Business etiquette for the new workplace pdf download

Utilitarianism, where the practical consequences of various policies are evaluated on the assumption that the right policy will be the one which results in the greatest happiness. This theories main developments came from Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill who distinguished between an act and rule utilitarianist morality. Later developments have also adjusted the theory, most notably Henry Sidgwick who introduced the idea of motive or intent in morality, and Peter Singer who introduced the idea of preference in to moral decision making.

Deontological ethics, notions based on 'rules' i. Another key deontological theory is Natural Law, which was heavily developed by Thomas Aquinas and is the basis of the Roman Catholic Church.

Virtue ethics, derived from Aristotle's and Confucius's notions, which asserts that the right action will be that chosen by a suitably 'virtuous' agent. One modern approach which attempts to overcome the seemingly impossible divide between deontology and utilitarianism of which the divide is caused by the opposite takings of an absolute and relativist moral view is case-based reasoning, also known as casuistry. Casuistry does not begin with theory, rather it starts with the immediate facts of a real and concrete case.

While casuistry makes use of ethical theory, it does not view ethical theory as the most important feature of moral reasoning. Instead of starting from theory and applying theory to a particular case, casuists start with the particular case itself and then ask what morally significant features including both theory and practical considerations ought to be considered for that particular case.

In their observations of medical ethics committees, Jonsen and Toulmin note that a consensus on particularly problematic moral cases often emerges when participants focus on the facts of the case, rather than on ideology or theory. Thus, a Rabbi, a Catholic priest, and an agnostic might agree that, in this particular case, the best approach is to withhold extraordinary medical care, while disagreeing on the reasons that support their individual positions.

By focusing on cases and not on theory, those engaged in moral debate increase the possibility of agreement. Professional ethics A 12th-century Byzantine manuscript of the Hippocratic oath. Professional ethics encompass the personal, organizational, and corporate standards of behavior expected of professionals. The term professionalism originally applied to vows of a religious order.

By at least the year , the term had seen secular application and was applied to the three learned professions: Divinity, Law, and Medical. The term professionalism was also used for the military profession around this same time. Professionals and those working in acknowledged professions exercise specialist knowledge and skill. How the use of this knowledge should be governed when providing a service to the public can be considered a moral issue and is termed professional ethics.

Professionals are capable of making judgments, applying their skills, and reaching informed decisions in situations that the general public cannot because they have not attained the necessary knowledge and skills. One of the earliest examples of professional ethics is the Hippocratic oath to which medical doctors still adhere to this day. Typically these include: Implementation Most professionals have internally enforced codes of practice that members of the profession must follow to prevent exploitation of the client and to preserve the integrity of the profession.

This is not only for the benefit of the client but also for the benefit of those belonging to the profession. Disciplinary codes allow the profession to define a standard of conduct and ensure that individual practitioners meet this standard, by disciplining them from the professional body if they do not practice accordingly.

This allows those professionals who act with a conscience to practice in the knowledge that they will not be undermined commercially by those who have fewer ethical qualms.

Internal regulation In cases where professional bodies regulate their own ethics, there are possibilities for such bodies to become self-serving and fail to follow their own ethical code when dealing with renegade members.

This is particularly true of professions in which they have almost a complete monopoly on a particular area of knowledge. For example, until recently, the English courts deferred to the professional consensus on matters relating to their practice that lay outside case law and legislation. Statutory regulation In many countries there is some statutory regulation of professional ethical standards such as the statutory bodies that regulate nursing and midwifery in England and Wales.

Failure to comply with these standards can thus become a matter for the courts. Examples For example, a lay member of the public should not be held responsible for failing to act to save a car crash victim because they could not give an appropriate emergency treatment. Though, they are responsible for attempting to get help for the victim. This is because they do not have the relevant knowledge and experience. In contrast, a fully trained doctor with the correct equipment would be capable of making the correct diagnosis and carrying out appropriate procedures.

Failure of a doctor to not help at all in such a situation would generally be regarded as negligent and unethical. Though, if a doctor helps and makes a mistake that is considered negligent and unethical, there could be egregious repercussions. A business may approach a professional engineer to certify the safety of a project which is not safe. While one engineer may refuse to certify the project on moral grounds, the business may find a less scrupulous engineer who will be prepared to certify the project for a bribe, thus saving the business the expense of redesigning.

Separatism On a theoretical level, there is debate as to whether an ethical code for a profession should be consistent with the requirements of morality governing the public. Separatists argue that professions should be allowed to go beyond such confines when they judge it necessary.

This is because they are trained to produce certain outcomes which may take moral precedence over other functions of society. For example, it could be argued that a doctor may lie to a patient about the severity of his or her condition if there is reason to believe that telling the patient would cause so much distress that it would be detrimental to his or her health. This would generally be seen as morally wrong. However, if the end of improving and maintaining health is given a moral priority in society, then it may be justifiable to contravene other moral demands in order to meet this goal.

Separatism is based on a relativist conception of morality that there can be different, equally valid, moral codes that apply to different sections of society and differences in codes between societies see moral relativism.

If moral universalism is ascribed to, then this would be inconsistent with the view that professions can have a different moral code, as the universalist holds that there is only one valid moral code for all.

Although people have differing opinions about if it is effective, surveys state that it is the overall goal of the University administrators. Setting up a business-like atmosphere helps students get adjusted from a more relaxed nature, like high school, towards what will be expected of them in the business world upon graduating from College.

Codes of conduct Codes of conduct, such as the St. Xavier Code of Conduct, are becoming more a staple in the academic lives of students. While some of these rules are based solely on academics others are more in depth than in previous years. Such as, detailing the level of respect expected towards staff and gambling. Not only do codes of conduct apply while attending the schools at home, but also while studying abroad. Schools also implement a code of conduct for international study abroad programs which carry over many of the same rules found in most student handbooks.

Normative sentences imply "ought- to" types of statements and assertions, in distinction to sentences that provide "is" types of statements and assertions. Common normative sentences include commands, permissions, and prohibitions; common normative abstract concepts include sincerity, justification, and honesty. A popular account of norms describes them as reasons to take action, to believe, and to feel. Types of norms Orders and permissions express norms.

Such norm sentences do not describe how the world is, they rather prescribe how the world should be. Imperative sentences are the most obvious way to express norms, but declarative sentences also may be norms, as is the case with laws or 'principles'. Generally, whether an expression is a norm depends on what the sentence intends to assert. For instance, a sentence of the form "All Ravens are Black" could on one account be taken as descriptive, in which case an instance of a white raven would contradict it, or alternatively "All Ravens are Black" could be interpreted as a norm, in which case it stands as a principle and definition, so 'a white raven' would then not be a raven.

Those norms purporting to create obligations or duties and permissions are called deontic norms see also deontic logic. The concept of deontic norm is already an extension of a previous concept of norm, which would only include imperatives, that is, norms purporting to create duties. The understanding that permissions are norms in the same way was an important step in ethics and philosophy of law. In addition to deontic norms, many other varieties have been identified. For instance, some constitutions establish the national anthem.

These norms do not directly create any duty or permission. They create a "national symbol". Other norms create nations themselves or political and administrative regions within a nation. The action orientation of such norms is less obvious than in the case of a command or permission, but is essential for understanding the relevance of issuing such norms: When a folk song becomes a "national anthem" the meaning of singing one and the same song changes; likewise, when a piece of land becomes an administrative region, this has legal consequences for many activities taking place on that territory; and without these consequences concerning action, the norms would be irrelevant.

A more obviously action- oriented variety of such constitutive norms as opposed to deontic or regulatory norms establishes social institutions which give rise to new, previously inexistent types of actions or activities a standard example is the institution of marriage without which "getting married" would not be a feasible action; another is the rules constituting a game: without the norms of soccer, there would not exist such an action as executing an indirect free kick.

Any convention can create a norm, although the relation between both is not settled. There is a significant discussion about legal norms that give someone the power to create other norms. They are called power-conferring norms or norms of competence. Some authors argue that they are still deontic norms, while others argue for a close connection between them and institutional facts see Raz , Ruiter Linguistic conventions, for example, the convention in English that "cat" means cat or the convention in Portuguese that "gato" means cat, are among the most important norms.

Games completely depend on norms. The fundamental norm of many games is the norm establishing who wins and loses. In other games, it is the norm establishing how to score points. Some people say they are "prescriptively true" or false. Whereas the truth of a descriptive statement is purportedly based on its correspondence to reality, some philosophers, beginning with Aristotle, assert that the prescriptive truth of a prescriptive statement is based on its correspondence to right desire.

Other philosophers maintain that norms are ultimately neither true or false, but only successful or unsuccessful valid or invalid , as their propositional content obtains or not see also John Searle and speech act. There is an important difference between norms and normative propositions, although they are often expressed by identical sentences.

Some ethical theories reject that there can be normative propositions, but these are accepted by cognitivism. One can also think of propositional norms; assertions and questions arguably express propositional norms they set a proposition as asserted or questioned. Another purported feature of norms, it is often argued, is that they never regard only natural properties or entities. Norms always bring something artificial, conventional, institutional or "unworldly". This might be related to Hume's assertion that it is not possible to derive ought from is and to G.

Moore's claim that there is a naturalistic fallacy when one tries to analyse "good" and "bad" in terms of a natural concept. In aesthetics, it has also been argued that it is impossible to derive an aesthetical predicate from a non-aesthetical one.

The acceptability of non-natural properties, however, is strongly debated in present-day philosophy. Some authors deny their existence, some others try to reduce them to natural ones, on which the former supervene. Other thinkers Adler, assert that norms can be natural in a different sense than that of "corresponding to something proceeding from the object of the prescription as a strictly internal source of action".

Rather, those who assert the existence of natural prescriptions say norms can suit a natural need on the part of the prescribed entity. More to the point, however, is the putting forward of the notion that just as descriptive statements being considered true are conditioned upon certain self-evident descriptive truths suiting the nature of reality such as: it is impossible for the same thing to be and not be at the same time and in the same manner , a prescriptive truth can suit the nature of the will through the authority of it being based upon self-evident prescriptive truths such as: one ought to desire what is really good for one and nothing else.

Recent works maintain that normativity has an important role in several different philosophical subjects, not only in ethics and philosophy of law see Dancy, Philosophy of business The philosophy of business considers the fundamental principles that underlie the formation and operation of a business enterprise; the nature and purpose of a business, and the moral obligations that pertain to it.

Moral obligation The term moral obligation has a number of meanings in moral philosophy, in religion, and in layman's terms. Generally speaking, when someone says of an act that it is a "moral obligation," they refer to a belief that the act is one prescribed by their set of values.

Obligation being a set code by which a person is to follow. Obligations can be found by an individual's peers that set a code that may go against the individual's own desires.

The individual will express their morality by the person following the set code s through seeing it as good to appease society. Ethics Ethics or moral philosophy is the branch of philosophy that involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong conduct.

The branch of philosophy axiology comprises the sub-branches of ethics and aesthetics, each concerned with values. As a branch of philosophy, ethics investigates the questions "What is the best way for people to live?

As a field of intellectual enquiry, moral philosophy also is related to the fields of moral psychology, descriptive ethics, and value theory. Three major areas of study within ethics recognised today are: Meta-ethics, concerning the theoretical meaning and reference of moral propositions, and how their truth values if any can be determined 1. Normative ethics, concerning the practical means of determining a moral course of action 2. Richard William Paul and Linda Elder define ethics as "a set of concepts and principles that guide us in determining what behavior helps or harms sentient creatures".

The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy states that the word ethics is "commonly used interchangeably with 'morality' The word "ethics" in English refers to several things. It can refer to philosophical ethics or moral philosophy—a project that attempts to use reason in order to answer various kinds of ethical questions. As the English philosopher Bernard Williams writes, attempting to explain moral philosophy: "What makes an inquiry a philosophical one is reflective generality and a style of argument that claims to be rationally persuasive.

As bioethicist Larry Churchill has written: "Ethics, understood as the capacity to think critically about moral values and direct our actions in terms of such values, is a generic human capacity. For example: "Joe has strange ethics. A meta-ethical question is abstract and relates to a wide range of more specific practical questions. For example, "Is it ever possible to have secure knowledge of what is right and wrong?

Meta-ethics has always accompanied philosophical ethics. For example, Aristotle implies that less precise knowledge is possible in ethics than in other spheres of inquiry, and he regards ethical knowledge as depending upon habit and acculturation in a way that makes it distinctive from other kinds of knowledge.

Meta-ethics is also important in G. Moore's Principia Ethica from In it he first wrote about what he called the naturalistic fallacy. Moore was seen to reject naturalism in ethics, in his Open Question Argument. This made thinkers look again at second order questions about ethics. Earlier, the Scottish philosopher David Hume had put forward a similar view on the difference between facts and values.

Studies of how we know in ethics divide into cognitivism and non- cognitivism; this is similar to the contrast between descriptivists and non-descriptivists. Non- cognitivism is the claim that when we judge something as right or wrong, this is neither true nor false. We may for example be only expressing our emotional feelings about these things.

The ontology of ethics is about value-bearing things or properties, i. Non-descriptivists and non- cognitivists believe that ethics does not need a specific ontology, since ethical propositions do not refer.

This is known as an anti-realist position. Realists on the other hand must explain what kind of entities, properties or states are relevant for ethics, how they have value, and why they guide and motivate our actions. Normative ethics Normative ethics is the study of ethical action. It is the branch of ethics that investigates the set of questions that arise when considering how one ought to act, morally speaking. Normative ethics is distinct from meta-ethics because it examines standards for the rightness and wrongness of actions, while meta-ethics studies the meaning of moral language and the metaphysics of moral facts.

Normative ethics is also distinct from descriptive ethics, as the latter is an empirical investigation of people's moral beliefs. To put it another way, descriptive ethics would be concerned with determining what proportion of people believe that killing is always wrong, while normative ethics is concerned with whether it is correct to hold such a belief.

However, on certain versions of the meta-ethical view called moral realism, moral facts are both descriptive and prescriptive at the same time. Traditionally, normative ethics also known as moral theory was the study of what makes actions right and wrong. These theories offered an overarching moral principle one could appeal to in resolving difficult moral decisions. At the turn of the 20th century, moral theories became more complex and are no longer concerned solely with rightness and wrongness, but are interested in many different kinds of moral status.

During the middle of the century, the study of normative ethics declined as meta-ethics grew in prominence. This focus on meta-ethics was in part caused by an intense linguistic focus in analytic philosophy and by the popularity of logical positivism. In John Rawls published A Theory of Justice, noteworthy in its pursuit of moral arguments and eschewing of meta-ethics. This publication set the trend for renewed interest in normative ethics.

Virtue ethics Virtue ethics describes the character of a moral agent as a driving force for ethical behavior, and is used to describe the ethics of Socrates, Aristotle, and other early Greek philosophers. Socrates — BC was one of the first Greek philosophers to encourage both scholars and the common citizen to turn their attention from the outside world to the condition of humankind.

In this view, knowledge bearing on human life was placed highest, while all other knowledge were secondary. Self-knowledge was considered necessary for success and inherently an essential good. A self-aware person will act completely within his capabilities to his pinnacle, while an ignorant person will flounder and encounter difficulty.

To Socrates, a person must become aware of every fact and its context relevant to his existence, if he wishes to attain self-knowledge. He posited that people will naturally do what is good, if they know what is right. Evil or bad actions are the result of ignorance. If a criminal was truly aware of the intellectual and spiritual consequences of his actions, he would neither commit nor even consider committing those actions. Any person who knows what is truly right will automatically do it, according to Socrates.

While he correlated knowledge with virtue, he similarly equated virtue with joy. The truly wise man will know what is right, do what is good, and therefore be happy. Aristotle — BC posited an ethical system that may be termed "self-realizationism.

At birth, a baby is not a person, but a potential person. To become a "real" person, the child's inherent potential must be realized. Unhappiness and frustration are caused by the unrealized potential of a person, leading to failed goals and a poor life. Aristotle said, "Nature does nothing in vain. Happiness was held to be the ultimate goal. All other things, such as civic life or wealth, are merely means to the end. Self- realization, the awareness of one's nature and the development of one's talents, is the surest path to happiness.

Physical nature can be assuaged through exercise and care, emotional nature through indulgence of instinct and urges, and mental through human reason and developed potential. Rational development was considered the most important, as essential to philosophical self-awareness and as uniquely human. Moderation was encouraged, with the extremes seen as degraded and immoral.

For example, courage is the moderate virtue between the extremes of cowardice and recklessness. This is regarded as difficult, as virtue denotes doing the right thing, to the right person, at the right time, to the proper extent, in the correct fashion, for the right reason. Stoicism The Stoic philosopher Epictetus posited that the greatest good was contentment and serenity.

Peace of mind, or Apatheia, was of the highest value; self-mastery over one's desires and emotions leads to spiritual peace. The "unconquerable will" is central to this philosophy. The individual's will should be independent and inviolate.

Allowing a person to disturb the mental equilibrium is in essence offering yourself in slavery. If a person is free to anger you at will, you have no control over your internal world, and therefore no freedom.

Freedom from material attachments is also necessary. If a thing breaks, the person should not be upset, but realize it was a thing that could break.

Similarly, if someone should die, those close to them should hold to their serenity because the loved one was made of flesh and blood destined to death. Stoic philosophy says to accept things that cannot be changed, resigning oneself to existence and enduring in a rational fashion.

Death is not feared. People do not "lose" their life, but instead "return", for they are returning to God who initially gave what the person is as a person.

Epictetus said difficult problems in life should not be avoided, but rather embraced. They are spiritual exercises needed for the health of the spirit, just as physical exercise is required for the health of the body. He also stated that sex and sexual desire are to be avoided as the greatest threat to the integrity and equilibrium of a man's mind. Abstinence is highly desirable. Epictetus said remaining abstinent in the face of temptation was a victory for which a man could be proud.

Contemporary virtue ethics Modern virtue ethics was popularized during the late 20th century in large part as a response to G. Anscombe's "Modern Moral Philosophy". Anscombe argues that consequentialist and deontological ethics are only feasible as universal theories if the two schools ground themselves in divine law.

As a deeply devoted Christian herself, Anscombe proposed that either those who do not give ethical credence to notions of divine law take up virtue ethics, which does not necessitate universal laws as agents themselves are investigated for virtue or vice and held up to "universal standards," or that those who wish to be utilitarian or consequentialist ground their theories in religious conviction.

Alasdair MacIntyre, who wrote the book After Virtue, was a key contributor and proponent of modern virtue ethics, although MacIntyre supports a relativistic account of virtue based on cultural norms, not objective standards. Martha Nussbaum, a contemporary virtue ethicist, objects to MacIntyre's relativism, among that of others, and responds to relativist objections to form an objective account in her work "Non-Relative Virtues: An Aristotelian Approach.

There are several schools of Hedonist thought ranging from those advocating the indulgence of even momentary desires to those teaching a pursuit of spiritual bliss. In their consideration of consequences, they range from those advocating self-gratification regardless of the pain and expense to others, to those stating that the most ethical pursuit maximizes pleasure and happiness for the most people.

Cyrenaic hedonism Founded by Aristippus of Cyrene, Cyrenaics supported immediate gratification or pleasure. There was little to no concern with the future, the present dominating in the pursuit for immediate pleasure. Cyrenaic hedonism encouraged the pursuit of enjoyment and indulgence without hesitation, believing pleasure to be the only good.

Epicureanism Epicurean ethics is a hedonist form of virtue ethics. Epicurus "presented a sustained argument that pleasure, correctly understood, will coincide with virtue".

He rejected the extremism of the Cyrenaics, believing some pleasures and indulgences to be detrimental to human beings. Epicureans observed that indiscriminate indulgence sometimes resulted in negative consequences. Some experiences were therefore rejected out of hand, and some unpleasant experiences endured in the present to ensure a better life in the future.

To Epicurus the summum bonum, or greatest good, was prudence, exercised through moderation and caution. Excessive indulgence can be destructive to pleasure and can even lead to pain. For example, eating one food too often will cause a person to lose taste for it. Eating too much food at once will lead to discomfort and ill-health. Pain and fear were to be avoided. Living was essentially good, barring pain and illness. Death was not to be feared. Fear was considered the source of most unhappiness.

Conquering the fear of death would naturally lead to a happier life. Epicurus reasoned if there was an afterlife and immortality, the fear of death was irrational. If there was no life after death, then the person would not be alive to suffer, fear or worry; he would be non- existent in death. It is irrational to fret over circumstances that do not exist, such as one's state in death in the absence of an afterlife. State consequentialism State consequentialism, also known as Mohist consequentialism, is an ethical theory that evaluates the moral worth of an action based on how much it contributes to the basic goods of a state.

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy describes Mohist consequentialism, dating back to the 5th century BC, as "a remarkably sophisticated version based on a plurality of intrinsic goods taken as constitutive of human welfare. During Mozi's era, war and famines were common, and population growth was seen as a moral necessity for a harmonious society. The "material wealth" of Mohist consequentialism refers to basic needs like shelter and clothing, and the "order" of Mohist consequentialism refers to Mozi's stance against warfare and violence, which he viewed as pointless and a threat to social stability.

Stanford sinologist David Shepherd Nivison, in The Cambridge History of Ancient China, writes that the moral goods of Mohism "are interrelated: more basic wealth, then more reproduction; more people, then more production and wealth The importance of outcomes that are good for the community outweigh the importance of individual pleasure and pain.

Thus, from a consequentialist standpoint, a morally right action is one that produces a good outcome, or consequence. This view is often expressed as the aphorism "The ends justify the means". The term "consequentialism" was coined by G. Anscombe in her essay "Modern Moral Philosophy" in , to describe what she saw as the central error of certain moral theories, such as those propounded by Mill and Sidgwick.

The defining feature of consequentialist moral theories is the weight given to the consequences in evaluating the rightness and wrongness of actions. In consequentialist theories, the consequences of an action or rule generally outweigh other considerations. Apart from this basic outline, there is little else that can be unequivocally said about consequentialism as such.

One way to divide various consequentialisms is by the types of consequences that are taken to matter most, that is, which consequences count as good states of affairs. According to utilitarianism, a good action is one that results in an increase in a positive effect, and the best action is one that results in that effect for the greatest number.

Closely related is eudaimonic consequentialism, according to which a full, flourishing life, which may or may not be the same as enjoying a great deal of pleasure, is the ultimate aim. Similarly, one might adopt an aesthetic consequentialism, in which the ultimate aim is to produce beauty.

However, one might fix on non-psychological goods as the relevant effect. Thus, one might pursue an increase in material equality or political liberty instead of something like the more ephemeral "pleasure".

Other theories adopt a package of several goods, all to be promoted equally. Whether a particular consequentialist theory focuses on a single good or many, conflicts and tensions between different good states of affairs are to be expected and must be adjudicated. Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill are influential proponents of this school of thought. In A Fragment on Government Bentham says 'it is the greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the measure of right and wrong' and describes this as a fundamental axiom.

In An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation he talks of 'the principle of utility' but later prefers "the greatest happiness principle". Utilitarianism is the paradigmatic example of a consequentialist moral theory. This form of utilitarianism holds that what matters is the aggregate positive effect of everyone and not only of any one person. John Stuart Mill, in his exposition of utilitarianism, proposed a hierarchy of pleasures, meaning that the pursuit of certain kinds of pleasure is more highly valued than the pursuit of other pleasures.

Other noteworthy proponents of utilitarianism are neuroscientist Sam Harris, author of The Moral Landscape, and moral philosopher Peter Singer, author of, amongst other works, Practical Ethics. There are two types of utilitarianism, act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism.

In act utilitarianism the principle of utility is applied directly to each alternative act in a situation of choice. The right act is then defined as the one which brings about the best results or the least amount of bad results. In rule utilitarianism the principle of utility is used to determine the validity of rules of conduct moral principles.

Here are the top 10 wrong yet persistent cultural stereotypes and the truth behind them:. While quality translations are key for effective marketing, there can also be a real risk of communication getting lost in translation among multicultural colleagues.

Language barriers are just one challenge. Moreover, effective cross-cultural communication comes down to much more than just words spoken. Non-verbal communication is a delicate and nuanced part of cultural interaction that can lead to misunderstandings or even offense between team members from different countries. Things like comfortable levels of physical space, making or maintaining eye contact, and gesturing can all be vastly different across cultures. Even something as simple as a greeting or handshake has cultural implications that should be considered in a work environment.

Business Insider put together this useful infographic to highlight the differences in handshakes and professional greetings around the world:. Despite the clear benefits, hiring talent from overseas can present an HR challenge. Not least among this is the complicated process of navigating employment laws and visa requirements for international workers. Requirements and regulations are different in each country and between countries, and can change frequently.

Beyond visas, further accommodations for a recruiting and retaining a culturally diverse workforce should be taken into account. For instance, providing a quiet space for prayer can make a workplace more welcoming and inclusive for employees with a range of beliefs, as can taking into account different cultural or religious holidays.

Of course, these considerations and accommodations can sometimes be an added business cost as well as a logistical challenge. Colleagues from different cultures can also bring with them different workplace attitudes, values, behaviors, and etiquette.

While these can be enriching and even beneficial in a diverse professional environment, they can also cause misunderstandings or ill feelings between team members.

For instance, the expectation of formality or relative informality , organizational hierarchy, and even working hours can conflict across cultures. Where a Japanese colleague may not feel it appropriate to leave work before their manager or, indeed, anyone else , a Swedish professional may be used to a 6-hour working day. Additionally, different approaches to punctuality, confrontation , or dealing with conflict can prove an issue. However, working styles and attitudes towards work can be very different, reflecting cultural values and compounding differences.

If not recognized and accounted, conflicting approaches to work can put the brakes on productivity. For instance, approaches to teamwork and collaboration can vary notably. Some cultures, including many in Asia and Central America, value collective consensus when working towards a goal. Whereas others, such as Germany and America, put emphasis on the independence of the individual.

Likewise, emphasis on order, rigor, and organization in the workplace versus flexibility and spontaneity can also reflect underlying cultural values. The Virgin Group is recognized as a leader in promoting workplace diversity and fostering a positive working culture. Hear how Richard Branson makes culture work in a multinational business by being flexible and open to different working styles:. In many ways, the Hult classroom mirrors this experience, immersing you in a diverse and collaborative working environment from day one.

By studying around the world and learning with peers and professors from over different countries, you will master the skill of communicating effectively across cultures and embrace the value of diversity in the workplace.

Have you experienced any particularly positive or negative aspects of working in a culturally diverse team? Do these influence your professional life today? Let us know in the comments below.

Make the most of what your career has to offer with a Masters in International Business from Hult. To learn more, take a look at our blog How volunteering prepared me for business school , or give your employability a huge boost with an MBA in international business. Download a brochure or get in touch today to find out how Hult can help you to explore everything about the business world, the future, and yourself.

Follow us. A firm handshake is a common practice when first meeting an employer, new business associate or co-worker. Both men and women greet with a handshake. While shaking hands, it is also polite to make eye contact and smile. Every workplace has different policies regarding clothing and personal appearance. When you go for an interview or start a new job it is usually best to dress more formally or conservatively until you learn more about the individual workplace culture and its expectations.

You can always alter your dress when you become more familiar with your workplace. For the most part, the common dress code for offices is informal to casual for both men and women. However, jeans, shorts or revealing clothing are generally discouraged in office environments. When passing people in hallways or arriving at work in the morning it is customary to say hello or good morning and make eye contact.

The same applies to leaving at the end of the day. It is courteous to say hello to all co-workers regardless of their position in the company.

Canadian workplaces are generally quite casual. It is common to address co-workers and business associates by first name, even when talking to a manager or supervisor. However, when introducing someone, use both their first and last names. Note: There are exceptions to this in formal settings or when addressing high-ranking officials. In these cases it is common to use Mr. Try to participate in group discussions and meetings, even if only to ask a few questions.

Contributing your own ideas or thoughts indicates that you are interested and want to be involved. However, do not interrupt the conversation but wait for your turn to speak. Most employers prefer that you ask questions if you do not understand procedures or instructions rather than be confused or make mistakes. Employers appreciate workers who are eager to learn new skills and adapt to changes in the workplace.

Asking questions of colleagues and immediate supervisors is one of the best ways you can show your desire to learn and develop professionally. Socializing and friendship are a normal part of workplace culture in Canada. However, it is considered impolite to ask directly about personal affairs such as religion, age and income.