English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Increasing numbers of corporations are now operating across national borders as a result of globalization. The “language barrier” is the first and foremost challenge they encounter when starting a business in a foreign market, and many companies are trying to solve the problem by adopting a common corporate language. Using English as an official corporate language is the most common solution for those corporations. The present study explored the impacts of English as a corporate official language policy implemented at a company, a rapidly developed high profile IT Company with 20,000 employees, in Japan, a country often perceived to be relatively monolingual and monocultural. When I started studying the company, I first found that the company’s motive to use English as the official corporate language was different from other instances of corporate language policy making I had come across. In previous studies (e.g.,  Feely &amp; Harzing 2003 ;  Marschan-Piekkari, Welch, &amp; Welch 1999 ), the companies implemented common corporate language to solve problems caused by language barriers between employees with diverse linguistic backgrounds. However, the company in this study implemented the corporate language policy to prepare for globalization and recruit talents globally. When the company introduced the English-only language policy, most of the employees of the company were Japanese. Therefore, at the time of implementing the language policy, there was no compelling reason for them to use English. The language policy did not work effectively except for a few departments with non-Japanese employees who spoke different first languages. English functioned as a lingua franca in those departments with multinational employees. The findings indicate that for NNESs (non-native English speakers) to communicate with each other in English, the environment has to be more multilingual, less dominated by a single first language. Although almost all Japanese citizens are required to take intensive English courses in compulsory schoolings, the average level of English proficiency is considered to be relatively low in the advanced economies. The present study indicates that it is not for linguistic competence but a lack of interaction with other ELF speakers. Therefore, for learners of ELF in an intensely monolingual society such as Japan to become competent communicators in ELF, providing multilingual learning environments would be more effective than the prevailing teaching practices of classroom learning in L1 Japanese speaker only environments.

Impacts and implications of English as the corporate official language policy: A case in Japan