Intercultural training as paradigm juxtaposition, and the need to differentiate critical cross-cultural management studies: The example of ‘managing Muslim minorities at work’

Cross-cultural management (CCM) studies is a multi-paradigmatic discipline which is commonly differentiated into functionalist (positivist), interpretive and critical, and intercultural training is its applied version in practice. Paradigms are ‘lenses’ from which to view reality. If paradigms are juxtaposed – considered in light of each other – apparent contractions across paradigms might be resolved and metatheoretical insights across multiple paradigms may be achieved. This article exemplifies paradigm juxtaposition based on a clearly specified empirical problem, namely: ‘how to manage Muslim minorities at work’. Based on the Burrell and Morgan taxonomy, paradigms may be differentiated based on two dimensions, namely objective and subjective, and regulative and radical change approaches. This article firstly shows how juxtaposing these four paradigmatic lenses enables a more holistic and sophisticated approach to the ‘problem’ for which the intercultural training is ordered and thus results in a better-fitting and more nuanced intercultural training practice. Secondly, this article establishes why the present academic practice of subsuming multiple approaches under the umbrella term “critical CCM” is insufficient for solving contemporary cross-cultural management problems. Consequently, critical CCM studies need to be re-differentiated into objectivist and subjectivist worldviews.