction' (Ahmad & Barner-Rasmussen, 2019, p. 2); 'translanguaging' (García & Wei, 2014;Langinier & Ehrhart, 2020), that is, using a mixture of languages (Janssens & Steyaert, 2014), and hybrid language use, such as parallel use of various national languages or company/professional jargon (Gaibrois, 2018).…”

“…Here, proficiency does not equate with ‘perfect grammar, an authentic accent, or extensive vocabulary’ (Nurmi & Koroma, 2020, p. 8). In MNCs, pluri‐lingual competence often manifests itself in practices such as code‐switching, that is, ‘shifting between languages during interaction’ (Ahmad & Barner‐Rasmussen, 2019, p. 2); ‘translanguaging’ (García & Wei, 2014; Langinier & Ehrhart, 2020), that is, using a mixture of languages (Janssens & Steyaert, 2014), and hybrid language use, such as parallel use of various national languages or company/professional jargon (Gaibrois, 2018). In some contexts, such as multinational teams of IT engineers, shared pluri‐lingual competence and familiarity with technical and organisational jargon, can lead to the creation of ‘new languages’ by the given work group, thus helping staff feel more at ease in interactions and increasing their participation and voice (Gaibrois, 2019, p. 99).…”

“…Reciprocity can further be enacted through other linguistically inclusive practices, such as collective negotiations of a common language, parallel language use, and making linguistic limitations explicit (Rogerson‐Revell, 2010). Finally, multilingual resources can also play an important role in accommodation (Jenkins, 2022) which can be accomplished through translanguaging (Gaibrois, 2018; García & Wei, 2014; Langinier & Ehrhart, 2020) and code‐switching (Ahmad & Barner‐Rasmussen, 2019). While not all staff can engage in reciprocity by drawing on multilingual resources, they can be trained in the other accommodation strategies discussed in this article.…”

French and language ideologies in a multilingual European Union institution: Re-constructing the meaning of language choice at work

“…Moreover, research on individual exchanges in multilingual settings (Kramsch and Whiteside, 2008) has revealed how language choice emerges from the subjective perception of shifting power dynamics within interactions across different space and time scales. This has enriched scholarly understanding of how power relations influence these practices (Vaara et al, 2005), the impact of a subsidiary context on language practices (Harzing and Pudelko, 2013), or the joint influence of the geographical location and the corporate environment (Langinier and Ehrhart, 2020). Studies from multinational and cross-border companies have also demonstrated that employees can successfully challenge official language regimes they perceive as unfair or unfavourable (Nekula and Marx, 2014; Trépos et al, 2016).…”

“…While the concern with standardised or ‘native’ language can be observed in various cultural contexts (Gunnarsson, 2014; Wilmot et al, 2023), it is not universal. This is particularly evident in multilingual work environments (Detzen and Loehlein, 2018; Langinier and Ehrhart, 2020) and teams employing English as a shared lingua franca (Nurmi and Koroma, 2020). Previous research within the unit under investigation highlighted that non-standard language use in internal communication was perceived as an integral aspect of life in the multilingual environment (Lovrits, 2022).…”