Keywords

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

11.1 Introduction

This concluding chapter attempts to pull together the various threads and portray three key aspects from the nine empirical chapters presented in this research monograph. As editors of this monograph, we do this by analyzing responses from the authors themselves. We asked the contributing authors to furnish pivotal information on three areas: first, to furnish key points regarding Investigating Cultural Aspects in Indian Organizations (from each of their chapter); second, key points regarding strategies to overcome these challenges; and third, key points regarding future opportunities in investigating cultural aspects in Indian organizations. All three areas pertain either to the study/chapter, methods, or practice or also a combination of these. In what follows below we discuss each contribution in turn.

11.2 Religion, Organizations, and HRM

India as a nation faces the challenge of heterogeneity within the organizations across the length and breadth of the country. The religious differences across the North, South, East, West, and Central India are large, and running a multi-location, multiregional domestic organization is nothing short of a multinational corporation. In her piece on “The Role of Religion on Human Resource Management (HRM) Practices in Indian Organizations” as Chap. 2, Rao uses a conceptual methodology to identify comprehensive primary and secondary sources in detailing these concepts. Findings from her research identify how religion impacts both direct and indirect symbols of individuals’ work-related practices. She argues that on one hand direct symbols are visible signs and are identified as religious observations, food preferences, and dress codes. Indirect symbols, on the other hand she argues, are tacit representations and are categorized into preferential treatment, attitudes towards learning, and outlook towards leadership. The following were Rao’s responses to the challenging determinants of her contribution.

First, she claims that “the workplace has employees from diverse religions.” Rao suggests that providing diversity training for employees at all levels is key for all organizations operating in India. In terms of future challenges, she states that in the future, researchers would need to conduct more empirical and qualitative studies on the role of religion at Indian organizations as there is a paucity of research on this theme. Rao’s second claim is that there is a cultural inclination to observe a lot of religious and ethnic holidays in India, being a multi-religious country. Organizations she claims should establish clear policies on vacation time for such celebrations. And in the future, exploring if the various holidays impact employee’s productivity in different regions in India should be undertaken, she states. Rao’s third assertion is that the importance of caste is paramount in organizational practices of recruitment, training, and promotions. Her counter is that organizations should create objective policies that have a strong focus on KSAs (knowledge, skills, and abilities). Her future research direction includes doing more research studies to understand how caste system impacts HRM practices. Rao’s fourth challenge is identified as “the significance of religion on indirect symbols of work.” She suggests that organizations need to establish practices on training and leadership that can tap into these religious values. Highlighting future research areas, the author claims there is a need to review the literature on various religions and identify other indirect consequences on work practices. Her study has identified only the major religions. Future studies, she claims, should include all the minority religions. Rao’s fifth identified challenge is “the implication of religion on direct symbols of work.” She suggests that organizations should provide reasonable accommodations for dress, vacations, and food preferences. In the future she requests scholars to review the literature on all the various religions and identify their consequences on dress, food preferences, and religious holidays.

In summary, Rao claims that her contribution can be considered innovative and adds to the evolving body of knowledge on culture in Indian organizations and HRM, as most scholarly articles detail either direct or indirect values of religion on individuals’ work-related behaviors. Her contribution takes a holistic approach in understanding the topic. We agree that her contribution provides a practical model that details guidelines and implications for global managers and the proposed theoretical model can be tested by scholars in the future.

11.3 Generation Z (Zippies) and Cultural Values

When a country’s census (2011) confirms that close to 50 % (more than 500,000 million people) of India’s total population (of more than 1 billion) is under the age of 24 and 65 % under the age of 35, it becomes pivotal to research the impact of age demographics on the country, businesses, and organizations. Thus, Shah’s contribution (Chap. 3) “Zippies and the Shift in Cultural Values in India” examining the impact of economic globalization on work and family collectivism for young middle-class Indians becomes very interesting and important.

Results from Shah’s contribution suggest that in an increasingly globalizing India, young Indians will strive to preserve traditional values of collectivity when it comes to family but will loosen their reins on workplace collectivism. She claims that her chapter is limited to examining the educated middle class in India as they are at the forefront of globalization and the intention of her study is not to assess national culture as a whole, but to predict cultural shifts in India. The results from Shah’s study provide critical insight as to how values are changing in a nation that promises to be a prominent feature on the global economic map in this century. The following were Shah’s responses to the challenging determinants of her contribution.

The author’s first identified challenge was that “we must distinguish between work and family domains in order to understand value shifts for young Indians in a globalized economy.” She claims to measure changes empirically in two different domains (work and family). She also used two different metrics. In the future she suggests that “while the two domains are distinct, the two have overlap and we need to investigate that overlap in future studies.” Shah’s second challenge was that “capitalism/free markets will have a greater impact on work values than family values, as capitalism demands more individualistic values,” something we hear and read a lot. She measures the impact of global capitalism, “aka economic globalization,” to better understand cultural value shifts in the work and family domains. In the future she suggests that “global capitalism is broadly defined, hence both macroeconomic indicators (such as GDP growth) and micro-indicators (such as number of years working in a multinational corporation or education) can aid in understanding value shifts.” Thus, Shah suggests that future studies can explore macroeconomic indicators. Her third identified challenge was “exposure to globalization will impact both work and family values.” She uses proxies of globalization, such as “tier of city” to better understand cultural value shifts in both work and family domains. Further, she uses “tier of city” as proxy of globalization but suggests that identifying other proxies of globalization would assist in advancing the impact of globalization on “value” shifts. Shah’s fourth challenge is identified as “exposure to type of organization (i.e., MNC versus non-MNC) will impact both work and family values” of Zippies. Here, in her contribution to this book, Shah uses proxies of globalization and capitalism, such as MNC exposures to better understand cultural value shifts in both work and family domains. However, she suggests that “MNCs may not be the best measure. A better measure maybe level of competitiveness as that creates greater pressures against collectivist values.” Shah’s fifth challenge is “shifts in family living arrangements will impact work and family values.” In her study she uses “living arrangements as a proxy for globalization to understand cultural value shifts in both work and family domains.” In the future she suggests that social and psychological connection may matter more in a real-time communication world and that scholars need to understand how families stay connected even if they do not live with each other as they may be a greater predictor of value retention than physical living arrangements.

In summary, Shah claims that insights from her contribution are not only useful to scholars who wish to predict behavior within firms and organizations but also to policy makers, entrepreneurs, and businesses, as it informs them of impending infrastructure needs which must be met via public, private, and/or public-private ventures. We strongly agree with her and also with her assertion that there is a wide recognition of large-scale intuitional changes, such as globalization, which calls for a reexamination of not only cultural values of Gen Z’s worldwide but also their changing dynamics and the challenges organizations and countries face.

11.4 Indian Expatriates and Cultural Similarities

The number of Indian expatriates abroad is growing. One estimate suggests India has the largest share of about $US70 billions of expatriates’ remittances to India (Feedbacq 2013). Hence, it is interesting and topical to study expatriate adjustment through the lens of cultural similarities (Chap. 4). Arora and Rohmetra’s piece of research attempts to bring out the conceptual framework to deliberate upon this cultural similarity paradox held by expatriate managers pertinent to the Indian context for Indian managers abroad. Their study highlights the unexpected problems and challenges being encountered by the Indian managers while abroad in culturally similar nations. The following were Arora and Rohmetra’s responses to the challenging determinants of their contribution.

Their first challenge was that “expatriates presume cultural similarity with less culturally distant nations and mostly go less prepared.” They suggest that pre-departure training needs to be accommodated, even at times when expatriates are sent to culturally similar nations. Their next challenge was that the unpreparedness brings immense culture shock which is difficult to handle. Here they suggest that at individual level and organizational level, initiatives like meditation, listening to music, pursuing one’s passion, etc., and training programs focusing on language and basic business etiquette training are also relevant. Arora and Rohmetra’s third challenge was that “the productivity of even the most effective managers is affected,” due to this cultural issue. They suggest that expatriates need to be focused. They argue that flexibility in situations is extremely important and that counseling can be helpful. The author’s fourth identified challenge was “adjustment problems.” They state that adopting the proactive approach can be useful. They argue that “one can gain information about different cultures from various sources and work on strengthening oneself to adapt to different situations.” They further suggest that expatriates work on enhancing one’s “cultural intelligence.” Arora and Rohmetra’s fifth challenge was “safety and security concerns of expatriate managers.” Their proposed solution was that “learning and self-motivation strategies can facilitate handling safety and security concerns in a different though seemingly similar culture.” In terms of their future research directions, they suggest that future probe into similar issues can be useful by conducting researches in cultures that are culturally similar. They suggest identifying relevant variables in context like the definable areas of presumed similarity: language, cultural heritage, and commonalities in historical, social, and cultural domains can facilitate learning about the kind of training programs that may be adopted by organizations to prepare their mangers prior to sending them for an international assignment. They conclude that even as empirical research in this domain is relatively less, cultural similarity calls for determining and conducting sound research in the field.

In summary Arora and Rohmetra’s study highlights how sometimes the Indian expatriates perceive that if sent to culturally similar countries, the stress and pressure would be comparatively less. However, their research in the domain presents that it is not always so. Keeping in view the successful completion of international assignments on one side and expatriate adjustment on the other side, their research attempts to highlight the cultural similarity paradox in context of Indian expatriates while simultaneously presenting the challenges being faced by them and suggesting a way forward.

11.5 Cross-Cultural Coaching

Cross-cultural coaching in organizations is a new concept, and the need for global coaches has evolved. Chatwani is a coach herself and is best suited to contribute to this topic. She argues that many authors have approached the topic of coaching across cultures from the point of view of a Western cultural ethos and have placed emphasis on differences and pitfalls. Her contribution focuses on how cultural and diversity aspects in the coaching process can be leveraged that goes beyond a Socratic dialogue of questioning and probing for learning. Her stand is that aspects of Indian culture are blended into the coaching process, thus giving it a cross-cultural character. She further argues that the example of the guru-śisya relationship suggests that learning systems cannot be applied across cultures in the same way without an understanding of the assumptions in their origins. The following were Chatwani’s responses to the challenging determinants of her contribution.

Her first identified challenge was “the importance of assessing cultural bias in learning interventions in HRM.” She suggests that “learning interventions in Indian organizations need to be assessed for cultural relevance if they are to be effective.” In terms of future research, she suggests that “cultural dimension needs to be added in assessing learning outcomes in organizations.” Chatwani’s second challenge was that “relevant coaching models are needed for the Indian context.” She suggests that there needs to be a better understanding of the opportunities for adapting current coaching practices. In the future, she suggests that Indian authors/coaches need to publish more about their coaching experiences and propose new models based on their experience and research. The authors’ third challenge was that there was a “danger of overuse of sociocultural anthropological frameworks to explain cultural differences in the outcome of learning methods.” She suggests the need to “expand the focus on cultural away from the individual in learning to the process and method.” She proposes more differentiated ways of defining culture in organizations, in the future. Her fourth identified challenge was “better leveraging of Indian heritage systems for learning in organizations.” As a solution she suggests the need to “elicit other traditional methods of learning and management that are relevant for Indian organizations.” In the future, she suggests scholars to investigate other traditional methods of learning and management that are relevant for Indian organizations. Chatwani’s fifth identified challenge was to “develop a better understanding of Western ethos in human psychology and its influence on management methods in general.” Her solution was to “increase the awareness of the bias in management methods.” In terms of future research directions, she requests scholars to research and publish more management material based on indigenous Indian psychological traditions.

In summary, by reflecting on the guru-śisya paradigm, Chatwani’s chapter has demonstrated an opportunity to develop a cross-cultural coaching approach ethos inspired by an ancient Indian system of learning for a popular HRM tool by adapting the coaching template that was derived from a Western ethos. We agree with her assertion that the purpose of coaching is to shift an individual’s mind-set, approaches, and behaviors to ensure effective action in cross-cultural approaches in organizations.

11.6 Talent Acquisition Culture

The catch phrase the “war for talent” was mooted by a consulting firm a few years ago, and since then it has become important for organizations to scout for highly skilled and competent employees in the pursuit of corporate competitive advantage. India being the second largest growing economy in the world, this contribution by Liu and Pearson titled “An Empirical Study of the Influence of Culture on Talent Acquisition in Indian Organizations” is timely and interesting. The author’s argue that the effectiveness of these arrangements in the cultural marketplace is not well understood. In their contribution, they employed a mixed method approach, and hence they utilized an investigation “in a pluralist study design with Indigenous managerial executives employed in Indian multinational corporations.” In terms of results (quantitative), it was found that the strength of culture influenced the relationships between talent acquisition and the organizations’ global ambition. These results were substantiated with qualitative evidence revealing the perceived influence of cultural forces on these connections. Liu and Pearson’s findings thus show the relevance of cultural effects when the labor market is liberalized to strategically integrate organizational systems in the pursuit of global ambition. The following were the author’s responses to the challenging determinants of their contribution.

Liu and Pearson’s first identified challenge was “establishing dominant issues of culture influence in Indian organizations.” They suggest “extensive reading of cross-culture management/business literature” as a solution. As a futuristic measure, they suggest a “sustained examination of global business challenge to identify concerns.” Their second challenge is the “creation of an investigative model with a basic independent/dependent culture framework.” Their solution for this challenge is to balance “the dimensions of complexity and simplicity to get a pragmatic arrangement.” In the future they suggest scholars to “expand the investigation framework to incorporate intervening variables.” The third challenge identified by these authors is the “collection of suitable primary data for instruments to assess the model.” They suggest centralization of “the data collection period rather than extensive travel to numerous centers.” In the future they suggest scholars to “evaluate objective data (e.g., performance)” and to “examine fewer organizations, industry, and geographic specific.” Liu and Pearson’s fourth challenge was “demonstration of moderating effects of culture.” They suggest a solution of “establishing acceptable statistical techniques demanded both quantitative and qualitative analyses.” In the future they suggest scholars and researchers to “employ qualitative and quantitative designs with newer emerging statistical procedures.” The fifth challenge identified by the authors was the “parsimonious description of a complex pluralist empirical study.” In terms of the future, they suggest that “academic scholarship of readership determines the content quality level and length of the document.” We acknowledge this challenge as fellow authors and editors and expect that publishers also take note.

In summary Liu and Pearsons’s chapter reports the results of an empirically based assessment of the extent a sample of Indian managers are transforming in their global context. In the study they claim that “in spite of skepticism drawn from previous studies asserting that the influence from foreign sources and particularly of Western foundations only superficially impact heritage-based behaviors and practices of Indian managers, the compelling evidence presented in this chapter reveals the external forces penetrated deeply into the mindsets of the respondents.” They further claim that “the corroborating quantitative and qualitative testimony shows globalization has induced challenges to the underlying cultural notions in the human resource practices of the 72 studied Indian originations.” However, we also concur that the findings should be read with caution and that future researchers consider factors such as international diversity, bigger samples sizes, and a broader industry coverage.

11.7 Knowledge Management Culture

The greatest area of growth in the context of the Indian economy is said to be the information technology (IT) and business process outsourcing (BPO) industry, which was worth $100 billion in 2013, and predicted to grow to $ 300 billion by 2020 (Economic Times 2013). In 2012 it was estimated to have contributed 7.5 % to India’s GDP and was directly employing close to 2.2 million people (NASSCOM 2012). Further, in 2012, the overall Indian IT/BPO aggregate revenues exceeded USD 100 billion, with exports in 2014 expected to cross USD 84–87 billion (NASSCOM 2014). Hence, this piece by Jyoti et al. is timely in the context of the sector as well as the topic. The purpose of this contribution was to investigate the impact of knowledge management (KM) practices on the competitive advantage (CA) of IT sector firms in Jammu, India. The authors used survey method to collect data from employees working in the private telecommunication organizations. Two sets of questionnaires were framed for the respondents. Structural equation modeling was used to investigate the relationship between the two processes, viz., knowledge management and competitive advantage. Results from their study revealed a significant relationship between knowledge management and competitive advantage. The authors claim that knowledge approach, knowledge protection, and knowledge acquisition were significant predictors of competitive advantage. The following were their responses to the challenging determinants of their contribution.

The first challenge identified by Jyoti et al. is that their results revealed that “KM is being practiced in Indian telecom sector at higher level.” They suggest that this sector should use “common IT applications in KM for sharing knowledge within/outside the organization such as coding and sharing of best practices, creation of corporate knowledge directories, etc.” They further suggest that in the future scholars should “identify the culture-based factors that can help in instituting KM in the organization.” The second challenge identified by them was “the knowledge culture of Indian telecom sector is technology oriented followed by acquisition and protection.” The solution suggested by them was that “before implementing all KM practices together, organization as well as management has to study each and every practice intensely and choose only those which are according to nature of the organization.” In terms of future research directions, they suggest that the “organization as well as management should focus on all core components of KM that include people, processes, technology (or) culture, structure, technology, depending on the specific perspective for implementing and executing overall KM process.” The third challenge identified was that “out of seven dimensions of KM, only knowledge protections, knowledge (IT) approach, and knowledge acquisition are significantly contributing towards competitive advantage of Indian telecom sector.” As a solution they suggest “designing strategies for better knowledge sharing, creation, conversion, and utilization to generate CA.” In the future they suggest that scholars should investigate if “every practice of KM has unique characteristic, so in the future both organization and management have to concentrate and assemble each practice in their process effectively for achieve high CA.” The fourth challenge was regional centric and stated that “telecom sector organizations in J&K have failed to utilize the efficiency of knowledge sharing, creation, conversion, and utilization for achieving the CA.” As a solution Jyoti et al. suggest that “employee orientation regarding KM should be through need-based training.” They suggest that in the future, impact of KC on CA through KM should be examined. The fifth challenge was that “the KM construct has been empirically validated in Indian telecom organizations and knowledge sharing is its important element.” They suggest “instilling a sense of knowledge protection in the employees regarding new created knowledge.” They further suggest that “future research can focus on more cultural predictors of KM.”

In summary Jyoti et al. suggest that the Indian IT/BPO sector should use common IT applications in KM for sharing knowledge within/outside the organization such as coding and sharing of best practices, creation of corporate knowledge directories (mapping internal expertise), and creation of knowledge networks (online interactive forums), groupware, intranet, e-mail, discussion forums, and e-bulletin boards. Moreover, they suggest that e-learning can also work as a training tool for improving knowledge sharing behavior and, as a result, organizations are able to build effective and successful knowledge sharing culture within/outside its boundaries. They conclude that this exercise will also help to enhance knowledge creation and conversion culture automatically.

11.8 Culture in Private Healthcare Hospitals

“Most developing countries have pursued formal health care system strategies which give primacy to government roles in financing and delivering health services” (Berman 1998, p. 1463), and for India it is no different. Healthcare in India is at present predominantly the responsibility of the federal and state governments but is also witnessing the private healthcare sector growing. The federal budget of 2011–2012 announced a 20 % hike in the health budget (Government of India budget speech 2011), and hence the funds for health have risen to $5.9bn or £3.7bn (BBC 2011). Since then year on year there has been a constant increase in the healthcare budgets in India. Thus, this Chap. 8 by Sharma et al. is again timely and interesting. The authors claim that creating a productive organizational culture for such hospitals is challenging for the leadership as these healthcare delivery systems are complex and comprise of many subcultures. The empirical quantitative study presented in the chapter is conducted to examine the significant aspects of organizational culture in Indian private healthcare sector hospitals. The following were the author’s responses to the challenging determinants of their contribution.

Their first identified challenge in their study suggested that “preexisting subcultural values contributed to the ambiguity, incompatibility, and contradictions which made it difficult to have a uniform hospital culture.” Sharma et al. as a solution suggest that “allowance must be made for the co-existence of multiple and heterogeneous cultures inside health organizations—integration of subcultures.” In terms of future research, they suggest that scholars should “investigate how subcultures can be assimilated to have common hospital culture acceptable to all groups.” Their second challenge was the “culture of playing the blame game and bureaucracy in these hospitals.” They suggest that “organizations that typify constructive cultures put people first by encouraging positive interpersonal relationships, but also they value self-actualization and employees who are achievement oriented.” In the future they suggest an “investigation into how the blame culture and bureaucracy be reduced and changed in these hospitals.” The third challenge identified by the authors was that the “issue of power balance in a hospital setting cannot adequately be described in simplistic terms that characterize doctors as superior to others.” The authors suggest a “need to align with and support frontline nurses and share decision-making with them and more focus on empowerment and job redesign strategies.” In the future they suggest “investigation regarding how issues of power imbalance between professional groups in hospitals be minimized to create synergy.” The fourth challenge was the “multifaceted and at times conflicting expectations regarding ideal organizational culture.” They suggest that “leadership should work towards a balanced or suitable culture exclusive to their organization needs.” In the future they suggest “investigation regarding how harmony can be maintained regarding expectations of different professional groups—setting and managing expectations.” Sharma et al.’s fifth challenge was that “male and female doctors have different opinions concerning values of proactivity, autonomy, and collaboration within hospitals. The results highlight that differences do exist within the professional group of clinicians based on gender and traditionally clinicians too been seen as a man-woman relationship in hospitals.” As a way forward, the authors suggest “initiatives focusing on improving management style through communication; encouragement of individual, team, and organizational learning; no egoistic blame game type of environment; linking all clinical groups into management; and clarity on acceptable practices.” Their future research focus here was for scholars to “investigate the perception and differences regarding organizational culture in clinicians within.”

In conclusion Sharma et al. try to explore the organizational culture patterns related to desired values in chosen hospitals. They further also explore whether clinicians and non-clinicians differ in their perceptions of hospital culture. The analysis of their results leads to discussion on developing insight to enhance the present organizational culture.

11.9 Cultural Literacy

Rohmetra and Arora in Chap. 9 argue that the global context has implicitly increased the need for global organizations to consider incorporating cultural literacy into their training programs that revolve around training managers to comprehend the need for acknowledging diversity and cultural differences. They further argue that the inclusion of managers from diverse cultural backgrounds poses a challenge for Indian organizations too, thereby creating a sound need to regiment novel work settings wherein the development and efficient performance of managers shall be grounded upon “how” and “what” of “culture” framing their cultural literacy program as well as making them culturally intelligent. Their research thereby aims at presenting the changing face of Indian organizations in the era of globalization, consequently highlighting the need and role of cultural literacy programs for developing the requisite competencies for success of these organizations, thus eliminating stress. The following were the author’s responses to the challenging determinants of their contribution.

Rohmetra and Arora’s first identified challenge was “reflecting on one’s own cultural identity and creating global consciousness.” They suggest a solution of “essentially analyzing how one functions in one’s own culture while seeking to give importance to the global perspectives of others as all cultures are important.” Their second challenge identified was “assessing cultural similarities and differences.” They say the solution here is that “culturally intelligent and synergistic solutions offering ‘win-win’ situations in organizations can be done only when cultural similarities and dissimilarities can be used as organizational advantages.” Their third identified challenge was “managing cross-cultural communication.” They suggest a solution where “offering cross-cultural communication training including basic training and etiquettes training that shall incorporate both verbal and nonverbal training can help build better intercultural relations.” Rohmetra and Arora’s fourth challenge was “handling intercultural conflicts.” The solution they offer here was that organizations “by strategically analyzing if any cultural gaps have led to intercultural conflicts can help reduce misunderstandings and misperceptions that lead to intercultural conflicts.” The fifth challenge these authors identify was “dealing with bias while simultaneously promoting teaming up with varying cultures.” They suggest a solution where “multicultural organizations try to reduce bias by teaming up people from different cultural backgrounds and building trust and faith in them.” In terms of their overall future research directions, they suggest the following:

The future prospects for the development of culturally intelligent organizations include researching into domains of HR initiatives that are currently opted by Indian organizations to enhance creation of meta-cognitive, cognitive, motivational as well as behavioral aspects of cultural intelligence. Determining the success rates of specific training programs as well as key indicators of development of cultural intelligence quotient can help determine what programs must be opted by which type of organizations. Research in the similar context may be extended to other organizations handling cross cultural encounters like aviation, education, health, entertainment, manufacturing, etc.

In summary, Rohmetra and Arora claim that the concept of cultural intelligence is gaining fast pace in the Indian context bringing out its significance while highlighting the paradigm shift that the Indian organizations are coming across. They showcase the case of the Indian hospitality industry where it is seen how managers and owners are now becoming aware of the differences prevalent across cultures and nationalities and the relevance of accommodating to these differences as a competitive advantage for Indian organizations.

11.10 Multiculturalism

As a “cultural melting pot,” multiculturalism is at the core of India and its organizations. Mishra and Mishra claim that in spite of growing importance of multiculturalism in today’s organizations, there is little research exploring this topic. They argue that there have been some discussions in leading journals of management; however, more is needed. In Chap. 10 the authors propose to explain the concept of “multiculturalism” in the context of India and highlight the barriers to the formation of multicultural organizations. Data were collected from 20 respondents employed in a Public Sector Undertaking (PSU) located in Rourkela, a city in the eastern state of Odisha, India. The following were the author’s responses to the challenging determinants of their contribution.

Mishra and Mishra identify several differences as challenges. The first challenge identified by them was “language diversity.” They suggest “awareness and familiarity with other communities” as a solution. In the future, they request scholars to look into the aspect of “leadership orientation and its impact on accommodation of cultural minorities.” The second challenge identified by these authors was “region differences.” As a solution they suggest “awareness and living together.” In the future they suggest researching into “how regional feeling changes cultural adaptation.” The third challenge was identified as “caste differences.” They suggest “fairness of treatment and maintaining human dignity” as a solution. In the future they suggest researching into “what organizations can do to influence the behavior of lower caste groups towards higher caste groups.” The fourth challenge identified was “religion differences,” the solution of which was suggested to be “sharing (interdependencies) with each other and living as neighbors.” In the future Mishra and Mishra suggest that researchers should look at the “involvement in community activities and what can be done to enhance community belongingness.” The fifth challenge was “orientation towards others.” The solution offered was “focus is on work and not on other factors and awareness about others.” In the future they suggest researching into “what organizations can do to encourage the acceptance of cultural minorities by the majority groups.” Though these may seem simplistic in nature, the authors argue that for organizations to be effective, they need to be aware of and adapt themselves to the national/regional culture where they operate.

In summary Mishra and Mishra’s study was based on an exploratory approach, where they argue and portray the important role played by organizations in multiculturalism. Their study highlights the ways through which organizations are influencing the attitude of cultural groups towards each other. They claim some of the factors to be workplace experiences, cultural celebrations, and enabling mechanisms such as schools; work role requirements bring different communities towards each other. Their findings suggest that relationships with others and respect for one another minimize the barriers among the groups. Mishra and Mishra claim through their findings that organizational policies and practices engender love for the city and in the name of love it creates love for others. In conclusion, this study highlighted the fact that “mere exposure to other cultures in the presence of some enabling mechanisms fosters closeness among the members of different communities and helps fostering a multicultural society.” We couldn’t agree more!

11.11 Conclusions

In conclusion, the epitome of this chapter was a critically condensed account of challenging determinants of each empirical chapter, an outline of how issues each of the chapter authors identified were/can be addressed, and conjectures how the difficulties might draw future interests, i.e., future research directions.