English is the global language for business, whether you are ready or not. Multinational companies such as Airbus, Daimler-Chrysler and Fast Retailing are making English the corporate language. This is to make it easier to communicate and perform across diverse business functions.
It's not just a good idea to adopt a common style of speech; it's essential for any American company that has operations abroad or for any French company that focuses on domestic customers. Imagine a group of Paris-based salespeople meeting for a meeting.
What would it matter if they could all speak English?
Consider that the same group is on a sales call to another company based in Paris. They don't realize that the potential customer will be inviting employees from other countries. This was what happened to me at one company. The two French companies were seated together in Paris and couldn't agree on a deal. This was a wake-up call that led to the adoption of an English corporate language strategy by the company.
Hiroshi Mikitani, CEO of Rakuten (Japan's largest internet marketplace), was faced with similar concerns. In March 2010, he ordered that English be the official language of business. Mikitani felt that the company had the potential to be the most successful internet service company in the world and that the new policy, which would impact approximately 7,100 Japanese employees, was essential to that goal, particularly as the company's expansion plans were centered outside Japan. His country, which is a conservative island nation, felt he had to contribute to a wider worldview.
Multibillion-dollar company, which is a mix of Amazon.com.com and eBay, was on a growth spree. It had purchased PriceMinister.com France, Buy.com, FreeCause in America, Play.com in the UK and Tradoria Germany. Kobo eBooks in Canada and joint ventures with companies in China, Indonesia and Taiwan. Mikitani, who was serious about the language shift, announced it to employees in English. Overnight, both the Japanese language cafeteria menus and elevator directories were replaced. He stated that employees must demonstrate proficiency in an international English scoring system within 2 years or risk being demoted or dismissed.
Corporate Japan was both fascinated and disgusted by the news, and it was picked up by the media immediately. Takanobu Ito (Honorable CEO of Honda) stated publicly that "It's stupid" for a Japanese company not to use English in Japan. But Mikitani was certain that it was the right decision and the policy is paying off. Mikitani has been able to build a diverse and powerful company thanks to his English mandate. Three out of six top executives within his engineering department are not Japanese. They don't even know Japanese. The company continues to actively seek out the best talent around the world. Rakuten's Japanese employees can now communicate with each other in English. 25% of Rakuten's foreign employees are able to communicate in English with their partners and coworkers.
It's not an easy task to adopt a global policy on language. Companies often stumble along the way. It's a radical idea that is almost certain to be met with resistance by employees. While many may feel that their English is not as good as the others, it can cause problems in team dynamics, performance, and national pride. Companies must overcome language barriers to thrive in a global economy. English will almost always be the same ground for most companies, at least for now.
English, the fastest-growing language in human history is used at a level that's usable by nearly 1.75 billion people around the world. Nearly 385 million people speak English in the U.S., Australia and other countries. There are also about a billion fluent speakers of English in former colonized nations like India and Nigeria. And millions more who have studied it as a second or third language. It is used by 565 million people on the internet.
Mikitani says that Englishnization has many benefits. However, very few companies have implemented a consistent English-language policy. My research and 10 years of working with companies has led me to develop a framework for companies to use in their language efforts. Although there is still much to learn, there are many success stories. Adopters will enjoy significant benefits.
Why English Only?
Unrestricted multilingualism can be inefficient, hinder important interactions and prevent key goals from being achieved. English has become the official language of business, regardless of where it is based. This is because it is easier to coordinate work and communicate with customers and other partners around the world.
The three main reasons for the shift to English as a corporate standard are:
Competition pressure.
You must be able communicate with many customers, suppliers and business partners if you are looking to sell or buy. You might be lucky enough to have them speak your native language, but you shouldn't expect it. Companies that don't have a language strategy put themselves at risk of losing out to companies that do.
Globalization of resources and tasks
Language differences can lead to a bottleneck, or a Tower of Babel. This is when geographically dispersed employees must work together to achieve corporate goals. An employee in Belgium might need input from an organization in Beirut or Mexico. Communication will be difficult without common ground. Communication will suffer if employees don't have a common language understanding. This is crucial for good decision-making. Nestle, a Swiss food giant, saw significant efficiency improvements in its purchasing and hiring processes due to the enforcement of English as a company standard.
M&A integration across national boundaries.
When everyone speaks the same language, negotiations regarding mergers and acquisitions are easy enough. However, when they don't speak the same language, it is easy to lose nuances, even in simple email exchanges. Cross-cultural integration can be difficult. That's why Aventis, which is the fifth-largest pharmaceutical company worldwide, merged France's Rhone and Germany's Hoechst in 1998. To avoid being a partisan, Aventis chose English to be its operating language, rather than French or German. Branding can also be an important factor. Merloni, an obscure, mid-sized Italian appliance manufacturer, adopted English in the 1990s to enhance its international image. This gave Merloni an advantage when it acquired British and Russian companies.
English, the fastest-growing language in human history is spoken at a level that's usable by around 1.75 billion people all over the globe. That's about one in four of us.
There are many obstacles to successful English-Language policies
One-language policies can lead to decreased efficiency, it is true. My research at Rakuten, along with a study that I did with Pamela Hinds from Stanford University and Catherine Cramton at George Mason University on a company I'll be calling GlobalTech, and a study that I did at FrenchCo, reveals the costs that global English language rules can cause. While proper rollout reduces risks, even well-thought plans can run into pitfalls. These are the most common.
Change is always a shock.
There is no way to prevent employees from feeling the emotional blow if the change is implemented. Marie was thrilled to learn about FrenchCo's English only policy when she (all names are omitted except Mikitani, Ito) first heard of it. Since she had been communicating in English with non French partners for some time, Marie saw the proposed policy to be a positive sign that the company was becoming increasingly international. She was unaware of this until she attended a regular meeting in French. "I didn’t know that the first meeting after the rule was published would be held in English. Marie admits that it was quite a shock. Marie recalls feeling full of energy when she walked into the meeting, until she saw the headsets for translators.
She says, "They are humiliating." "I felt more like an observer than a participant in my company's activities."
Will Mandarin Be Next?
Why not adopt an English-only policy given the growth and size of China's economy? It's possible that Mandarin could become the global language for business. It is possible but not likely. Two reasons are available for this.
First, English has a huge head start. China cannot replicate Britain's colonial history. As early as 16th century, the British Empire started incorporating English into many areas of the world. The spread of English was furthered by the philanthropic efforts of American and British organisations long before companies began to use it in their workplaces.
Second, Mandarin is very difficult to learn for a large portion of the world. It is easier to learn "broken English" rather than "broken Mandarin". Knowing Mandarin, or any language spoken by large numbers of people, is clearly an advantage. Mandarin is currently not an option as a single-language policy.
The compliance is spotty.
GlobalTech's service representatives faced a new problem when they received an English mandate. The technology company was based in Germany and had many subsidiaries around the world. Hans, a service representative received a panicked call from his boss after a major customer's multimillion-dollar financial operations was halted by a software problem. GlobalTech and the customer were both at risk of losing hundreds of thousands of dollars. Hans immediately called the technical department in India. However, the team could not jump on the issue because all communications were in German. This was despite an English-only policy that had been in place two years ago. The crisis escalated as Hans waited for documents from translators. Two years after the implementation, adoption was still slow.
Self-confidence erodes.
Non-native speakers can feel less valued by companies if they are required to communicate in English. FrenchCo employees say that it is difficult to accept that one's worth as an English speaker outweighs one's true value. He points out that the company has not asked employees to improve their foreign-language skills over the past 30 years or offered them the chance to do so. "Now it is difficult for us to accept that we are disqualified." People who work under one-language policies worry that they will only be given jobs that require strong English skills regardless of their content knowledge.
Two years after GlobalTech's English-only policy was implemented, my colleagues and me interviewed 164 GlobalTech employees. We found that almost 70% of them still felt frustrated by it. FrenchCo found that 56% of English-speaking medium-fluency speakers and 42% low-fluency speakers expressed concern about their ability to get promoted due to their limited English proficiency. These feelings are common in companies that announce a new policy but don't actually offer any language classes. Noting this, employees underestimate their abilities and overestimate the difficulty of learning fluent English is a sign that they are often unaware of their capabilities. (See sidebar, "Gauging Fluency.")
Assessing Fluency
Progressing from beginner level to advanced--which greatly improves an employee's ability to communicate--involves mastering around 3,500 words. This is a much easier task than learning the 10,000 words required to go from advanced to native speaker. The payoff might be lower.
Unemployment is a threat to job security
Although fluency can be achieved for most people, it is not possible for everyone. However, when employees adopt an English-only policy, their job requirements may change, sometimes overnight. This can be difficult to swallow, especially for top performers. Mikitani, Rakuten's CEO, was not shy about telling his employees that he would degrade those who had not improved their English proficiency.
Employees resist.
It is not uncommon for non-native speakers to revert back to their native language at the expense English-speaking colleagues. This is often because it is faster and easier to conduct meetings with their mother tongue. Some may resort to more aggressive methods to avoid speaking English such as scheduling meetings at inappropriate times. For example, employees in Asia may schedule a global meeting for the middle of the night in England. This allows non-native speakers to shift their anxiety and power to native speakers.
FrenchCo employees stated that they stopped contributing to the common discourse when they felt their poor language skills could be made more visible and lead to career-related consequences. An HR manager at FrenchCo explained that employees are afraid to make mistakes, so they won't speak at all.
Other cases may see documents written in English that were supposed to be written in English, as Hans at GlobalTech experienced. One GlobalTech employee says, "It's too difficult to write in English so I don't do that!" "And then, there's no documentation at any."
Performance is affected.
Employees who stop participating in group settings can have a negative impact on the bottom line. Processes can become a mess if employees stop participating in group settings. Companies lose out on any new ideas that could have been generated during meetings. People aren't willing to report costly mistakes, or make observations about poor decisions or other problems. GlobalTech's Indian office engineer explained that his ability to contribute was affected when meetings were reverted back into German. He lost important information--particularly in side exchanges--despite receiving meeting notes afterward. These quick asides often contained valuable contextual information, background analysis, or hypotheses about a problem's root cause. He did not participate in the meetings or learn from the problem-solving sessions.
