Understanding risk perception in multicultural workplaces
Article is based on Moona Kiistala’s thesis for If 2024
In today’s diverse and globalised work environment, understanding risk perception is crucial for maintaining safety, especially in multicultural and multilingual organisations (Porru & Baldo, 2022). Nowadays, employees have and will have diverse cultural backgrounds and may not necessarily share a common language (Mattila et al., 2024).
In Europe, the workforce is culturally more diverse than ever before (European Commission, 2021). Foreign-born workers face greater exposure to occupational risks compared to native workers, and these risks are often more serious (Flynn, 2014; Giraudo et al., 2019; Porru & Baldo, 2022; Salminen, 2012). Communication challenges are estimated to be the primary root cause (Guldenmund et al., 2013; Lindhout et al., 2012) but cultural differences, language barriers, and management approaches are also significant contributing factors (Flynn, 2014; Giraudo et al., 2019).
Several cultural factors that affect workers’ varying perceptions of safety, include conceptions of safety, safety responsibility among managers and subordinates, appropriate interaction between superiors, subordinates, and equals, discrepancies between communicated and actual ways of working, employees’ perceptions of work- related dangers compared to other daily risks, and adaptation to workplace risks (Flynn et al., 2018).
To address these observations, I conducted a comprehensive study involving interviews with 11 companies across various industries, two labour unions, and a Finnish Authority. These extensive interviews with companies and experts provided a good picture of the current situation. The study aimed to answer three key questions: what factors cause challenges in multicultural and multilingual organisations, what specific challenges do employees and employers face, and what best practices and solutions are being used or should be adopted by companies to communicate clearly and efficiently.
The impact of varying safety standards
Different cultures and previous work experiences shape employees’ understanding of safety. Varying safety standards can stem from different cultures but also from working in other companies, particularly contractors, often encounter varied safety cultures and standards. This can lead to differing tolerances for risk and diverse interpretations of what constitutes safe practices. For instance, a safety procedure considered routine in one company might be seen as excessive or insufficient in another, causing confusion and inconsistency. In addition, foreign employees might be more willing to accept lower standards of safety due to fear of discrimination, or a desire to fit in.
Hierarchical perceptions and communication gaps
Perceptions of hierarchy within a workplace significantly affect safety communication. Employees’ views on their relationships with coworkers and managers influence how they communicate concerns and report incidents.
In some cultures, hierarchical structures might discourage open dialogue, while in others, a more egalitarian approach could facilitate better communication. Effective safety communication hinges on bridging these hierarchical gaps to ensure that every employee feels comfortable voicing safety concerns.
Cultural and linguistic diversity
Companies often struggle with effectively addressing cultural and linguistic diversity in their safety communication practices. This challenge arises from the absence of clear guidelines on how to appropriately navigate cultural and linguistic differences without resorting to stereotypes or incorrect assumptions.
Companies might find it difficult to balance tailored communication with avoiding the appearance of discrimination or inequality. Additionally, many companies lack awareness of these challenges, leading to an oversight of the critical role that effective communication plays in maintaining workplace safety.
Proactive vs. reactive approaches to safety
Balancing proactive and reactive safety measures is a challenge for many multicultural organisations. Proactive measures involve anticipating potential risks and implementing strategies to mitigate them before incidents occur. In contrast, reactive measures address issues after they arise. Both approaches are essential, but without recognising and addressing cultural and linguistic factors, companies may find it difficult to implement these strategies effectively.
Practical solutions and cultural awareness
Addressing these challenges requires both practical and cultural solutions. Practical solutions involve implementing concrete best practices, such as increasing visuality in forms of pictures and videos, utilising plain language, and translating material to multiple languages. For instance, safety manuals and training sessions could be available in multiple languages and designed to accommodate different cultural norms. Furthermore, management should undergo education on utilising plain language and understanding the nuances of diversity, multiculturalism, and multilingualism, ensuring these factors are duly considered in workplace practices.
Organisational culture solutions focus on fostering an inclusive environment that values diversity. This includes recognising the unique challenges faced by a diverse workforce, acknowledging cultural differences, and providing tailored safety training that considers cultural and linguistic differences. Companies should actively involve their multicultural employees in the planning of safety materials and orientation sessions to ensure that the messages are tailored to their intended audience.
Enhancing safety through cultural sensitivity
Recognising and addressing cultural differences and language barriers is essential for effective workplace safety. Employees from different cultural backgrounds may not be familiar with certain behavioural norms, safety standards or hierarchical structures that are obvious to the dominant population. By acknowledging these differences, companies can better understand their impact on safety and communication, ensuring that all employees are adequately supported.
Some considerations
Creating a safe work environment in multicultural and multilingual organisations requires more than just implementing standard safety protocols. It involves understanding the diverse perceptions of risk and addressing cultural and linguistic barriers that can hinder effective communication. By fostering an inclusive culture and providing tailored resources, companies can enhance safety and ensure that every employee, regardless of their background, can work efficiently and safely.
References
European Commission. (2021). Industry 5.0 : human-centric, sustainable and resilient. Publications Office.
Flynn, M. (2014). Safety and health for immigrant workers. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Flynn, M., Castellanos, E., & Flores-Andrade, A. (2018). Safety Across Cultures: Understanding the Challenges. Professional Safety, 63(01).
Giraudo, M., Bena, A., Mosca, M., Farina, E., Leombruni, R., & Costa, G. (2019). Differences in work injury risk between immigrants and natives: Changes since the economic recession in Italy. BMC Public Health, 19(1). https://doi. org/10.1186/s12889-019-7178-2
Guldenmund, F., Cleal, B., & Mearns, K. (2013). An exploratory study of migrant workers and safety in three European countries. Safety Science, 52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2012.05.004
Lindhout, P., Swuste, P., Teunissen, T., & Ale, B. (2012). Safety in multilingual work settings: Reviewing a neglected subject in European Union policymaking. European Journal of Language Policy, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.3828/ejlp.2012.10
Mattila, S., Lindholm, M., & Kivistö-Rahnasto, J. (2024). Työturvallisuuden megatrendit. www.tvk.fi
Porru, S., & Baldo, M. (2022). Occupational Health and Safety and Migrant Workers: Has Something Changed in the Last Few Years? In International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (Vol. 19, Issue 15). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159535
Salminen, S. (2012). Are Immigrants at Increased Risk of Occupational Injury? A Literature Review. The Ergonomics Open Journal, 4(1), 125–130. https://doi.org/10.2174/1875934301104010125