Corps de l’article

Over the past four decades, IB research has expanded its focus from traditional forms of organizational structures, legal and economic issues, to topics related to the identity and culture of individuals, teams, and organizations, particularly following the 1980 work of Hofstede (Leung et al., 2005). In doing so, IB research acknowledges the prominence of cross-cultural interactions resulting primarily from globalization and the need to study them to facilitate cross-cultural business exchanges and experiences.

Within this stream, IB research has hitherto neglected interactions of individuals with stigmatized national identity with foreign-based partners or clients. Other management fields have similarly overlooked this matter. Yet, over decades, identity has been a focus of studies in regard to its disclosure and its antecedents. These studies have mainly focused on sexual orientation (see Clair et al., 2005; Croteau et al., 2008; Hereck, 2009; Lidderdale et al., 2007; Ragins, 2004, 2008; Schneider, 2016), health conditions (e.g., people with chronic illnesses), or disability (e.g., Stone and Colella, 1996).

National identity, which is “one of the most fundamental of social identities” (Milfont et al., 2020) and which plays a crucial role in forming organizational identity (Baba et al., 2021; Hannan et al., 2006), has received very limited attention (Vaara et al., 2021). To date, very little is known about what leads individuals to unveil their national identity in international work settings, especially when this identity is stigmatized, which has been linked to “negative beliefs” about those who hold it (Pescosolido et al., 2008), being seen by others as having a “personal flaw” (Goffman, 1963), and considered “undesirable” (Ragins, 2005).

In an attempt to address this gap, this study is guided by the following research question: What are the antecedents of the disclosure of a stigmatized national identity in a cross-national work setting? Addressing this question is critical and timely for several reasons:

First, according to the literature, in work domains, individuals may feel the need to reveal their identity to align “their self-view to the views others have of them” notably “if doing so is central to their self-concept” (Ragins, 2008: p.200). However, those who reveal a stigmatized identity may experience employment discrimination, social exclusion, and even hate crimes (Clair et al., 2005; Crocker et al., 1998; Croteau et al., 2008). This makes the disclosure of stigmatized national identity an intriguing issue to investigate.

Second, the media coverage of the current geopolitical context, marked by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, has revealed that refugees were treated differently depending on their national and ethnic identity. This coverage has shown on several occasions that Ukrainian citizens, who are “European people with blue eyes and blond hair[1]”, and who “look like us” (Bayoumi, 2022) have been receiving better treatment in western countries than non-White and non-Christian refugees, such as Afghan, Sudanese, or Eritrean refugees. This makes this study’s topic a pressing and concerning issue for international business. Indeed, the supposed differential treatment of refugees suggests that some refugees, particularly those with a stigmatized national identity may face identity issues in the near future in their new workplaces and host countries.

Third, in the industry of call centers, which is this study’s focus, employees serving foreign markets are either enlisted or coerced to shape their national identity, changing their names, accents and culture, to embrace those of their foreign clients (Tine, 2011; Taktak Kallel; 2006; Nyobe and Plane, 2015). As employees are pressured to mask their actual national identity, it is crucial to find out the antecedents that may lead them to reveal this identity to foreign clients.

This study draws on Social Identity Theory (SIT) (Tajfel, 1978) and on Stigma Theory (Goffman, 1963; Clair et al., 2005; Ragins, 2008), both of which provide insight into what may cause individuals to disclose a stigmatized identity. SIT states that individuals make identity-related choices based on how they relate to others, while stigma theory posits that individuals may or may not disclose their stigmatized identity depending on their individual characteristics, the context of disclosure, and the anticipated consequences of disclosure.

This study intends to advance both IB and management studies. At the theoretical level, it will complete the existing definition of SIT, adding to it ‘individual antecedents’ while providing answers regarding how to overcome stigma. At the empirical level, it will provide details on the antecedents leading to the disclose of a stigmatized national identity in international work settings. I will argue that language fluency, experience in and with client countries, as well as holding highly valued skills are key antecedents to national identity disclosure.

I will begin with a careful examination of both IB and management literature on identity disclosure. I proceed to outlining this literature’s failure to identify, among others, the antecedents to national identity disclosure. Next, drawing on a cross-comparison case study of two Tunisian-based call centers serving Western clients, I explain in the next section why Tunisia and the study’s 40 respondents of Tunisian nationality are relevant to this research, as well as how the data were collected and analyzed. Finally, I offer insights into which antecedents lead to national identity disclosure and why, moving on to the study’s contribution, both theoretically and empirically.

National identity and social identity theory in international business

The IB literature has not addressed the disclosure of stigmatized national identity in cross-national work settings. Instead, it has focused on social Identity Theory (SIT), which holds that individuals make identity choices depending on how they relate to others. Hence, the next section will look into SIT in IB. Although IB has not studied stigmatized national identities specifically, its emphasis on SIT may help understand how/why individuals relate to others whether or not those others share their national identity. To begin, I define national identity, this study’s focus.

National identity, a key diversity component

National identity is a “key aspect of diversity in and around international organizations” (Vaara et al., 2021) that informs the preferences and behavior of local and global consumers and employees. It consists of four components: belief system, national heritage, cultural homogeneity, and ethnocentrism (Huntington 1996). Belief system refers to supranatural beliefs or religion and how they foster solidarity and participation in society. Their role includes easing tensions and facilitating conflict resolutions within a culture. National heritage relates to history and how significant historical events and figures are for today’s nation members. Cultural homogeneity refers to “cultural uniqueness” or to what makes a culture unique and distinct from others despite the existence of subcultures within it. Finally, Ethnocentrism amounts to making cultural attributions and evaluations based on one’s own cultural standards. It entails maintaining culturally centered values and behaviors (Keillor and Hult, 1999). In business setting, this leads, for instance, to favoring one’s fellow citizens over foreigners for employment, or making managerial decisions based on one’s cultural references.

Thus, national identity is a set of core traits, meanings, and unique characteristics (Clark, 1990; Keillor et al. 1996) such as language, religion, history, cultural beliefs, and norms that “tie subcultures together within national boundaries” (Thelen and Honeycutt, 2004) and that distinguish members of a given culture from others. National identity is a collective, group, and social identity that overlaps with other social identities including gender, territorial, racial, religious and ethnic identities (Wong and Duff, 2001). It is not impermeable. According to Douglas and Craig (1997), and Thelen and Honeycutt (2004), national identity may evolve over time due to external forces such as immigration and international exposure.

When a national identity meets other national identities: Focus on social identity theory in IB

SIT posits that individuals categorize themselves and others--using various categorization schemes (Ashforth and Mael, 1989) -- that may be based on stereotypes (Hamilton, 1985) in order to strengthen their self-esteem and limit feelings of uncertainty (Abrams and Brown, 1989). Thus, SIT consists of two processes: self-categorization and social comparison (Ashforth and Mael, 1989; Citrin, Wong and Duff, 2001). The former refers to “identification as” and reflects an individual’s perceived self-location in a group. The latter refers to “identification with” and indicates positive feelings toward the group an individual believes they belong to.

SIT may lead to ingroup favoritism and/or outgroup prejudice (Barrett, Lyons, and Del Valle, 2004). Indeed, self-categorization produces an accentuation of either perceived similarities with in-group members or perceived differences with out-group members in values, behavior, or attitudes (Hogg and Abrams 1988). Social comparison generates an effect that brings positive outcomes to the self. This usually leads to the in-group being judged positively and the out-group negatively (Adler and Adler, 1987; Lauring, 2008; Mackie et al., 2000; Nygren, 1971; Schneider, Hall, and Nygren, 1971), which may engender ethnocentrism (Turner et al., 1987) or discriminatory behavior (Hsee, 1996). In his study, Tajfel (1974: p.13) referred to this phenomenon as “in-group bias”, or “the tendency to favor the ingroup over the out-group in evaluation and behavior”. Social identity can, therefore, be positive or negative depending on individuals’ evaluations. When it is deemed unsatisfactory, individuals may either leave their social group to join a more “positively distinct” one or make their social group more positively distinct (Tajfel, 1974).

Group distinctiveness is, therefore, a key condition for identifying with a group. Perceived similarity is another condition, since people usually identify with those with whom they have similarities, while distinguishing themselves from those with whom they share few or no similarities (Ashforth and Mael, 1989). Other conditions for identification include prestige of the group, salience of the outgroup, and other factors such as “interpersonal interaction (…), liking, proximity, shared goals or threat, common history” (Ashforth and Mael, 1989: p.22).

In IB, where individuals with different national identities have to cooperate with each other, SIT can be described as the extent to which these individuals relate both to those who share their national identity and to those who do not. SIT has been found to inform company practices such as global recruiting, expatriation success or failure, international knowledge transfer, global cooperation, or knowledge flows.

Buchan et al.’s (2011; p.14) multi-nation study, for instance, found a positive link between global social identity and cooperation, asserting that “an inclusive social identification with the world community” facilitated global cooperation that “transcends parochial interests”.

Regarding expatriation, Olsen and Martins concluded in their 2009 study that host country nationals offered greater support to expatriate colleagues whose demographic characteristics (country of origin, race, or ethnicity) were deemed prestigious. This contributed to facilitating the integration of the “prestigious” colleagues while slowing down that of those who were not perceived as such. Toh’s (2003) study added that expatriates who were seen by host country nationals as members of their ingroup were more likely to adopt organizational citizenship behaviors.

SIT has also been found to affect knowledge transfer in international joint ventures between local companies and foreign corporations. Child and Rodrigues (1996: p.47) asserted that “social identities are consequential for the quality of learning that takes place and hence for realizing the full potential value of the knowledge being transferred”. According to the authors, the type of knowledge being transferred, its content and the way it was transferred were all informed by the participants’ social identities.

International knowledge inflows too, have been associated with SIT. Reiche et al. (2015: p.554) for instance, stated that shared language among headquarter and subsidiary managers “positively related to tacit knowledge inflows at the subsidiary level”. Regarding recruiting, Carr et al’s (2001) research on Tanzanian students revealed that these students believed human resources should favor Tanzanian citizens over Western and East African candidates when recruiting, which the authors argue, confirms ingroup favoritism.

SIT offers valuable information regarding ingroup/outgroup formation and their relationships in cross-national business. However, it falls short in explaining what may prompt people to disclose or conceal their stigmatized national identity. Indeed, while SIT explains why individuals may choose to stand with those who do or do not share their national identity, it does not indicate what may lead these individuals to choose to reveal or conceal their national identity to outgroup members, especially when this identity is stigmatized by those members. Therefore, the next section will look into management studies regarding disclosure of stigmatized identities.

Stigma theory and disclosure of identity

Management and organization studies have similarly largely dismissed addressing national identity, as well. However, they have studied other identity features (e.g., personal identity and sexual orientation) and more importantly, the antecedents to the disclosure of these features, especially when they are stigmatized. Although this literature has not focused on national identity specifically, it may provide insight into individual choices regarding the (non)disclosure of their stigmatized identities.

According to this literature, individuals with stigmas, that is, those who have characteristics deemed “undesirable, deviant, repulsive” (Ragins, 2005) or personal flaws (Goffman, 1963) face multiple challenges both in work and nonwork domains. They are usually devalued and discriminated against, may face psychological stress, social isolation, employment termination and be subject to physical assault and even hate crimes (Clair et al., 2005; Crocker et al., 1998; Croteau et al., 2008; Dovidio et al., 2000; Gielen et al., 1997; Jones, 1984; Herek, 2009; Kleck et al., 2000; Herek, Cogan, and Gillis, 2002; Schevitz, 2002). Individuals who hold an “invisible stigmatized identity” (Ragins, 2008) face the additional challenge of deciding whether to reveal their hidden stigma (Clair et al., 2005; Goffman, 1963). Examples of invisible stigmatized identities include “gay men, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgendered employees” (Ragins, 2008: p.194). Over the past decades, management and organization studies have identified four broad groups of antecedents to identity disclosure: stigma characteristics, individual features, the disclosure context, and the anticipated consequences of disclosure.

Stigma characteristics may include stigma controllability, its disruptiveness, whether it is a threat to others, and personal motives (Clair et al., 2005; Crocker et al., 1998; Jones et al., 1984; Ragins, 2004; Ragins, 2008). According to these studies, people who are considered responsible for their stigma (controllability), are more likely to be rejected, which may prevent them from revealing it. Finally, a stigma that causes discomfort and uncertainty (disruptiveness) may not easily be revealed by its holder.

Individual differences and/or personality characteristics, such as propensity toward risk taking, identity development, individual motivation, and other identities held by an individual (Clair et al., 2005), are another set of antecedents to identity disclosure. In their study, Clair et al. (2005) posit that individuals who reveal their stigmatized identity have a high propensity toward risk taking. Likewise, those whose identity is highly developed (e.g., LGBTIQA+ people who are already “out”) are more likely to reveal their stigma (Clair et al., 2005) than those less developed.

In addition, the disclosure context or environmental factors (Croteau et al., 2008) may either trigger or hinder disclosure (Berkley et al., 2019). Working in a discrimination-free environment (“institutional support”), with people who share one’s stigma (“similar others”) or support it (“ally relationships”) (Ragins, 2008), may facilitate disclosure (Miller and Major, 2000; Reis and Shaver, 1988; Sarason et al., 1990). Personal motives (Clair et al., 2005), also dubbed internal psychological factors (Ragins, 2004), including the willingness to reveal one’s true self, build/preserve relationships, get accommodation, and trigger social change, may likewise shape an individual’s decision to reveal their invisible stigma.

Finally, the anticipated consequences of disclosure (Ragins, 2008) shape identity disclosure decisions. Consequences that are deemed positive, such as self-esteem (Corrigan and Matthews, 2003), relief (Clair et al., 2005; Woods, 1994), well-being (Chaudoir and Fisher, 2010), reduced stress (Clair et al., 2005), and building intimacy (Derlega et al., 1993; Jourard, 1971) may facilitate disclosure.

Although enlightening, this literature is as unsatisfying as the IB literature presented earlier for the following reasons: First, it mainly focuses on sexual orientation, health conditions, or disability. Although some (e.g., Sanchez and Bonam, 2009) have addressed identity disclosure among biracial people, little is known about the antecedents to identity disclosure among individuals with concealable stigmatized cultural and national identities. Second, current studies have mainly focused on the antecedents relating to individual characteristics, the context of disclosure, and the anticipated consequences of disclosure. Are these antecedents also relevant in a cross-national work setting? If so, which among them, lead to national identity disclosure?

This article is designed to extend extant studies in at least the two points listed above. It differs from those studies in that it focuses on the disclosure of stigmatized national identities, a topic that has been understudied in IB research and in the management literature.

National identity is a crucial matter to address given the intense cross-cultural exchanges (Guillén and García-Canal, 2009; Pinkham and Peng, 2017) resulting from globalization, and given the current tense geopolitical context.

In the industry of call center especially, employees that serve foreign clients are either enlisted or coerced to shape their national identity. In his study of a Senegal-based French speaking call center, Tine (2011) stated that teleoperators were forced “to neutralize their Senegalese accent” (p. 17), “erase” their “culture of origin” and “deny” their “identity” (p.1). In her Tunisian study, Taktak Kallel (2006) reported that call center agents were coerced “to adopt a French pseudonym and a preferably Parisian accent”. Boussebaa et al., (2014) too, recounted, in their study of two Indian-based call centers serving U.S. corporations how Indian workers were coerced to mimic American English and accent, and how “failure to provide the required ‘pure’ English service experience” (p. 15) led one company to lose a U.S. client.

The study intends to learn: 1) what types of individuals’ antecedents facilitate or hinder national identity disclosure in cross-national work settings; 2) why a person’s antecedents matter in shaping their decision to disclose their national identity.

Methodology

The study’s context

Tunisian national identity

Based on Keillor and Hult’s (1999) definition of national identity, Tunisian national identity can be understood as the extent to which individuals identify with Tunisian culture’s unique characteristics. In addition to sharing the same belief system and national heritage, these individuals are presumed to share two other features: cultural homogeneity and ethnocentrism (Huntington, 1996).

Belief system: One of Tunisia’s important belief systems is Islam. Although Tunisia recognizes other religions, such as Christianism and Judaism, Article 1 of the Tunisian Constitution considers Islam as the nation’s religion. To date, Muslims are estimated to make up 99.5% of the Tunisian population[2].

National heritage: Colonization is considered an important national heritage of many African nations that “predisposes” these nations “toward the West” (Keillor and Hult, 1999). In its history, Tunisia underwent at least nine foreign invasions including those of the Arabs, the Ottoman Turks, and the French (Antichan, 1884). During Tunisia’s French protectorate (1881–1956), indigenous populations were forced to abide by French principles, rules, culture, and language (La Barbera, 2006; Lüsebrink, 1997; Yousfi, 2014), which shaped their self-representation (Daoud, 2011). Although Tunisia undertook “Arabization efforts” (Daoud, 2011) after its independence, it “still has strong political, economic and cultural ties with France” (Yousfi, 2014, p.401).

Cultural homogeneity: Zghal’s (1994) study suggests there are three features that may set Tunisian culture apart from other North African, Muslim, and Arab cultures: 1/the perpetual search for equality and dignity, 2/the search for fuzzy situations, and 3/ the promotion of social relations. The author related the first trait to Islam, which she said, “forbids any intermediary” “between man and the supreme being” (Zghal 1994, p.178). In businesses, this translates into people being uncomfortable with a “manager controlling behind them” (Yousfi et al. 2005), striving to limit gaps in pay, training, career development, information, and promoting entrepreneurship as a way out of mandatory subordination to employers (Zghal, 1994; Yousfi et al., 2005). In the same vein, Hosfede’s study[3] classified Tunisia as “a moderately feminine society” “driven by a certain amount of modesty and fairness” and valuing equality.

Zghal also noted that Tunisians voluntarily seek fuzzy and unclear situations, rejecting written rules in favor of particular situations, and producing “ambiguous rules” leading to multiple interpretations. Furthermore, they highly value extra-organizational membership and blood ties, which according to Zghal, strongly influences organizational practices, such as recruiting and promotion. This results in the most important positions being held by family members, friends, and acquaintances of managers (Zghal, 1994). In her study, Yousfi (2014, p. 402) also found that in Tunisian organizations, most of which are family-owned, “relational logic (…) takes precedence over formal task definitions”.

Ethnocentrism: Existing studies on Tunisian culture (Yousfi, 2014; Zghal, 1994) indicate that Tunisians may be as attached to their Tunisian, Arab-Muslim culture (since they value community membership) as to the cultures of those who invaded their country, especially France (because of their national heritage). This makes it difficult to ascertain whether they make cultural attributions based solely on Tunisian cultural norms.

A relevant setting for the study

The current study was conducted in Tunisia at a time where the country was considered by French investors to be North Africa’s second-best destination for service activities (Relation Client Magazine, 2011). The study was performed during the Arab spring, characterized by political instability, as well as, identity, cultural and religious crises in the country. As these crises had major consequences in international business, due among others, to the migration of “tens of thousands” of Tunisians to the Italian island of Lampedusa in the early months of the revolution (Boubakri, 2013), I believe this study is relevant for today’s businesses although the data were collected in 2012.

Due to its geostrategic position (located between Africa, Europe, and the Arab world), the quality and youthfulness of its workforce, and its social and fiscal advantages, Tunisia has become attractive to foreign investment. In 2010, 3,135 foreign companies were established there, employing 324,821 people. Nowadays, French-speaking call centers employ 22,000 workers and make nearly 270 million (Tunisian Ministry of Communication Technologies) in revenue.

I chose the call center industry after reading that their employees who served foreign-based clients were coerced or enlisted to shape their national identity (Tine, 2011, Taktak Kallel, 2006).

Finally, the Tunisian national identity is this study’s focus as this identity may be regarded as a stigma in the region and countries where the study’s respondents’ clients reside. The study’s respondents, who are Tunisian nationals, remotely serve Western-based clients. The literature suggests that Tunisians may face prejudices and challenges due to being North Africans, predominantly Arabs and Muslims. In their study of state accommodations for Muslims based in France, Germany, and Great Britain, Fetzer and Soper (2003) contend that there has been “popular fear of Muslims” in the three nations, fear that has intensified following the 9/11 attacks. In France, where the majority of the two companies’ clients reside, anti-Muslim acts increased by 54% in 2019, according to the French Central Territorial Intelligence Service. In the UK, hate crimes against Muslims increased by 593% following the attacks at New Zealand mosques (Dodd, 2019).

France-based North African descendants are, according to Lamont et al. (2002), deemed “too culturally different” notably because of their religion (Islam as opposed to Catholicism) and are “prime victims of French racism.” Along with young Black men, young North African men “are 20 times more likely” than their White counterparts to be stopped by the police in France (Défenseurs des droits, 2017, p. 391). This description makes my choice of Tunisian respondents relevant, since holding Tunisian identity may be considered a stigma with regard to the definition of Ragins (2005) in regions/countries where the respondents’ clients live.

Case selection

The two companies’ legal names will be kept private per their managements’ request. In the current study, they will be referred to as COMP1 and COMP2. They were both selected following an exploratory study conducted in June 2012 on eight Tunisian-based call centers.

The reason for performing a qualitative exploratory study is that there are no available studies on the disclosure of stigmatized national identity in IB and management studies. The first step was to identify firms that might fit to my target companies, that is, any Tunisian-based call centers serving Western customers and regulating their employees’ national identity.

The companies were found through the employees’ personal networks of the first firm (snowball sampling: Noy, 2008; Handcock and Gile, 2011), a technique recommended when the researcher is not familiar with the location (which was so in my case as I am not a Tunisian citizen) and when “the focus of study is on a sensitive issue, possibly concerning a relatively private matter, and thus requires the knowledge of insiders to locate people for study” (Biernacki and Waldorf, 1981: p.141). I interviewed 30 call center agents and managers, asking 10 open-ended questions about how they had been handling employees’ national identity at work. The study revealed that of the eight pre-selected call centers, six strongly coerced their personnel to westernize their identities, changing their names, accents, as well as any visible features of their national identity. As the literature predicted (Tine, 2011; Taktak Kallel, 2006; D’Cruz and Noronha, 2006; Poster, 2007), the employees of the six companies were required to use White-sounding names, pretend to be Westerners, and be based in the West when on call with Western clients. This strongly restrained employees’ freedom to reveal their Tunisian identity. Therefore, I chose the two remaining companies, COMP1 and COMP2, as they did not coerce workers to adopt western identity and rather allowed them the freedom to decide whether to keep their Tunisian national identity or to adopt a western one. I believe my choice of COMP1 and COMP2 was relevant as their employees were free to decide whether to disclose their Tunisian identity, contrary to those of the other six companies. The research question, what are the antecedents that lead to the disclosure of a stigmatized national identity in cross-national work settings? is expected to uncover the antecedents and actual reasons COMP1 and COMP2 employees revealed their Tunisian Arab Muslim identity to Western clients although not being coerced to do so.

Two companies studied

COMP1 and COMP2 are both Tunis-based multi-channel call centers serving mostly French but also Belgian customers on behalf of Western contractors for whom they work as providers. While COMP2 employees were making outbound calls to sell phone and internet subscriptions to the French, those of COMP1 were taking inbound calls, to answer Belgian clients who had encountered technical issues with their internet-telephone-TV subscriptions. Employees were compensated based on performance criteria, which, according to the two companies’ managers, comprised: attendance, work behavior, versatility (i.e., ability to work on all activities), and individual performance (e.g., the manager makes sure the teleoperator meets the average call duration as well as the penetration rate[4]). Table 1 summarizes the two companies’ description.

Research strategy and data collection

The data were collected in the two companies through a comparative case study approach. According to Yin (2003: p.13), this approach best fits studies investigating “a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident”, which is so in this study’s case. Indeed, as interactions between individuals with stigmatized national identity and their overseas clients have not received particular attention, there is uncertainty about the antecedents that trigger or hinder national identity disclosure and whether the context of disclosure plays a role.

Following recommendations of Eisenhardt and Graebner (2007), I selected respondents from different levels and positions, who I believed were “highly knowledgeable” of the topic of the study, that is, people actively involved in regulating Tunisian employees’ national identity. These respondents were identified as playing an active role in this identity in that they were somehow expected to shape or match their behavior with the national identity they had chosen (case of the teleoperators) or participated in some way in the management of employees’ national identity through their activity (supervising, training, recruiting, running the activity).

Table 1

Company characteristics

Company characteristics

-> Voir la liste des tableaux

The sample consisted of 40 people, comprising 30 from COMP1 and 10 from COMP2 (see Table 2). It was limited to 40 people because adding more would not have added information to the study, as theoretical saturation (Glaser and Strauss, 1967) had been reached.

Table 2

Sample characteristics

Sample characteristics

-> Voir la liste des tableaux

To “appreciate the possibilities of multiple realities” (Yin, 1994), I opted for multiple data collection methods, including direct observation, document analysis, and semi-structured interviews. The observations took place for three days at each company in July 2012. I observed the respondents’ day-to-day life at work, including their phone conversations with Western clients, their meetings and breaktimes, in an attempt to learn how their national identity was shaped. I also assessed companies’ memoranda, archives, and staff registers to ascertain the two company policies on employees’ national identity disclosure.

I interviewed each of the 40 respondents individually, 30 to 90 minutes per interview. The interview questions included the respondents’ socio-demographic description (age, gender, past experience, seniority, etc.), company policies on identity management and disclosure, and individual antecedents to disclosure. The data were recorded and transcribed in Microsoft Word.

Data analysis

As per recommendations of Eisenhardt (1989) and Gavard-Perret (2008), I manually analyzed the data by data source (interviews/documentation/observation), reviewing each piece of data carefully and meticulously in an attempt to perform thematic coding, which consists of emergent themes, patterns, or explanations (Miles and Huberman, 2003). This manual approach (Gavard-Perret, 2008) was adopted in order to identify potentially consistent subtleties and complexities in the data that I would have missed if I had used a qualitative data analysis software. The data reviewed were discussed every two months at research meetings with experienced management researchers, whose role was “to critique interpretations that might look a little too gullible” (Gioia, Corley, and Hamilton, 2012), an approach that proved to be beneficial as these researchers’ outside perspective helped preserve the study’s neutrality.

The data review led to identification of three recurrent themes and codes that I deemed relevant to the research question (see Table 3). These themes are: 1) employees’ use of western identity (coded as “WEST ID”), although they were free to keep their Tunisian identity; 2) the antecedents to employees’ non-disclosure of their Tunisian identity (coded as “ANTE NON-DISCL ID”); 3) the antecedents to employees’ disclosure of their Tunisian identity (coded as “ANTE DISCL ID”). Based on these themes, in keeping with guidance from Eisenhardt (1989), Glauser and Strauss (1999), and Yin (1994), I performed within-case and cross-case comparisons toward highlighting similarities and differences among individuals and companies.

Table 3

Thematic coding of data

Thematic coding of data

-> Voir la liste des tableaux

Findings

Employees used western identity even though they were free to use their own

The data reveal that although being allowed the use of their original Tunisian national identity, 20 out of the 40 employees in the sample adopted a western identity. This consisted of 13 COMP1 employees and 7 COMP2 employees. These employees all introduced themselves to their clients using a Belgian or French-sounding pseudonym rather than their actual Tunisian names, exclusively speaking French, thus abstaining from practicing Arabic during work, and pretending to live in France or Belgium and to be of French or Belgian nationality. Also, they made considerable efforts to build strong links with their clients’ countries and language to maintain or improve their mastering of the clients’ cultures. W., a COMP2 teleoperator, who chose to be named “Sandra Lafarge,” explained how she proceeded in order to maintain links with her French clients’ culture:

“I have always been around French people. I used to work in tourism as a waitress in a bar frequented by French people. I have a lot of contact with French people, and I watch French channels very regularly.”

When digging into the reasons these employees made such a choice, I found out that they perceived Western clients to be culturally biased against their Arab-Muslim and North African identity.

Employees’ use of a western identity instead of a tunisian one may rest on the western clients’ cultural prejudices perceived by employees

Employees described some of their Western clients as Muslim, Arab, and North African intolerants. When interviewing them, I frequently heard words such as “racist” or “Islamophobic” as they described their clients.

I., for instance, a COMP1 supervisor, contended that:

“My teleoperators receive an average of 40 clients a day each. About 3 or 4 of these clients make racist comments.”

His colleague M., another COMP1 supervisor, revealed that they were warned by management and prepared for such comments from Western clients.

“When I was recruited, my manager warned me during training. He told me: you will often be called a d**** Arab.”

According to these supervisors and their colleagues, the most common slurs and requests from clients were: “D**** Arab” and “I want to talk to a Frenchman.”

Employees also made the following remarks when asked why they were using a western identity instead of their Tunisian identity:

“The French don’t necessarily accept to deal with people from the Maghreb. There are some racists…” C., a COMP2 training manager said.

“Normally, we should tell the clients that we are Tunisians. But as some are racist, we prefer to tell them we are French or Belgian [...] so as not to hear ‘d**** Arabs,’” S., a COMP1 teleoperator said.

“Some of our teleoperators often choose to keep their real names at the beginning when they are recruited. But as they get hung up on, they end up using (western) pseudonyms,” R., COMP2’s HR Manager said.

“When clients call me, I can tell them that I am in Tunisia. But because some people are racist, sometimes we have to say that we are in Tours, France, where the parent company (of our contractor) is located,” S., a COMP1 teleoperator said.

“Sometimes I have racist clients. In this case, I prefer to tell them that we are Belgians and that we are in Belgium. When we see that the customer is aggressive, we prefer to cut them short and tell them that we are Belgian,” M., a COMP1 supervisor said.

Furthermore, the data suggest that the studied companies and their Western contractors might be aware and even tolerant of employees’ use of western pseudonyms, as conversations between Western clients and Tunisian teleoperators were recorded and available to contractors.

“COMP1 knows that the use of (western) pseudonyms is the only method to avoid complaints or negative feedback from clients [...]. If, when listening to the recordings, the contractor sees that we are pretending to be Belgians, he will say nothing. He will do nothing. He will understand why we have to do that,” M., a COMP1 supervisor said.

In light of the above quotes, it would be relevant to argue that employees’ use of a western identity instead of a Tunisian, Muslim, Arab, and North African one, might be due to their Western clients’ perceived and/or anticipated cultural prejudices against their national, religious, cultural, and ethnic identity. Considering their actual identity to be stigmatized or believing that it might be so, employees conceal this identity and, therefore, choose a western one instead for fear of racist slurs from clients.

Employees’ strategic skills and comfort with french culture may be key antecedents to national Identity disclosure

As 20 employees out of the 40 in the sample adopted a western identity, the remaining 20 chose to keep their original Tunisian identity. This consisted of 17 COMP1 employees and 3 COMP2 employees.

A close examination of the observational data and fieldnotes revealed that these employees were either knowledgeable in French culture and language (case of 7 people from COMP1 and COMP2) or held skills that were sought after and highly valued by Western clients (case of 17 people, all of whom were COMP1 employees). Four COMP1 employees fell into the two categories. They were both familiar with French culture and language while holding highly valued skills.

Indeed, seven employees (3 at COMP2 and 4 at COMP1) who disclosed their Tunisian identity were born and/or raised in France or had a work experience in Europe, which was not the case of employees who adopted a western identity. Among these employees was M., 36, a COMP2 teleoperator and holder of dual French-Tunisian citizenship. Born in France to Tunisian parents, M. joined Tunisia six years prior to the study due to “family issues” after 30 years of living in France. Her colleague, N., a 30-year-old Tunisian-born teleoperator, also lived almost her entire life in France (from 5 months to 30 years old). At the time of the study, she had been living in Tunisia only for a couple of months following her wedding to her Tunisia-based partner. While working at COMP2, N. was remotely pursuing a doctorate in biochemistry at a Southern France-based university and was expected to defend her dissertation a year later. B., 35, N.’s and M.’s colleague, was not born in France. However, he admitted having lived there “a couple of years” for work.

At COMP1, among employees who kept and revealed to clients their national identity of origin were:

  • K., 31, a Tunisian-born teleoperator who lived in France for 12 years,

  • C., 19, a teleoperator born in Tunisia to a French mother who lived in France for 10 years,

  • A., 30, a French-born Tunisian teleoperator who lived in France during his first 6 years.

  • I., 31, a French-born Tunisian teleoperator who lived in France during his first 8 years, then studied in Belgium for several years.

When asked why they chose Tunisian identity over western identity, these employees did not mention ‘racist comments’ from Western clients as their colleagues who disclosed a western identity did. Indeed, the Western-born and/or raised employees did not complain about clients’ comments deemed racist by their colleagues, since they did not hear such comments from clients. Instead, some, such as K. and N., (COMP2 teleoperators) indicated that they kept their Tunisian identity because they do not believe one should impose on others an identity that is not their own.

“I always go by my Tunisian name. Why should I use a European name? I don’t think people should be forced to use an identity that is not theirs”. N. said.

“I don’t wish to adopt a French surname. One should not prescribe to others the modalities of their identity”. K. said.

Others stated that they kept their Tunisian identity because this identity is not that different from that of their Western clients. The following manager, for instance, contented that his name is quite common in France where his clients reside.

“In France too, there are people called “M1.” (his Tunisian first name). Why should I take a pseudonym?”

Observational data and employee interviews suggest there may be another reason employees chose to disclose their Tunisian identity. This reason is related to the skills employees used to serve Western clients. At the time of the study, the COMP2 employees’ mission was to perform sales of telephone and internet subscriptions to French customers, whereas that of COMP1 workers was to fix technical issues encountered by Belgian clients with these subscriptions.

Thus, contrary to COMP2 employees whose role was to perform outbound calls to French clients in order to “sell” subscriptions, COMP1 staff received inbound calls from Belgian clients experiencing technical issues with theirs. According to the direct observation I carried out at the two companies, the technical assistance offered by COMP1 employees required them to hold specific and expert skills to meet client needs. As Belgian clients did not have the required technical skills to handle issues they encountered with their subscriptions, they absolutely needed Tunisian teleoperators’ expertise. Therefore, Tunisian teleoperators found themselves in a powerful position that might have given them confidence in using their Tunisian Arab-Muslim identity. Western clients needed them more than they did, which was not the case with COMP2 clients, who did not expect or need the calls they received from COMP2 employees. Therefore, based on the observational data, one can posit that COMP1 employees’ highly valued skills may have given them the power and confidence in their ability to serve Western clients without having to use a western identity.

Employee interviews confirmed this observation:

“I’ve been working in call centers for years. I have experience with technical support. I don’t need a French name to be effective.” M2, a COMP1 teleoperator.

“Clients who call you expect you to answer technical issues they may have with their equipment. If you can do that, it doesn’t matter where you’re from or what your name is.” A., a COMP1 teleoperator.

“My nationality has nothing to do with my job. Clients expect competent and efficient people. I am well versed in this business and know how to assist each of my clients. I don’t need to be Belgian to be successful in my job.” L., a COMP1 teleoperator.

Discussion and conclusion

This study has revealed that individual knowledge, skills, and experience are key antecedents to disclosure of a stigmatized national identity. The study contributes to extant studies at different levels.

Contribution to SIT in IB

The study’s findings suggest that the existing definition of SIT may be incomplete. According to this definition (Ashforth and Mael, 1989; Citrin et al., 2001; Hogg and Hardie, 1992; Tajfel, 1978; Spears and Doosje 1997), people identify with in(out)group members depending, among other things, on whether they share similarities with these group members, whether the group is distinctive or prestigious. In this study, 20 respondents chose their (Tunisian) ingroup, coming out as Tunisians, while the other 20 chose the outgroup, identifying with European identity. Of the 20 who chose Tunisian identity, 17 held skills that were highly valued by Western clients; seven were born/raised or had worked in French-speaking European countries, and four fell into either category (see Table 4).

Table 4

Summary of the respondents’characteristics and disclosure patterns

Summary of the respondents’characteristics and disclosure patterns

-> Voir la liste des tableaux

This outcome suggests, contrary to what SIT states, that people do not necessarily identify with a given group because they share similarities with the latter, but rather, because of their antecedents, which in this case are their skills, past experience and comfort with client cultures.

Despite sharing cultural traits and interests (similarities) with their Western clients, the seven French born and/or raised respondents did not choose European identity as SIT would have suggested. Instead, they chose Tunisian identity, arguing that no one should impose a foreign identity on others. These employees’ command over and comfort with French culture and language not only gave them the required knowledge to serve French speaking clients but also strengthened their confidence in serving these clients without having to use a European identity.

Similarly, unlike what SIT suggests, the 20 Tunisian respondents who identified with European identity did not necessarily share similarities or interests with Europeans as they were neither born nor raised in Europe. Besides, they did not consider European identity to be more attractive, distinctive, or prestigious than Tunisian identity. They chose European identity because they feared racist slurs and comments from Western clients.

It might be argued that these 20 respondents picked western identity because they understood this choice as a work requirement, and because they wished to please Western clients and secure their employment. However, as stated in the method section, the two chosen companies did not force employees to take European identity. Adopting European identity was not a condition for keeping one’s employment nor was it considered a performance criterion. While meeting performance criteria requires teleoperators to communicate in French successfully and to have some knowledge of French or Belgian cultures, none of these criteria require the full adoption of European identity, such as a European sounding name, European accent, and customs. Exchanges with R., COMP2’s HR Manager, revealed that some teleoperators picked Tunisian identity at first, but ended up opting for western identity after getting “hung up” repeatedly by clients. This implies that these teleoperators would have preferred to be on the side of their (Tunisian) ingroup but felt compelled to do otherwise. Thus, their ‘choice’ of European identity was not imposed by management as a condition for achieving performance or keeping their job, but rather by European clients. From another point of view, one might see employees’ willingness to identify with Tunisian national identity as “ingroup favoritism” (Barrett, Lyons, and Del Valle, 2004), “in-group bias” (Tajfel 1974).

Feelings of belonging are not always the reason individuals choose to identify with a particular community. Individuals make identity choices based on their own skills and experience and not necessarily based on how they relate to others. In finding this, this study enhances and completes the existing definition of SIT.

Contribution to stigma theory

Tunisian employees describe some of their clients as “racist” and “Islamophobic”. According to them, some European clients have called them “d**** Arabs”. Some do not “accept to deal with people from the Maghreb”. Some have hung up on them for using their Tunisian names, and some have expressed on several occasions their willingness to only “talk to a Frenchman”. These accounts suggest, as the Tunisians seem to assume, that European clients might be prejudiced against the teleoperators’ national and ethnic identity. Also, these accounts imply that the teleoperators’ national identity arouses negative feelings and beliefs in European clients, making it a stigmatized identity according to Goffman’s (1963), Ragins’ (2005) and Pescosolido et al’s (2008) definitions.

The findings have revealed that ‘fear of racism’ was the reason 20 Tunisians picked European identity. Indeed, the 20 employees ‘came out’ as Europeans instead of Tunisians because they believed their Western clients to be biased against their Tunisian, Arab, and Muslim identity. This may be referred to as “the anticipated consequences of disclosure” (Ragins, 2008). According to Corrigan and Matthews (2003), Clair et al. (2005), and Woods (1994), only positive consequences facilitate the disclosure of a stigmatized identity. In this case, employees rather anticipated negative consequences considering, based on their clients’ comments (e.g., “d**** Arabs”) that they were racists.

This study’s findings suggest that having skills that are particularly in demand and/or having a work or life experience in/with client cultures may be ‘remedies’ for stigma. Indeed, employees who were born and/or raised in Europe, as well as those who held skills that were sought after by European clients were able to keep their Tunisian national identity without fear of stigma and racism.

The 17 employees who possessed technical skills that were highly valued by COMP1 clients found themselves in a position of ‘sought-after experts’ while Western clients were merely supplicants. This powerful status may have reinforced COMP1 employees’ power and confidence in serving Western clients using their North African Arab-Muslim identity, thereby possibly protecting them from potentially racist comments from these clients.

The seven Western-born and/or raised Tunisian employees did not complain either about clients’ comments deemed racist by their colleagues, since they did not hear such comments from clients, presumably because clients were satisfied with the service these employees provided, as they might not perceive their cultural and national origin when on phone calls with them. These employees might not feel compelled to ‘come out’ as French or Belgians because they might already ‘sound or look so’ to clients, as they were born and/or raised in client countries.

Contribution to Tunisian national identity

The fact that half of the sample identified as Tunisian while the other half identified as European confirms the Tunisian cultural ambiguity noted by the literature (Yousfi, 2014; Zghal, 1994), according to which Tunisians are attached to both their native culture and the cultures that once invaded their country. The identification of 50% of respondents with a Belgian or French identity may be seen as confirmation of their “predisposition toward the West” (Keillor and Hult, 1999) due to their national heritage. Indeed, the shared history of France and Tunisia, as well as their strong political, cultural, and economic relations (Yousfi, 2014), may have informed employees’ decision to disclose a European identity rather than their actual Tunisian one.

Alternatively, the fact that 50% of the informants identified with their (Tunisian) ingroup could be interpreted as an expression of their need for equality and dignity (as they may not see Europeans as their superiors but rather as their equals), or as a confirmation of their strong desire to belong to their community since they place a high value on community membership (Zghal, 1994; Yousfi et al., 2005).

This strong desire for community membership, however, may make it difficult for management to address what appears to be a critical issue in the study: employees’ fear of racism and stigma from clients, which was cited as the primary reason they chose European identity over Tunisian identity. This necessitates management’s efforts to significantly reduce stigma in order to deliver a better experience for both staff and western clientele. One method may be to provide diversity and sensitivity training as well as employee development initiatives. Additionally, management could look into the most effective stigma-reduction tools and provide workers with them. The data suggest that having in-demand skills might be one of these tools, which implies that cross-national firms should first identify the needs of their international clients before hiring employees who either already possess these skills or have the ability to acquire them. Examples of these skills may include strong familiarity with and interest in client cultures, language proficiency, and overseas experience. However, such a strategy might be in opposition to Tunisia’s value system, which places a significant emphasis on blood ties and community membership (Yahiaoui-Sekkai, 2007; Yousfi et al., 2005; Zghal, 1994).