As a showcase of Swedish culture, the Gotheborg III is a symbol of Swedish world trade. Picture from daylife.com by AFP Getty Images that captured the Gotheborg III cruising the Suez Canal, 100 kms north of Cairo upon its return trip from China in 2007.
The word culture being a rather broad term is often difficult to define. Around the 1950s, Alfred Kroeber and Clyde Kluckhohn compiled a list of 164 definitions (and there are probably more definitions of culture today) that most commonly refer to the fine arts and humanities; an intricate pattern of human knowledge, belief, and behavior or a set of shared attitudes, values, goals, and practices that characterizes an institution, organization or group. Geert Hofstede defines culture as a certain collective programming of the mind.
As a critical discourse analyst, it is second nature for me to ponder the meanings that underlie any syntagmatic choice of words. Flipping through the daily newspapers in Sweden, it seems that the Swedish mass media, right up to and including the Swedish Ministry of Culture or the Regeringskansliets Kulturdepartementet (and what I would label as ‘public institutions’) are more often concerned with using the word kultur or culture in relation to the arts, referring to music, dance, theatre and museum installations. On the Swedish language website, culture has been defined as:
Kultur är inte bara museer, bildkonst, litteratur och film utan även arkitektur, teater, dans och Kulturråd i utlandet.
~ Kulturdepartementet
The use of the words “inte bara” roughly equivalent to “not only” in the English language, deceives readers into believing that more than one point of view on the definition of culture has been taken into account; but where in their definition of culture are these other aspects of race, religion, language, beliefs and traditions?
As an example of where the priorities for culture lie in the Swedish government, the Kulturdepartemente is also responsible for the sports pages in the print media (ref. Kulturdepartemente).
Moving on to another of Sweden’s prominent public institutions, the Swedish Ministry of Integration and Gender Equality’s website, also shows that the word culture is hardly defined or touched upon. In fact, reading the integration policies on that page, you’ll find that the use of the word ‘integration’ is a politically correct substitute word for assimilation efforts for foreign immigrants in Sweden, as if “fitting in” was the only problem immigrants or foreigners faced here.
As a point to prove that Sweden’s approach to foreign immigrants to the country is assimilation rather than integration, Swedish language courses are essential for any immigrant who wishes to get a job in Sweden. High-level literature such as that of Strindberg, which I found utterly depressing, were offered on literature reading lists when I got here. I also needed to learn how to call the police to make a police report, and how to report to the Sjukkassan that you will be home for the day. Practical things but all rather bland and unfriendly ways of introducing one to the Swedish society I thought, in their efforts to ‘seamlessly integrate’ me into the Swedish society. I would rather suggest that their Swedish language courses textbook spoke of the Swedish culture, traditions and festivities, like the importance of midsummer, why so much sill on the menu? And how Swedes celebrate and layout a julbord at Christmas and what about Easter and pingstdagen and yes, even tell some about the tradition of Swedish high school graduation, which looks like absolute fun on the streets as a way of getting me as a foreigner, interested in becoming a part of what is Swedish.
It’s Swedish to be egalitarian and to consider all ‘equal’
Sweden, being a country that ranks amongst others as most concerned with equality between the sexes and persons, it perhaps isn’t too far fetched to conclude that the non-acknowledgement of culture in terms of how people can and are different from each other is very Swedish and part of the dominant Swedish ideology.
Problems Sweden faces as a result of the margininalization of cultural differences in public discourse
This consistent and perhaps conscious slant to the use of the word culture at most institutional levels of the society (save the academic institutions) to refer to the fine arts scene in the Swedish mass media and governmental discourse could well be insignificant, but the consequences are evident within the social fabric of the Swedish society and the nation is already facing some difficulties.
Svenska Dagsbladet (SvD), a prominent and well respected Swedish broadsheet published an article on the 25th January entitled Vem vill ta över that addresses Sweden’s future leadership. Bengt Lejsved, a Swedish headhunter who has been in the field for twenty years was worried about the lack of interest among the younger generations to take over the future top management positions in Sweden. He foresees that Sweden as a nation will need to look abroad, to Africa and the Middle East for example, for their future leaders of Swedish corporations. This perhaps isn’t too feasible, since he foresees a cultural problem “since Sweden is not exactly world champions on integration” (SvD Näringsliv Sunday 25th January:16). I think I could agree with him on that comment.
In an effort to consolidate tips on the future leadership of Sweden, and with a lack of public discussion on what is Swedish culture and its resulting management / leadership style, Agneta Lagercrantz who wrote the article in SvD, gathered pointers from the North American Harvard Business School’s solutions (reflected in the print edition of the article). But even a brief overview of the Inglehart-Welzel Cultural Map of the World below would show Sweden to be in a niche spot of its own, being hardly close to the US-model of values.
The Inglehart-Welzel Cultural Map of the World.
What is noticeable from the diagram above is that Sweden stands slightly further apart from its Nordic neighbours even within the realms of Scandinavia and other north European countries, so that it seems to be somewhat in a league of their own. So how useful will North American tips on future leadership be for Sweden? Would it not be more useful to begin from ‘within’ and seek answers to Swedish leadership problems beginning with a look at what is Swedish management culture and defining what makes Swedes distinct from their closest neighbours?
In the same print edition of the article by Agneta Lagercrantz, she reports that the general consensus of a conference arranged by the Svenska Globaliseringsrådet is that “that there is no typical Swedish leadership you can lean against for support” in the globalization era. This ‘finding’ seems a direct contradiction to what the academic world is discovering. Of course the point of departure is the definition used by the Svenska Globaliseringsrådet on what types of globalized organizations they are referring to – are they Swedish managed organizations that have gone global or foreign organizations who have acquired Swedish organizations gone global?
The definition of what type of global organizations they are addressing is crucial since for anyone (including myself) who has specialized in the study of the Swedish management style both in Sweden and abroad, it’s quite clear that there exists a distinct and identifiable Swedish style of management that can be trusted to function both at home and abroad. Some Swedish organizations with foreign subsidiaries have even made it a point to have their managers there as ‘culture carriers’ to the foreign subsidiary so that the goals of the organization are not lost in its effort to go global.
Other problems with the avoidance to use the word culture in reference to tradition, beliefs, language, race and religion that borders on laborious is when in the press, journalists are repeatedly qualifying themselves when they write about sensitive cultural issues. Journalists cannot hint that they dislike the events unfolding in the state of Israel without first saying that what they’re writing is not necessarily anti-Semitic and writing about Islamic extremism is like treading on a minefield of syntagmatic choice of words that threaten to be misunderstood by defenders of equality in Sweden. Within organizations, even the Volvo PV executives are feebly trying to explain that things have become “different” in the working environment, since Ford’s acquisition of Volvo. In all of this, the concept of culture in its wider meaning of belief systems, traditions, ideology etc., would have come in handy, but the discussions stop short when the readers start thinking of song, dance and theatre instead of values, beliefs, hierarchy and language.
Most definitely a World Culture Museum would have been a gift from heaven (and one does exist in Gothenburg), provided the word culture was addressed in terms beyond the cultural arts. But even in this context we find the word culture hijacked and marginalized in meaning where the museum is dedicated to showcasing mostly fine arts. Imagine an exhibition of burqas set up and explained by someone who actually chooses to wear one? I know of a Saudi Arabian woman who has a doctorate degree from Harvard, is a successful businesswoman and chooses to wear her Niqab and gloves everyday to work. Her extensive knowledge of Middle Eastern cultures shows in her choice of dress, when she chooses a different burqa to work, depending on which country and cultural background the male counterpart she’s meeting that day comes from. When in Iran, she wears the Iranian Chador and Ruband, in Iraq, she wears a Madina Niqab and gloves, in Pakistan, it is a Burqa and when in China, she keeps to her traditional outfit by wearing a Xinjiang veil. Just her sense of appropriate attire for each and every business meeting revealed to me, her cultural sensitivity and understanding of gender roles in the Middle East. Speaking to her, I understood that the understanding of culture in terms of fundamental beliefs and traditions is crucial in regional and global trade.
But as we’ve noticed from the Svenska Globaliseringsrådet, talking about culture as a crucial aspect of global trade for Sweden becomes difficult when the government institutions insist that the way to success for Sweden is to water down Swedishness and go for a more ‘global identity’, especially in management.
The place of culture in a globalized Sweden…What can be done?
Looking at salary levels and benefits packages in becoming an international executive abroad - an expatriate remains one of the most attractive career choices among those who choose to work within private organisations in Sweden. Thus, as a preferred career choice, this also comes with an interest for education and training towards anything that can help in becoming a successful expatriate. The general belief among those sent out and among those who train and educate them has by and large been that assimilating and fitting into the new society is what to aim for.
A look at the various immigration offices in the world also indicate that assimilation (often in the guise of the use of the more politically correct word integration) into the society to where one moves is also the overall target. But contrary to the axiomatic, even hegemonic belief of assimilation disguised as integration is the best way to go, the research results not only from my own research but from many other published works show that ‘fitting in’ in the new country is perhaps not at all the best for the corporations and the expatriate.
From the corporate point of view, the point of sending anyone from the home office abroad is mostly because they want the home offices values and policies to be transferred and applied to the foreign organisation. Any significant integration is thus counterproductive.
From the personal point of view any adaptation to foreign ways of work and life makes the return even more difficult.
With the Swedish government pushing for Sweden’s globalization on several fronts, the lack of proper address in the use of the word culture so much so that it cannot be used in its broader meaning without quite substantial explanations in the long run, is one that is myopic and possibly dangerous since it means that a whole gamut of socio-cultural problems that exist in the Swedish society will continue to be silenced from discussions. For how are we to discuss these problems systematically and efficiently when there isn’t even a categorical name for them? Such is the two-edged sword of language in a constant dialogic process between events, happenings and users of the language.
Cultural change is a slow and sometimes difficult process, but perhaps in this age of globalization, it’s about time that Swedes themselves have a paradigm shift in ideology. The concerns of being egalitarian on several fronts could remain, but within that framework, it should also be acknowledged that all people are not alike and to say so doesn’t mean it is sexist, racist, discriminatory or prejudiced. And to acknowledge that Swedes do possess certain values of their own and that these will be brought with them in terms of organization management and leadership.
At a societal level, acknowledging that people are different from each other and that different cultures in Sweden do exist (a result of its rather liberal immigrant policies), would also mean an acknowledgement of Swedish values and culture not just at home but abroad. It would also acknolwedge that organizations do in fact send Swedes to foreign subsidiaries as ‘culture carriers’. What is needed in public discourse is the distinction that globalizing Sweden does not necessarily mean being non-Swedish, losing egalitarianism or that everyone needs to be ‘the same’, but rather embracing differences, being aware of them and learning to work within such a framework.
Recent Comments