The rise of populism has seen the election of political figures and parties who promote negative attitudes towards migrants and foreign nationals to further their own goals. This context is mirrored in active or passive welcoming behaviours or (sometimes) low-level aggression by locals towards foreigners in their country.
It is important to understand which countries seem to have an unwelcoming environment for international assignees and what companies and individuals can do to master this difficult situation. Based on recent research by The RES Forum that looked at managing global mobility in hostile environments, this article describes the neglected areas of social and psychological threats.
We encompass these more intangible aspects of living abroad as these have clear effects on how assignees feel and behave in their host environments. We factor in general attitudes of the local population and host teams with respect to issues such as whether they are perceived to be welcoming, friendly, open and helpful. However, this is a generalisation of many intricate and individualised actions and beliefs of host country nationals and it generates, therefore, a simplified picture that does not apply to each person in a particular country.
Given that companies, HR and global mobility (GM) leaders have to take decisions relating to general market circumstances, broad country patterns and socio-cultural as well as institutional contexts, we believe it is important to go beyond an analysis of physical threats (terrorism, criminality etc) to include institutional (cumbersome regulations, difficult access to government services) and psychological (negative attitudes to foreigners, host population avoids contact) threats.
Most academic research has concentrated on physically-dangerous environments, but too little work has been devoted to understanding the effects of social and psychological threats – e.g. of unwelcoming locals – on international assignees.
The RES Forum member companies identified as friendliest countries the US, Netherlands, Singapore, Australia and Canada. In contrast, the least friendly countries were seen by the GM experts as Saudi Arabia, Russia, India, China, and Mexico. Other relatively unfriendly countries were quoted as Taiwan, Romania, Afghanistan, South Africa and Vietnam.
While the selection is restricted to those countries that RES Forum member firms operated in, it became apparent that the friendliest countries were seen as posing low social and psychological threats. These included predominantly developed market economies where the command of English was excellent. This may make expatriate/local interactions easier.
The pattern among the less friendly countries was very varied although they tended to be poorer, less developed and have a lower percentage of good English speakers (with the notable exception of South Africa) in their populations. We know from our and other academic and professional research that the most physically-hostile countries are often afflicted by ineffective governance, a lack of legal transparency, high wealth and earnings inequality and high levels of crime and violence. Interestingly, in the research there was a substantial overlap of unfriendly and hostile environments.
How can we understand the social and psychological threat levels better? Within city attractiveness studies of London, Vienna and Singapore it has been noted that the openness of locals to interact with foreigners, the assessment of a city as cosmopolitan and/or the feeling that a specific city is positive for learning and career growth are all attractive factors to foreigners who seek to live and work in that location. But we have few insights into locations where the host environment can be more psychologically and socially challenging. The RES Forum survey looked at the effects of these challenges on global assignees. The way host country locals treat expatriates has a serious effect on assignees. Unfriendly attitudes and behaviours by locals can result in psychological problems for international staff.
So what can multinational corporations do? While many companies respond to physical threats, psychological and social issues are far more difficult to identify and deal with. Companies should pay close attention to issues in unfriendly locations and offer local mentors, buddy systems, coaching and counselling where appropriate. Other key activities to support expatriates could entail sophisticated selection that takes psychological issues into account, enhanced training in resilience, stronger local networking and local team support, coaching, housing, rest and recuperation and psychological help where health issues have arisen. Identifying and managing psychological threats is likely to strengthen assignee performance, retention and well-being and must be in the interest of both organisations and individuals.
