Jakob Lauring , Charlotte Jonasson , Guro Refsum Sanden
{"title":"When can resistance to a standardization policy result in destandardization? The case of corporate language implementation","authors":"Jakob Lauring , Charlotte Jonasson , Guro Refsum Sanden","doi":"10.1016/j.ibusrev.2025.102446","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The implementation of corporate language policies is widely regarded as a strategy for improving communication and coordination across globally dispersed organizations. However, employees who experience a mismatch between the corporate language and their competencies or job requirements may resist the policy or attempt to change it, as documented in existing language-sensitive international business research. Nevertheless, the long-term effects of resistance against a language policy initiative have yet to be explored. We applied a two-year qualitative study following the top management’s decision to use English as a corporate language in a Danish organization. Results showed that discrepancies between external job requirements and policy directions were used by employees as a source of power to legitimize reinterpretations of the policy leading to a language destandardization process with important consequences for the organization. These findings contribute to literature on language policy implementations by describing how negotiated reactions change the practice of a policy.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51352,"journal":{"name":"International Business Review","volume":"34 4","pages":"Article 102446"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Business Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0969593125000599","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The implementation of corporate language policies is widely regarded as a strategy for improving communication and coordination across globally dispersed organizations. However, employees who experience a mismatch between the corporate language and their competencies or job requirements may resist the policy or attempt to change it, as documented in existing language-sensitive international business research. Nevertheless, the long-term effects of resistance against a language policy initiative have yet to be explored. We applied a two-year qualitative study following the top management’s decision to use English as a corporate language in a Danish organization. Results showed that discrepancies between external job requirements and policy directions were used by employees as a source of power to legitimize reinterpretations of the policy leading to a language destandardization process with important consequences for the organization. These findings contribute to literature on language policy implementations by describing how negotiated reactions change the practice of a policy.
期刊介绍:
The International Business Review (IBR) stands as a premier international journal within the realm of international business and proudly serves as the official publication of the European International Business Academy (EIBA). This esteemed journal publishes original and insightful papers addressing the theory and practice of international business, encompassing a broad spectrum of topics such as firms' internationalization strategies, cross-border management of operations, and comparative studies of business environments across different countries. In essence, IBR is dedicated to disseminating research that informs the international operations of firms, whether they are SMEs or large MNEs, and guides the actions of policymakers in both home and host countries. The journal warmly welcomes conceptual papers, empirical studies, and review articles, fostering contributions from various disciplines including strategy, finance, management, marketing, economics, HRM, and organizational studies. IBR embraces methodological diversity, with equal openness to papers utilizing quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-method approaches.