A Place of Globalization
Cross-Cultural Cooperation
between Estonian and Norwegian Business People in Tallinn
Kari Helene Partapuoli
Thesis presented for the
Cand. Polit. degree at the Institute of Social Anthropology, University
of Tromsø, November 1998. Revised: Copenhagen, August 1999
This thesis is in many
ways created by everyone I met throughout my stay in Tallinn.
The Norwegian and the Estonian
businessmen and women were very generous with their time and information.
Especially everyone working at Martines. Thor Haabet let me participate
in meetings and read business plans. Harald Olsen let me enjoy the luxury
of his down town apartment. Magnus Skjørshammer and I shared
frustrations about being foreigners in Tallinn. Kaarina Ritson became
one of my dearest friends. She took care of me when I had my particular
«fieldwork moods» and shared her own experiences about the Norwegian-Estonian
business setting. She also read and commented on parts of the text.
Her help has been invaluable.
Just as important were all the
people I met outside the business environment, some of which must be
mentioned in particular. Siret Bankier made me realize that Estonia
consists of more than Tallinn and taught me about a lifestyle very different
from my own. Lilia Kuznetsova served me some of the best meals I have
ever had. Dmitri and I ate more food than we could handle. Lilia also
taught me to respect the importance of hard academic work and about
the nuances of being Russian in Estonia. The people at TTÜ gave
me a place to live and a place to work which made my stay much easier.
Mare Teichmann responded quickly to my initial letter and made my stay
in Tallinn possible. Ave Härsing took care of me from day one and
was a good friend. Ilmo Saulep gave me beautiful roses, was a perfect
office mate and told stories from a time I know little about. Wayne
Thompson solved a housing problem, was a good friend and took me out
and about and introduced me to Estonia. A special thanks to the 'English
Club'. Helgi and Endla at TTÜ cared for me and gave me a birthday
to remember. I spent some magic nights together with Viive, eating home
coocked food and practicing Norwegian and Estonian. William Cronenberg
shared with me of his valuable knowledge of Tallinn and Estonia and
provided insightful comments on my empirical examples.
You all made my stay in Estonia
one to remember and I will keep coming back.
I hope I have treated all of
you right!
The students of social anthropology
in Tromsø have made the study of anthropology interesting and
fun. Ellinor Angell, Jørgen Iversen and Per Egil Kummervold have
read, discussed and commented on early drafts of the text. Ellinor has
contributed with ideas, especially on business stunts, and comfort throughout
the entire process.
Mayvi Johansen, Øyvind
Eggen and Line Vråberg have contributed in less visible, but no
less significant ways to this project through discussions and friendship.
Siri Johnsen and I shared last minute frustrations and joys.
My academic supervisor Sidsel
Saugestad structured me and my thoughts, persuaded me to write a conclusion,
and provided valuable help throughout the writing up process.
Gitte Thune increased my understanding
of business in general, and of profit and dress codes within business
in particular (and a few other things as well).
Hallgeir Bjørnstad Strand
is not here to receive my gratitude, but it still feels appropriate
to mention his far-reaching support before and during my fieldwork.
Berit and Gunnar Partapuoli
have supported me financially and otherwise, much longer and more generously
than I could expect. I can only hope that I am worth their concern and
money.
A very special thank you to
Finn, together with whom I take chances I never regret.
Tromsø, November 1998 and
Copenhagen, August 1999, Kari Helene Partapuoli.
1.1 The Problem
"For
me Estonia is the area of land on the shore of the Baltic Sea where our
ancestors settled. A place on the earth that with its variability and
uniqueness makes one wonder, at the same time, about the diversity and
the similarity of the whole world." (Ann Tenno, Estonian
photographer).
This thesis sets out to describe and
explain what it involves to do business in a Norwegian-Estonian cross-cultural
setting, in a situation where Norwegian (and Western) business is expanding
into Estonian markets, and more generally, the former Eastern Block. It
is based on fieldwork in Tallinn from February to August 1996 among Norwegian-Estonian
companies, and thus reflects a specific phase in the ongoing transformation
of Estonian society. In the spring of 1996 Estonia had been an independent
nation for five years and had during that time experienced extensive economic
and social reforms. Since independence from the Soviet Union in 1991 the
country had also received considerable economical and political attention
from the USA and the Western European countries in form of financial investments
and developmental programs. Estonia in 1996 was a country which was adjusting
to its new and still changing institutions and social structure. It was
viewed by the West as a progressive country, suitable for profitable investments.
This study will focus on how global processes influenced the cooperation
between Norwegian and Estonian business people in Tallinn.
Anthropologists and sociologists have
in latter years focused on the transnational flow of capital, business
people and consequently business cultures as an aspect of the more universal
processes of globalization that are currently taking place in the world.
The increasingly world-wide cross-cultural business cooperation and communication
raises many issues, not all of them purely economical. Most importantly,
perhaps, it involves the interplay between truly global processes (such
as capital flow) and local adaptation to such processes. When, as in the
case here examined, a translocal flow of individual people takes place
(as opposed to a flow of money or technology), the extra-economic aspects
of business relations are clearly of the greatest importance. An anthropological
study of these themes may hope to reveal specific discrepancies and correspondences
between global, translocal and local business cultures as experienced
by business people operating in cross-cultural environments.
The collapse of the Berlin Wall in
1989 obliterated the almost fifty year old division between communist
and capitalist blocks in Europe, and parts of what had till then been
the territory of the Soviet Union and its satellite states in Eastern
and Central Europe, became major areas of interest for Western (and Norwegian)
business life(1). The knowledge that people
from the former Soviet Union and Western Europe had of each other during
the Cold War was limited and often misleading. As a result of the now
extensive contact between «East» and «West», the amount of mutual knowledge
and understanding has increased dramatically. However, many misconceptions
and prejudices concerning how people from the Western and the Eastern
hemisphere think and live still exist. As contact has developed the need
for information has increased as well. This is especially apparent when
people engage in personal cooperation with real issues at stake like «doing
business together». The shared and divergent understandings that the various
actors involved in such cooperation have, of «how one does business» and
how one creates a «suitable environment» for doing business, are of the
greatest importance in the daily operation of a cross-cultural firm.
Norwegian business people come from
a cultural business context considered to be Western and capitalistic,
even though Norway (population 4 million) has a social-democratic system
of government(2)that is often referred
to as the «third way» (Hill 1993:177) and thus has a quite extensively
planned economy. Norway is also one of the few countries in Western Europe,
together with Iceland, Luxembourg and Switzerland, which has chosen to
stay out of the European Union (EU). After the discovery of the North-Sea
oil deposits, Norway has also become one of the richest countries in the
Western world. Estonia, in contrast, is a former Soviet national republic
which is now adapting to independent nationhood and a market economy.
Estonia's national policy is based on a strong free market orientation
including low public subsidies and liberal laws on the import and export
of goods. The country, as the first of the Baltic states, has started
membership negotiations with EU. While Estonia was part of the Soviet
Union, poverty as a social phenomenon was nearly unknown, although scarcity
was virtually omnipresent. The radical changes towards a market economy
after liberation have on the one hand brought forward desired changes
such as free travel, access to a variety of goods and freedom of the press.
The termination of national subsidies, inflation and unemployment were,
on the other hand, some of the negative factors of the reforms. The income
level for many Estonians has been reduced after independence. A report
worked out by the Norwegian research institute Fafo concludes that ten
percent of the Estonian population was living below the subsistence minimum
in 1995 (Grøgaard 1996:127-129). The ambiguity of the situation
affected the cooperation between Norwegian and Estonian business people.
During my fieldwork, when I observed
Norwegian and Estonian business people «doing business» together, it seemed
clear (both to me and them) that their cooperation was heavily influenced
by a number of extra-economic factors in the local socio-cultural environment,
e.g. rules of etiquette and morality, administrative and legal routines,
accessibility of information, ethnic and class differentiation, etc. In
addition, local Norwegian and Estonian habitus; an embodied matrix,
acquired through learning processes, which guides thoughts, feelings and
actions (Richardson 1993:23), affected the cooperation. Pierre Bourdieu,
who is the originator of the term, uses habitus to describe deeply learned
cultural knowledge which is expressed through actions (Bourdieu 1977).
Habitus guides and forms the basis for actions. It is an often unconscious
style of practice which is imprinted in the body, but also leaves room
for improvisations. Bourdieu says that the homogeneity of habitus within
a given socio-cultural group causes practices to be predictable, understandable
and taken for granted (Bourdieu 1990:58). In cross-cultural business cooperation
the business partners may not share the same habitus, and their practices
of «doing business» may be mutually unintelligible and unpredictable.
Nevertheless, all my informants related to a set of (presumably global)
ideas of what business is and how business should be done, which I shall
refer to below as a global business ideology. In practical business
cooperation, the interplay of this global ideology with local habitus
and personal factors generated a wide range of different and inconsistent
ways of «doing business», which I shall refer to as local business
practices. Thus, most of the business people I met were firmly convinced
that business was «the same everywhere», and tried to act in accordance
with this view. This did not mean that they were unaware of the very obvious
differences between Norwegian and Estonian business settings and practices.
Many of them were conscious of the fact that there exist different ways
of «doing business», and able to describe these differences in quite sophisticated
detail. But when these same individuals were actually «doing business»,
they were often unable to act in accordance with their understanding,
and tended to assume that all business people spoke the same «business
language»: the language of market economics and commercial activity(3).
Moreover, even in cases when the parties managed to work out satisfactory
terms of cooperation, they did not necessarily refute the global business
ideology explicitly as they were committed (cf. Goffman 1972) to global
business ideology. Thus, the local processes of Estonian-Norwegian cooperation
in Tallinn need to be situated within a larger context that reaches beyond
their local setting. They are aspects of a wider, translocal, contact
between Norway and Estonia, and are dependent on, influenced by, and even
in part caused by global political and economic processes. What is taking
place in Tallinn is an articulation of a global, Western-style
business ideology within a local post-Soviet setting. The contradictions
- between global ideology and local practices - that are inherent in this
situation, form the subject matter of the present thesis.
My data, which were mainly collected
among twelve small Norwegian firms in Tallinn (population 500 000), the
capital of Estonia (population 1.5 million), serve to demonstrate the
complexity of this situation. During the cooperation process there were
a lot of misunderstandings between the parties concerning for example
planning, management styles, proper relationships between business contacts
and the flow of information. Some of these misunderstandings never became
known to either of the parties, and some had serious economic consequences
for the firm. Proper knowledge about each other's starting points and
how the various parties in a cross-cultural firm view and react to their
daily cooperation may be crucial for both the social environment within
a firm and its economic success.
The main empirical focus throughout
this thesis will be on cross-cultural cooperation between actors on the
management level in Norwegian companies situated and registered in Tallinn
but with Norwegian origin (see appendix 1 for a list of companies and
individual descriptions). In all of the firms the management level included
both Estonians and Norwegians. It consisted of Presidents, Managing Directors,
Project Managers, secretaries and translators. Formally, there existed
an agreement between the Estonian and the Norwegian partners on the terms
for their cooperation. Both acknowledged that they took part in Western
commercial business activities. There was general agreement on the global
ideology of business. But as we shall see below, there was not agreement
on how to «do business» in practice(4).
These divergencies between ideology and practice could cause frustrations
on both sides and even economic loss. My goal is therefore, first, to
describe the ideological discourse about business that Norwegian and Estonian
business people participated in, and secondly, to discuss how the business
people related to the global ideology of business through practical cooperation.
During my fieldwork there were 14
firms in Tallinn with Norwegian involvement (appendix 1). Apart from the
Estonian branch of Statoil(5) and
Coca Cola(6) the management
level of these companies consisted of 3-4 people on the average. I collected
data from all of the 14 firms although the main body of my data is based
on information from the 12 smaller firms. Coca Cola and Statoil are included
in this study because they are viewed by the Norwegian business people
as important forerunners for the Norwegian business environment in Tallinn,
but I have only conducted interviews with a few people in these two firms.
Most of what will be said about the two larger firms in this thesis is
based on accounts from Norwegian business people who were not themselves
directly involved with these firms. My data were collected through 37
formal and informal interviews (see appendix 2), in addition to extensive
conversations, and participant observation in the social life of people
connected to the firms. I also worked for one of the firms over a period
of three weeks, mainly as a translator. In return for my services I was
allowed to read business plans and take part in meetings. I lived in a
student dormitory, had access to an office at Tallinn Technical University,
and socialized with students and employees at the university. I returned
to Tallinn in November 1996 for two weeks in order to take part in the
official program during the Norwegian Prime Minister 's visit to Estonia.
During this visit I participated in a «business day» with both Norwegian
and Estonian business people present, and in a work shop on cross-cultural
cooperation. I shall not at this point discuss my fieldwork in further
detail, and in the main body of the thesis, methodological comments will
be included only if they are directly relevant to my main argument. A
more detailed and personal discussion of field methods and experiences
is included as an epilogue. This does not mean that I consider methodological
elaboration superfluous. The story about my fieldwork experiences and
the story about my findings are inseparable, but the stories have different
protagonists. In the first, I represent the reality of my Norwegian and
Estonian informants, while in the second the researcher herself is brought
into focus.
The thesis has five chapters, which
focus on the following themes: global business ideology (Chapter One),
the local context and its participants (Chapter Two), the articulation
of global ideology through practical cooperation in the local setting
(Chapters Three and Four) and finally conclusions (Chapter Five). The
present, introductory chapter, will discuss how global discourse on business
generates a global ideology of business. Global common denominators of
business ideology will be discussed and incorporated in an analytical
model of business as a «discursive object». The model will later be used
as an analytical tool to explore the relationships between practical business
activities and the ideal model of business. Chapter Two will deal with
Western responses to the changes in Eastern Europe, which formed the background
for the Norwegian business people's arrival in Estonia. We shall see how
official policy and media in the West formed a popular view of the East
as a challenging, «uncivilized» place, in need of Western help. The production
of Estonian national identity will be briefly examined on the background
of both historical events and mythical history that is actualized in the
present. The chapter also gives an overview of the business environments
in Tallinn and provides a brief description of the Norwegian-Estonian
companies. Chapters Three and Four will analyze empirical cases through
comparing cross-cultural business practice to aspects of the
global ideology of business, as defined in this introduction.
Chapter Three will mainly deal with misunderstandings in the cross-cultural
cooperation, whereas Chapter Four will analyze more successful situations.
Finally, Chapter Five will summarize how global ideology affected the
Estonian-Norwegian business situation together with local Norwegian and
Estonian business habitus/practices. A discussion of method is incorporated
as an epilogue, as well as two appendices. The first appendix consists
of a detailed list of the fourteen companies examined. This list should
be consulted during the reading of the thesis. The interview guides I
used during my fieldwork are included as the second appendix(7).
Globalization is a term which
is often used to describe a dominant tendency within the modern (or rather
postmodern) world of the late 20th century. It is a result of increasingly
intensive contact between previously distant localities. Globalization
theories deal with the ways localities are connected, how they are influenced
by global processes and how localities effect the global level. Consequently
Roland Robertson sees globalization as
«...indicating
the problem of the form in terms of which the world becomes 'united'»
(Robertson 1990:18).
Mike Featherstone argues that globalization
processes produce, aside from their more obvious, socioeconomic effects
(wage labor, monetary economy, citizenship, formalized education, and
abstract ideologies such as nationalism), a «...globalization of culture»
(Featherstone 1990:1; see also Eriksen 1991). As a result, people who
have never met each other before can form anonymous «imagined communities»
based on for example commitment to an ideology such as nationalism. Global
cultural flows can produce ideas of similar ways of thinking and communicating
among people which cross traditional cultural boundaries. Featherstone
further argues that global cultural flows are complex, but although the
terms globalization and global culture are widely used there seems to
be no clear consensus regarding their meaning and results. Thus, the Norwegian
author Thure Erik Lund argues that globalization has no intrinsic meaning
at all: when we speak about globalization or a global culture we disregard
the existence of local cultures, since the global culture is assumed to
have an over-arching, and hence morally superior, value (Lund 1998:41).
According to Lund, global culture is a fiction which exists only in the
media or on the Internet and has little relevance to people 's actual
lives. In contrast, many anthropologists and sociologists stress the complex
effects of globalization processes such as global cultural flows. It is
true that the world may become more homogeneous and uniform as global
processes impinge on and eclipse distinctive local traits, but the world
may also become more diverse in reaction to global, macro-level processes.
Homogenization and diversification are two sides of the same coin, as
most contemporary theoreticians seem to agree. It is therefore difficult
today to find consistent proponents of either of these extreme positions.
A more typical view might be that expressed by Thomas Hylland Eriksen,
who states that the world is shrinking at the same time as various local
distinctive traits enjoy recognition (Eriksen 1991). Jonathan Friedman
similarly argues that assimilation and segmentation are two processes
which take place simultaneously on the global scene:
«Ethnic and
cultural fragmentation and modernist homogenization are not two arguments,
two opposing views of what is happening in the world today, but two constitutive
trends of global reality» (Friedman 1990:311).
I will argue along similar lines that
a number of disparate events taking place in the world may be part of
the same process, whether they originate from an obscure local community
or a transnational company. I will argue that processes which are global
in their reach also play a role in people's lives. Even though some global
processes are transmitted through the media they still communicate between
real places and purvey cultural ideas which are interpreted and articulated
by real people. The idea of a global culture (or global cultures) does
not presuppose the disappearance of local cultures, but takes into account
that mechanisms which have a global effect will influence localities.
The Norwegian and Estonian business people will, for example, relate to
global ideas of business culture when they are cooperating. Throughout
this thesis global processes will be identified and related to local processes.
Translocal contact between people
and transfer of technology have always existed to some extent. In the
second century BC, Polybius wrote of the rise of the Roman Empire:
«Formerly
the things which happened in the world had no connection among themselves
... But since then all events are united in a common bundle» (quoted in
Robertson 1990:21).
The difference today is the extent
and intensity of the global flows. Since the 1970s we have seen an increasing
internationalization of capital, technology, goods, information, media
and production. The seemingly footloose nature of international capital,
production etc. has made theoreticians point to deterritorialization as
an important aspect of globalization (e.g. Appadurai 1990, Cox 1997, Eriksen
1991, Storper 1997). A car factory can close down in Tokyo and influence
the stock markets in Oslo or Tallinn. People connected to the Internet
in Ny Ålesund, the northernmost community in the world, can communicate
with Internet users in Nigeria. This focus on deterritorialization as
an aspect of globalization does not, however, preclude a regard for local
geographies within the world, but is a way of explaining the reach of
global processes. But it is also true, as the geographer Kevin R. Cox
argues, with reference to critics like D. Gordon (1988), P. Hirst and
G. Thompson (1992), that global processes with beneficial social effects
mainly reach the Western World and not the Third World countries (Cox
1997:3). This, however, should not overshadow the more general point that
the reach of globalization is, practically speaking, universal today.
Even resistance against this trend by major economic and political powers
cannot in the long run, keep the global world out, as the fall of the
Soviet empire convincingly demonstrates. There remains, however, the complex
question of how global processes touch down in various localities,
which can only be answered empirically.
At least two dynamics of globalization
can be identified within the deterritorialized world. There exists a world-wide
flow of images through, for example, commercials, television and the Internet
and a world-wide flow of capital and commodities through international
transactions and stock exchanges. These are flows which are initiated
and manifested by people, but do not necessarily involve direct human
contact transnationally or have a fixed center. The other main dynamic
involves a flow of people and involves direct encounters. These are people
like tourists, immigrants and business people who for various reasons
move around in the world. They may be air hostesses or exchange students,
but together they form a fluctuating global world of interpersonal contacts.
This distinction between two separate flows with separate characteristics
within the global dynamics is, of course, analytical. Global processes
always include both human contact and a disassociation from place: the
flow of people to and fro between Western and Eastern Europe is a result
of global political processes, and global Coca Cola commercials would
not be made unless they influenced local consumers to buy the soft drink.
The difference between these two spheres is that one is constituted of
people and involves direct, personal encounters in real, local settings,
while the other can influence localities without the actors ever being
physically present. Though different, both dynamics involve the communication
and transfer of ideological concepts and enable communication between
people and a sense of shared global cultures. Both the flow of images,
money and commodities and the flow of people thus contribute to shaping
our ideas about aspects of the world. They provide us with knowledge about
foreign countries, notions of how business should be done, beauty ideals,
political ideologies, expectations of standards of living, progress, identity
etc. There exists, somewhat paradoxically, a global idea of «indigenous»
cultural representation; Inuits, Sami and Nenets meet with Indians in
global conferences focusing on preservation of local identity. Similarly,
and less surprisingly, there exists a common, global ideology of how to
«do business» among Norwegian and Estonian business people despite their
different business backgrounds. These ideas affect the practice of the
people who are «doing business» together.
Arjun Appadurai further differentiates
global processes by defining five dimensions or «landscapes» of global
cultural flow within which actors navigate: ethnoscapes (human movement),
technoscapes (technological flow), finanscapes (financial transfers),
mediascapes (flows of images produced by media), and ideoscapes (flows
of ideology) (Appadurai 1990:297-301). Finanscapes involve the complex
nature and form of global capital influenced by stock exchanges, currency
markets, multi-national companies, national financial policies, the movement
of business people, etc. Political images, often connected to nation states
or opponents of national policies, are the main contents of Appadurai's
ideoscapes. Ideoscapes constitute a fluid discourse on terms such as 'freedom',
'democracy', 'human rights', 'dictatorship', 'power' etc. I shall not
discuss Appadurai's «scapes» much further in the following. I will use
them to define the empirical focus of this thesis, which will be on what
I have chosen to call businesscapes, which exist in the intersection
between finanscapes and ideoscapes, between the practice of «doing business»
and the ideological discourses concerning how to do business.
As Appadurai points out, the relationship
between the «scapes» is always one of disjuncture and unpredictability:
«...current
global flows occur [...] in and through the growing disjunctures between
ethnoscapes, technoscapes, finanscapes, mediascapes and ideoscapes.» (Appadurai
1990:301).
This means that the flows of people,
images, ideas, money, and machinery tend to manifest themselves in incompatible
combinations. Appadurai mentions as an example the Japanese who are open
to import and export of goods, but oppose the idea of immigration (Appadurai
1990:301). We should expect cross-cultural business people, operating
on the disjuncture between ideoscape and finanscape, to exhibit similar
breaches of logic.
As we have seen, the ideology of «doing
business» among Norwegians and Estonians in Tallinn is a result of processes
on a larger scale than the day-to-day cooperation between the parties.
The fall of the Berlin Wall resulted not only in changes within Eastern
Europe, but also in a wide-spread acceptance of capitalism as the victorious
world ideology. International financial organizations such as The International
Monetary Fund (IMF) invested and lent money to Eastern Europe through
the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) on the condition
that sweeping socioeconomic reforms be carried out, including large-scale
privatization of the economy. Governments in the West designed bilateral
aid and reconstruction programs based on the guidelines of the IMF and
EBRD and on a global political ideology based on classical liberalism.
The global media focused heavily on the new business opportunities in
the East. As a result of these and other global processes, large multinational
companies as well as individual Western entrepreneurs started moving into
Eastern Europe.
The Norwegian business people who
arrived in Tallinn between 1989-90 and 1996 were part of this process
and their «scape» of activity was definitely characterized by disjunctures.
One example of disjuncture between expectations and practice was when
some of the Norwegian business people came to Tallinn because they saw
it as a place which offered quick profit coupled with risk, which was
different from the Norwegian business setting, but were surprised when
business was done differently in Tallinn. Even though the Western press
and politicians emphasized the willingness of the East to embrace capitalism,
Western business people who came East quickly learned that practices do
not necessarily accord with ideology. The ideas the Western actors had
of «how one does business» frequently failed to match the way «business
was done» in Eastern Europe. Something similar was experienced by the
Eastern Europeans, whose expectations of how Western business was done
often differed from the way the Westerners actually «did business». This
was often confusing for them, since they from the outset had assumed that
Westerners would know how to «do business».
It has been pointed out by most theoreticians
on globalization (e.g. Cox 1997, Cvetkovich and Kellner 1997, Friedman
1990, Gertler 1997, Miller 1997) that the relationships between global
processes and localities are extremely complex. Global processes touch
down in localities and influence them. But various global processes may
be articulated in various ways in each place. Some may have no significance
in one place, but play a crucial role in others. Students at the University
of Edinburgh in Scotland are, for example, engaged in environmental protection
on a global scale and consequently many students become vegetarians and
take part in demonstrations against global pollution or ruthless exploitation
of endangered species. Conservation of the world's environment plays a
lesser role among students at the University of Tromsø in Norway,
where students line up at the local branch of Burger King late Saturday
night to enjoy a juicy hamburger and only demonstrate en masse when the
government threatens to reduce public spending on students. «Save the
Whales» is thus in many parts of Norway a suspect slogan, which is seen
to threaten local adaptation. It is almost impossible to predict the shape
of global influence on a local setting.
In this thesis «the local» is defined
as the geographic place Tallinn where Norwegian-Estonian cross-cultural
business cooperation takes place. This locality is affected by global
processes on a day-to-day basis. Indeed, the cooperation itself is part
of a global process. The local actors involved in these global processes
are Norwegian and Estonian business people. Like business people elsewhere,
they travel and meet, directly, in person-to-person encounters or, indirectly
via fax, e-mail or telephones. In the course of these meetings, their
conceptions of what business is and their experiences of how «business
is done» are communicated and spread, and they thereby contribute to an
international ideological discourse on how to do business. This discourse
is fluid, and its meanings are subject to constant negotiation, as the
local and global conditions of international business change. But as I
have emphasized above, and in spite of the fact that business people themselves
often are very well aware of the fluidity of their discourse, they often
tend to assume that they all «speak the same language», the most universal
of all global languages today: the «language of business». In this respect,
Norwegian and Estonian business people in Tallinn are no exception. They
are often unaware of the conflicting business practices that lie behind
their apparent agreement. But in the cooperation situation they are unavoidably
confronted with the discrepancies between global ideology and local practice,
and in the course of time they may learn from these confrontations and
generate new ideas of how to «do business» on the background of their
experiences. The Norwegian business people who are the main subjects of
this thesis become a new kind of professionals (Featherstone 1990:8) who
travel back and forth in the global world and hold knowledge and skills
of how to «do business» in Estonia with Estonians. They experience business
in cross-cultural settings first-hand, learn from their experience, and
may ultimately succeed in developing and embodying a new business habitus
based on their practical experiences.
Business in the 1990s has
become a universal concern that is discussed on many different arenas
all over the world. It is of vital importance today to understand this
global ideological discourse concerning what business is, how business
should be done, how a business person ought to dress, speak, behave, etc.,
because business is increasingly «done» in complex, cross-cultural settings,
where misunderstandings are likely to occur. Since the business discourse
has an extremely powerful influence on global affairs, these misunderstandings
often have crucial impact on local conditions. Business people working
in cross-cultural environments will be challenged by different ideas of
business as well as different practices of «business». With business expanding
on a global scale, a common understanding or idea of the ground rules
of business becomes important to the actors themselves in order to simplify
and understand their jobs.
Thomas Hylland Eriksen and Runar Døving
point out in their article «In Limbo: Notes on the Culture of Airports»
that the meaning of airports varies from place to place, at the same time
as there exists a universal, decontextualized meaning of «the airport
in general» (Eriksen and Døving 1992). In one way it can be said
that all airports are alike because they relate to the same rules of behavior,
or what we may call the same «culture»: «If you've seen one, you've seen'em
all» (Eriksen and Døving 1992:1). This can also be said of business.
Behavior acquired in one setting can be of use when «doing business» in
a different place, and some factors of business are predictable and disengaged
from local context. The question is how and why some traits are globally
recognizable as belonging to the business sphere.
Hege Aasbø (following Michel
Foucault), states in her thesis on discourse concerning the preservation
of cultural monuments in Zanzibar that discourse is a very large-scale
«discussion» which is separated from time and place and consists of verbal
statements, written texts and actions (Aasbø 1997:8-9). Foucault
points out that this discussion creates «discursive objects» (Foucault
1972). Discursive objects can be explained as reified themes around which
the discussions center. The discursive objects are treated by the partners
of the discussion as if they were objective «things». Foucault's example
is the discourse on sexuality in psychology and in the wider public in
the nineteenth century, which created sexuality as an object of discourse
which is now part of our «reality». This thesis will not attempt to give
a historical account of how business became an object of discourse (though
it is clear that its roots go back at least to the eighteenth century,
see Jürgen Habermas 1962). I will merely point out that business
today is an established discursive object which is part of our reality,
while it is still being debated. The term discourse is not fixed to time
and place and is therefore suitable to use on phenomena with both local
and global reach. The discourse on business is manifested in local settings
such as Tallinn or Oslo, while it is simultaneously part of an international
discourse on business.
The ideological discourse on business
takes place on both global and local arenas, for example at conferences
organized by the World Trade Organization, on the one hand, and in informal
communication within the Norwegian-Estonian business environment in Tallinn,
on the other. In the latter context, the Estonian business people would
define «business» by contrast to how things were done during Soviet times.
Estonians, they would say, fit the image of competitive and liberal-minded
business people perfectly. They would emphasize the intensely competitive
nature of Estonian national character and contrast this to the communist
ideology, under which, of course, Estonians, as «natural entrepreneurs»,
had suffered inordinately. Norwegians would likewise contrast business
with conditions under Soviet rule, but they would frequently invoke these
conditions as explanations of why Estonians were incompetent business
partners, of why «Estonians do not know how to do business» (a common
expression of frustration). Such statements may of course be taken at
face value and understood as objective judgments of what kinds of action
are effective in generating profit, but they are also contributions to
an (ultimately) global ideological discourse on how to «do business»,
in which business itself is taken for granted and treated as a discursive
object, an ideal, against which concrete behavior by individuals or groups
is evaluated. Thus, an American businessman stationed in Tallinn, who
read one of the cases presented in Chapter Four of this thesis, frowned
and said that «No real businessman would do business in this way», when
he read that a Norwegian businessman had agreed to own only 48% of the
shares in his Estonian company. Again, the objectivity of the judgment
expressed in this statement may be emphasized, and may well be valid,
from a purely professional point of view. But the statement is also a
contribution to a discourse that goes much further than this. Thus, an
advertisement for a Hong Kong bank in an international glossy magazine
pictures two Asiatic businessmen sitting at a table eating with chopsticks
and wearing Western-style dark suits. By the table we see an executive
briefcase and the front of a Mercedes. The caption reads: «Everything
has changed. Except the relationship, and the barbecued duck». One of
the messages of this ad is simply that it is safe for Western business
people to «do business» in Asia. It emphasizes cultural differences, such
as the use of chopsticks, and the importance of personal relations in
Asia, as opposed to the supposedly more formal character of «doing business»
in the West. But the clue is that «Everything has changed». Even though
Asia is different from the West (and even though this difference might
be supposed to increase with the incorporation of Hong Kong into Red China),
this Hong Kong bank knows what business is. This knowledge
is proven, not by statistics or facts, but by the businessmen's attire,
their car, and the calm, glossy, exclusive esthetic of the ad itself.
This ad, along with the statements quoted above, contributes to creating,
maintaining and changing the global discursive object we call business.
Noting that business exists as a discursive
object, and that there exists a global discourse on how to «do business»
properly, we shall attempt to describe some of the general and most common
traits that define business and business people within this discourse.
The model of business which will be presented below stipulates and outlines
an ideal of habitus which business people everywhere relate to.
The Dutch scholar and humanist Erasmus Rotterdamus described business
people in the following way in the fifteenth century:
«the most
foolish and vulgar people who exist are business people. They are involved
in the most pitiful and degrading craft one can imagine, and besides that
they do it in the most shameless way; even though they lie, take false
oaths, steal, swindle and always try to cheat on other people, they always
force their way in order to be the first, that is why they always have
their hands full of gold.» (in: Tikkanen 1987:59 - my translation from
Norwegian).
This negative quote might sound disrespectful,
but in its own way it describes important aspects of business even today,
although business in the 1500 and 1600s was a more marginal activity than
it is in the 1990s. (It did not enjoy the same prestige as it does today,
as it was mostly done by marginal groups like small-scale Jewish traders
or powerful trading families who made fortunes on loans to the Kings or
Popes and suffered bankruptcy if the King refused to pay back the loan
(see for example Palmer and Colton 1965).)
As the ad for the Hongkong bank suggests,
some external factors like clothing help us determine whether or not we
are dealing with a business person. When I asked business people to describe
businessmen and women they often started with the dress code in business.
One Norwegian businesswoman said: «I would have to start with the clothes.
Business people have to be dressed nicely and most of them carry a briefcase».
The dress code makes it easy to recognize business people. No one will
question whether the two Asian men in the ad mentioned above are business
people. The dark suits immediately indicate that they work with business
even though the ad never mentions the word. I shall not attempt to give
a further account of the style in clothing among business people, except
to note that there are some differences between how business people dress
in Tallinn and Oslo. I once met a Norwegian businessman on the plane from
Stockholm to Tallinn who told me that when he met his business partners
in Norway he did not always wear a suit, and he had once forgotten to
bring a suit and tie to Estonia. The people he tried to make a deal with
in Estonia only addressed his Estonian partner who was properly dressed
for the occasion. Estonian business people thus dress more formally than
Norwegians. One will rarely see an Estonian business person wearing jeans,
while this is not uncommon in Norway. This distinction, though in itself
perhaps of minor importance, is, as we shall see, symptomatic of more
general conflicts that arise between the parties of Norwegian-Estonian
business cooperation. It indicates, moreover, that although there exists
a generally recognizable global code of dress in business, this code is
subject to subtle local variations.
The most striking aspect of business
and the main aim of business and business people is, as Rotterdamus put
it, to «...have their hands full of gold». Profit, to make more
money than you have invested, is the superior goal of all business. But
profit is not a goal that can ever be achieved. Once profit has been «made»,
the ideal business person does not rest contented, but immediately looks
around for opportunities for new investments, in an ever-expanding spiral
of growth and maximizing. «Accumulate, accumulate! That is Moses and the
prophets!» (Marx 1867), is how Karl Marx described this basic spiral of
growth in classical economy. The idea of accumulation is clearly visible
in today's business. If the financial annual results of a firm are better
than the previous year, it is common practice in business to estimate
an even higher profit rate for the following year. The grounds underlying
this logic are based on an ideal belief that a 5% growth rate one year
can be doubled into a 10% growth rate the next year. Norwegian media will,
for example, report that SAS had a bad result this year because the organization
operated with a 100 million kroner profit, down from 200 million kroner
last year (not actual numbers). The company has a positive balance, but
they have not managed to further maximize surplus and thus the final result
is described as disappointing.
It is the search for profit that makes
the Norwegian business people invest in Tallinn/Estonia. Tallinn is considered
to be a new market with new possibilities and attendant risks. My material
shows that many Norwegian business people come to Tallinn more or less
by chance, but none would even have considered Tallinn if they had not
viewed the business opportunities as profitable. As Tallinn was seen as
a profitable (and high-risk) market, it may have been particularly attractive
to business people who were trying to start the first turn on a profit
spiral, and not only to established firms which just wanted to maximize
their surplus.
But business, as a global discursive
object, is more than the mere search for profit. The ideal business person
is also a responsible agent. Max Weber, in his classical discussion
of «The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism», described the
connection between the search for profit and the emphasis on responsibility,
as part of the foundation for the development of capitalistic society.
Weber emphasizes that maintaining a cycle of profit is a long-term activity,
which is impossible to engage in without long-term predictability in business
relations (Weber 1981 [1922]). Business ethics are one aspect of responsibility
which are often focused on by the public. When business people act irresponsibly
in order to gain profit, the press might react critically. But another
and more fundamental aspect of responsibility is the responsibility business
people have towards their business partners and their employees. In order
to establish good business contacts one has to appear as a responsible
business person. Appearances, including proper clothing and a representative
office, are factors which initially indicate whether a firm or a business
person is trustworthy. But reputation, based on whether or not one has
in fact fulfilled one's commitments in previous business relations, whether
one pays back loans, delivers goods on time, is scrupulously discrete
in dealing with third parties, etc., plays a much more fundamental role
in the long run. In the early stages of cross-cultural business cooperation,
we might expect problems of responsibility to be endemic, since the parties
have poor access to information about the reputation of prospective partners.
Consequently, responsibility or the lack of it was one of the most recurring
themes when Estonian and Norwegian business people described each other.
Both parties often claimed that the other party acted irresponsibly.
A third significant factor of business
as a discursive object apart from responsibility and profit is willingness
to take risks. Risk and profit are closely connected. Investment
is always risky, and gambling is often necessary in order to attain profit.
(It must be pointed out here that there is a difference between business
people who are risking their own money and those who work for larger firms
and do not have the authority to risk large amounts of money or do in
fact risk other people's money). The general opinion among the
business people I spoke to is that larger investments increase the chances
for a high profit, but also for losses. The factors of risk are seldom
constant and they vary from one context to another. Economic crime, insufficient
infrastructure, red tape, undeveloped markets are some critical external
factors in Tallinn which increase risk. Problems of concrete business
cooperation within a firm are also a source of risk. But the key to success
(i.e. profit) also lies in the cross-cultural cooperation. «Transaction
costs» and the factors of risk both within a firm and in relation to its
external environment can be reduced significantly by successful cooperation
between Estonians and Norwegians.
Rotterdamus goes on in his description:
«...they always force their way in order to be the first». Closely connected
to risk is the entrepreneurial activity which is likewise a distinctive
feature of the global discursive object business. Fredrik Barth describes
entrepreneurial activity as maximization of profit, experimental and speculative
activity and willingness to take risks (Barth 1972:7-8). In order to succeed
in business the ability to be the first to exploit or create a new niche
and take chances in order to maximize profit are viewed as important.
Barth also defines entrepreneurship as the ability to exploit discrepancies
between different niches (Barth 1981). An example of this may be to move
the production in a Norwegian factory to a low cost country or to attempt
to sell previously inaccessible Western products on the Estonian market.
Part of creating a niche is timing - to be at the right place
at the right time. It was frequently pointed out, by Norwegian and Estonian
business people in Tallinn, that the Norwegian business people had arrived
relatively late on the business scene in Estonia. The Swedes and especially
the Finns had already taken advantage of the most attractive parts of
the Estonian market. To be first is thus important, but not always
easy. Perhaps as a result of this, most of the Norwegians were involved
in numerous projects at the same time, hoping that at least one of them
would succeed.
Yet another significant factor of
«doing business» that has global acceptance is the ability to create networks
and establish business contacts both formally and informally. The coupling
of business and personal relationships was noted by William Baron Scott,
a British jurist, as early as the eighteenth century when he remarked
that «A dinner lubricates business» (Scott 1745-1836). The importance
of networks is emphasized in today's literature on business: an article
written for SAS's flight magazine focuses on how men traditionally have
better networks than women and thus do better in business and describes
initiatives to teach women how to «network» better (Hervig 1998:22-23),
a Norwegian journal for management and economy publishes articles about
networks of knowledge within and between companies (Larsen 1998:73-79)
and textbooks directed towards students of business and management deal
with the importance of alliances and networks (Haugland 1996). The informal
aspect of networking is also considered important in business. By knowing
and trusting the persons one is «doing business» with one can reduce the
risks involved. The possibility for informal contracts and deals also
increases by having a large network. A good and extensive network may
simplify the process of creating new business relations and the introduction
of new projects in a business environment.
Business people covet profit. To attain
profit, they run risks and try to find new niches for entrepreneurship.
They form both formal and informal networks for themselves and the firm,
and seek to establish contacts based on responsibility and trust. These
are «common denominators» for business everywhere on the globe, and constitute
an ideological frame of reference for both Norwegian or Estonian business
people. Of course, the five general factors characterizing business as
a global, discursive object that I have singled out above are only analytically
separable. In the actual ideological image of the «ideal business person»
they are intimately connected, and prescribe an integrated «way of being»,
an ideal global «business habitus» that local actors strive to realize
in their local business activities. In actual business situations, each
of the five global factors (profit, responsibility, risk-taking, entrepreneurship
and network building) are constantly reinterpreted to fit the local circumstances.
Clearly, some local business scenes are more compatible with the ideal
they describe, or with parts of the ideal, than others. Thus, Tallinn,
as a local place where business is «done» in accordance with the global
ideal of business, is a place where risk-taking behavior and entrepreneurship
seem problematic, while assessing responsibility in partners and achieving
reliable networks are perhaps more appropriate. But in addition, there
are also other factors of business that are specific to this local context,
and that are not, or are only very poorly, reflected in the global discourse.
The Norwegian press often reports
on how Norwegian business people fail in Eastern Europe. One recent example
was the Rosnor case in northern Russia where the Norwegian investors were
ousted by their Russian counterparts (Dagens Næringsliv, February
19th, 1996). A different «business culture» in the East, often including
corruption, is a common explanation for mishaps. Lately the public debate
in Norway has focused on the moral aspects of «doing business» abroad.
The Norwegian involvement in China and Nigeria are two examples. Critics
like NorWatch argue that it is unethical to conduct business in a country
that breaks human rights by for example imprisoning government opponents.
But apart from these debates very little attention is directed towards
the activities of Norwegian business outside home. Ways of controlling
or evaluating Norwegian businesses abroad are limited if not totally absent.
This is especially the case for businesses which do not receive any public
subsidies from the Norwegian government. My study is one way of focusing
on Norwegian business activities abroad without merely pointing to the
unstable situation in the host country or the moral aspects of investment.
This thesis will try to present the reality as it appears for the people
involved and provide information about a type of business activity which
is unfamiliar to most people, at least in Norway.
When anthropologists choose their
field of study, the world of commercial business is seldom an alternative.
There are a large number of anthropological studies of trade within communities
in the Third World or studies of non-monetary economies such as Barth's
study of economic spheres in Darfur (Barth 1981) and Clifford Geertz's
examination of economic modernization processes in two Indonesian towns
(Geertz 1963). But the situation of business people operating in the economic
system of the Western World is mostly ignored. One exception is Edward
T. Hall and his wife Mildred Reed Hall who have written books on cultural
differences between American and Japanese business people and American,
French and German business people (Hall and Hall 1987, 1990). These books
are largely directed at the people actually «doing business», not social
scientists, and function as guide books in how to «do business». But the
authors also introduce analytical tools for a cross-cultural understanding
of business situations (these analytical tools are developed in other
works by Hall, see for example Hall 1984). But on the whole, anthropology
has been known to seek the exotic as its focus. Western-style business
may be viewed as familiar and consequently not interesting to American
and Western European anthropologists. Another aspect of anthropology is
the tendency to study 'down'. It has been argued that Western anthropologists
only study people with fewer resources than themselves. Traditionally
such studies were conducted in countries which are considered less fortunate
than the West when it comes to financial resources and influence over
the World system. When anthropology is done in the West, the anthropologist
often focuses on groups which have less power, such as sub-cultures and
ethnic minorities. Laura Nader notes that little anthropological work
in the United States has been directed towards the middle and upper classes
(Nader 1969:289), and although the situation has to some extent changed
during the thirty years that have passed since Nader's article was written,
her argument is still in the main valid. Business people are viewed as
a powerful group in the Western world, even the ones who are focused on
in this study, who do not enjoy as much power as executives of multi-national
corporations. Business people may have a higher Western education and
make a lot of money. They speak the language of stock exchanges, international
trade and banking; all considered to be powerful arenas. One of the reasons
Nader gives for anthropologists to study 'up' is that we should not neglect
issues which influence our daily lives (Nader 1969:286). It is not difficult
to see that Norwegian and Western business done in Estonia, has direct
influence on the daily life of Estonians, although it does not, directly
affect the lives of people in Norway.
The often small entrepreneurs who
set up businesses abroad form a sea of knowledge concerning how global
processes materialize themselves on a micro level. These business people
come in different shapes: Swedish brothel owners in Asia, Norwegian scrap
metal dealers in Kaliningrad, Pakistani shop owners in Norway, Norwegian
business people in the Baltic States and American business consultants
in Estonia. They are often more or less long-term and committed residents
in contrast to more mainstream actors such as representatives of transnational
corporations. Through their practical experience with working in a global
environment they become global agents who hold valuable knowledge about
global languages of power in various localities.
The experience of such agents raises
more general issues that are relevant outside the Estonian-Norwegian context.
Among Estonians the nature of Norwegian and other foreign business activity
is discussed regularly both in the media and among the people directly
affected. This side of the story is seldom told outside Estonia. In my
opinion it is important that Estonian perceptions of Norwegian business
customs are known in Norway. The knowledge that both sides have of the
situation they have in common is rarely presented as a whole. It is my
hope that a presentation of the situation from both sides by an outside
observer will contribute constructively to our understanding of the day-to-day
situation of «doing business» in a post-communist country or even in cross-cultural
settings generally.
My study will mainly focus on concrete
segments of cooperation between the actors and on cultural context. I
will not offer a cost-benefit analysis of the Norwegian firms in Tallinn.
Nevertheless knowledge of the local situation is often a prerequisite
for successful cooperation and therefore directly linked to economic accomplishment.
So I must disagree with one of my Norwegian informants who claimed that
as long as he «knew his job» as a business person, he did not need any
knowledge of Estonia beforehand (see Chapter Three). I believe that the
«job» of «doing business» is not the same everywhere, and that an awareness
of the surroundings one is «doing business» in only increases one's chances
of economic gain and reduces the risk of actually harming the country
in which one is a guest. The two seemingly opposed perspectives are interdependent.
Glasnost, perestroika and the collapse
of the Berlin Wall are well known historical concepts and events which
symbolize the break-up of the Soviet Union and the Eastern Block. The
changes did not only affect the former Soviet Block, but also created
an insecurity for the future of the rest of the world. The situation in
Europe had been kept stable since the Second World War. The Eastern and
Western Blocks faced each other as enemies, but the situation was frozen
in a stable deadlock. The dramatic power struggle between the USSR and
the USA and Europe created a constant threat of war, but also a degree
of predictability within the world community. With the new and unclear
situation it became important for the international community to influence
the development in order to ensure stability. A new type of attention
had to be directed towards the East. A will and a sense of obligation
from the West to change and help the East evolved. What direction the
development should take and how reforms ought to be implemented became
important issues both to the countries of the former Eastern Block and
to the surrounding world community. Powerful international organizations
like The International Monetary Fund (IMF), The European Bank of Reconstruction
and Development (EBRD), The European Union (EU) and The International
Finance Corporation (IFC) recommended dramatic economic reforms involving
a high degree of privatization and a turn towards a liberal market economy.
The fulfillment of these reforms, often measured by the rate of the country's
inflation, became in many cases obligatory criteria for the reception
of funding. The fall of communism necessitated its replacement by the
victorious capitalistic ideology. The Eastern part of Europe was considered
a promising market, and forty thousand Western European companies opened
up offices in Eastern Europe from 1989 to 1995 (Thorheim 1995:12).
But as John M Howell asks in his book
Understanding Eastern Europe «...why privatise?» (Howell 1994:71).
Privatization was strongly recommended as a sensible policy for the countries
in the East and was implemented in all of them, although to various extents.
It was also seen as a value to quickly implement reforms involving
a high degree of privatization, as stated in a Norwegian report to Parliament
on Norwegian aid to Eastern Europe:
«The general
impression is that the countries which have [...] carried out rapid reforms
have had a more favorable economic development compared to those which
have adopted a more gradual reform strategy» (Stortingsmelding Nr 47:
10 - my translation).
One may argue that the countries which
were the first to implement market oriented reforms, such as the Baltic
States, Hungary and the Czech Republic, also had the most favorable basis
for reforms. They were relatively small and had experienced some economic
reforms prior to 1989 (Mailand-Hansen 1988). The economic success of these
countries may thus be due to their favorable starting points in contrast
to other Eastern European countries, and not only the swiftness of their
implementation of reforms after the breakdown of the Eastern
Block.
The strong belief the world community
had in the success of rapid implementation of privatization as an instrument
to stimulate economic growth in Eastern Europe leads Howell to point out
that the Eastern countries were asked to go through with privatization
to an extent that no Western democracy has ever done. He claims that the
world had no prior experience with a privatization process like the one
about to be realized in the East in the beginning of the 1990s. The ideology
of capitalism and liberalism seems to have become stronger in the Western
world after the breakdown of the Soviet Union. But in many ways it is
an ideology that is being implemented to its fullest extent in
countries outside the Western hemisphere. In practice every Western
country is, to a greater or lesser extent, based on the idea of the welfare
state, not a totally privatized state, and spends a large part of its
gross national product (GNP) e.g. on health-related services to its citizens.
Even Great Britain, which has gone through profound privatization processes
compared to other Western countries, has privatized quite gradually and
still spends large amounts on social services provided by the state. The
average public spending in the OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation
and Development) countries amounted to 45.9% of GNP in 1997 (Skonhoft
1998:2). It thus seems strange that countries which until recently have
been heavily dependent on state services should be advised to go through
with a rapid privatization of sectors such as the postal services, hospitals,
electricity and water supply. Nevertheless, this is the procedure the
IMF and the World Bank recommend towards countries in Eastern Europe,
Africa, Latin America and lately in Indonesia. In order to be considered
creditworthy and to receive advantageous loans during the economic crisis
the country experienced in 1997-1998, Indonesia had to reduce its official
spending dramatically. This is not to say that the reforms throughout
Eastern Europe have been unsuccessful in all respects. But the elimination
of public safety nets in already rapidly changing societies, without the
reinstatement of new institutions, has created a situation of insecurity
among the public. Thus, in the Fafo report mentioned above, on living
conditions in Estonia after independence, the research team found that
a majority of the Estonian population distrusted the new national authorities
and that many Estonians viewed the recent changes as a threat to their
standard of living (Grøgaard 1996:243).
Even Norway, a country with considerable
focus on high public spending which has only recently started to privatize
a few national institutions, has based its official strategy towards Eastern
Europe on private enterprises and liberal capitalism. Norway's main official
response to the changes in the East was the establishment of the Action
Program for Eastern Europe(8)by the Ministry
of Foreign Affairs in 1992. The main aims of the program are:
«...to contribute
to a fundamental restructuring of the countries in Central and Eastern
Europe and the CIS states in order to ensure a democratic and economically
sustainable development» (Stortingsmelding 47:3 - my translation).
The main geographical areas of interest
in 1994 were North-West Russia, the Baltic states and Poland. Twenty five
percent of the program's funds were directed towards the Baltic states.
The program calls on commercial enterprises to invest in the area and
offers funding (three of the firms I studied in Tallinn had previously
received financial aid from the Action Program, though only one of them
did so during my fieldwork).
In addition to the Western governments'
official policy towards the East based on a will to change the societies
through the application of liberal capitalist ideology, media and popular
opinion stressed the importance of the West «helping» the East with know-how
derived from the experience of living in the Western world. The «helping»
attitude was at the same time a mixture of idealism and condescension
on the Western behalf. One of the few exceptions to this tendency was
an article written in a Danish newspaper in 1988, which focused on what
Eastern Europe could offer Western Europe. The article claimed, among
other things, that inspiring intellectual discussions going on within
Eastern Europe could contribute to constructive critiques of the West
(Sperling 1988:4). In the business arena the Western world could offer
«help» in the form of hard currency, capital and commercial skills to
the East, which was portrayed as a place with high productivity, skilled
labor and low wages. In the early years after 1989 Norway was very positive
towards interaction with the former Soviet Block. Environmental cooperation,
cultural exchange, trade and commercial business were some of the main
activities. Russia was seen as the most important partner in all respects,
also when it came to business, but Estonia and the Baltic states were
viewed as attractive markets for investment as well. Estonia and the Baltic
states also valued Western investment highly. Marian Walny, a Polish mayor,
describes his situation at the time like this:
«What characterized
me as a mayor in the beginning, was impatience on the one hand and on
the other hand a lack of experience, a lack of theoretical knowledge and
that I trusted people too much. The wish to change and improve the world
was overwhelming» (Letnes 1995:12).
His words and especially the last
sentence cover much of the general feeling at the time: improvements coupled
with impatience. Western investors could argue that they were «helping»
the society in question by investing, while they had the possibility of
making money at the same time. The Eastern party wanted Western capital
in order to make their region or country wealthy, prosperous and safe.
A general feeling among many Estonians was that Western investments in
their region would create strong bonds to the West and hence reduce the
risk of Russian military, political and economical dominance (e.g. Stalsberg
and Harry 1996). At the same time a considerable amount of short-term
humanitarian aid was directed to the East from the West. The sense of
helping, recreating, reforming and changing a region for the better was
strong on both sides.
One aspect of Western ideological
discourse was aid to and restructuring of the former Soviet Block. Another
element was the representation of the East as an 'Eldorado' for money
making and almost anything else. The former Eastern Block was suddenly
the 'land of opportunities'. In order to be successful in the future,
investments in the East were seen as essential by both Western media and
public. I have noted this even in the case of my own fieldwork. The responses
from people in Norway when I told them about my project are invariably
that I had made a wise choice of region and that I most definitely will
get a job(!). A parallel might be the perception of computer technology
as 'the future'. One of the aims of the Norwegian and Western aid to Eastern
Europe was the spreading of global business ideology to the East. The
assumption was that Eastern Europeans were unaware of how to relate to
the business ideology and how to «do business». With both official policy
and popular opinion emphasizing Western involvement in the region as aid
and help, the motivation for Norwegian business people to «do business»
in Estonia was only strengthened. In a parallel strand of discourse that
was simultaneously followed, especially in the media, the East was portrayed
as booming and hazardous. The focus on the mob, corruption, violence,
insecurity on all levels, prostitution and fast money helped to mystify
the East. A Norwegian film was shot in the Latvian capital Riga, called
The Virgins of Riga (Jomfruene i Riga), picturing Norwegian
business people striking shady deals, succeeding by chance and being entertained
by women and cheap liquor. The East was seen as daring, unreformed, unstable
and adventurous. The then Norwegian Minister of Trade, Grete Knudsen,
described the situation for the Eastern countries and the Norwegian business
people as the «...great challenges in the [Eastern]
countries» (Thorheim 1995:21). The Baltic states were
featured in an article in one of the main Norwegian financial papers,
Dagens Næringsliv, which described them as the «Baltic
Bonanza» (Bugjerde and Engdal 1996:20). The same paper interviewed a Norwegian
scrap metal trader in Tallinn (Engdal 1996:18) and described Via Baltica,
the highway project meant to connect the three Baltic states, as an extremely
dangerous road where one is likely to be killed or robbed. Dagbladet,
one of the most widely read daily newspapers in Norway, printed an article
by an economist, titled «Norwegian Encounters with the Mafia» («Norsk
møte med mafiaen») (Maurseth 1996:42). The article was accompanied
by a black and white drawing, picturing two gangsters, with hand-guns
instead of heads, threatening each other at gun point. The main argument
of the article was actually that only very few Norwegian companies had
contact with the so-called Mafia. That the title had to focus on the Mafia
and that the article was illustrated in the described manner falls in
line with the ongoing discourse picturing the East as something out of
the Wild West. Norwegian business people in Tallinn could all tell stories
in the same genre as the newspaper headlines from Norway. At the same
time they often pointed out the importance of correcting the negative
'Wild West' image that the Norwegian press painted of Estonia.
The Mafia, corruption and violence,
or rather the stories about Mafia, corruption and violence, had a mythical
importance among the Western people in Tallinn (see Chapter Four). Literally
the first description that was presented to me by a Norwegian business
person in Oslo who also had an office in Tallinn was that «Tallinn is
the Chicago of Europe». He went on to say that «...the whole
of Estonia is corrupt, they'll smuggle anything - even liver paté!».
One of the stories which circulated among the Western crowd in Tallinn
was a horror story of an American businessman who had to jump out of window
in order to avoid two Russian gangsters. This is how the story was told
to me: The American had been drinking at a popular bar among the Westerner
crowd in Tallinn. He made friends, or so he thought, with two Russian
men. They talked about music and found out that the American had some
CDs that the two Russians were interested in borrowing. When the bar closed,
the American invited the two men up to his apartment to look at his CD
collection. Once in the apartment the two men attacked the American. He
managed to crawl into the bathroom and lock the door. While in the bathroom,
he could hear the two men discussing how to kill him. He decided to jump
out of his bathroom window, which was on the third floor. Both his arms
and legs were crushed in the fall. He lay screaming in the street for
a couple of hours until an ambulance arrived. He stayed in a hospital
over the weekend in agonizing pain, without receiving any anesthetics.
He constantly asked the nurses to call representatives from his company,
which they refused. On the following Monday his Western employers were
finally contacted. They ordered a helicopter, and he was flown out of
the country and never set foot in Eastern Europe again.
There are other stories about men
being drugged by Estonian and Russian women and subsequently robbed, of
women being molested, of people being shot at noon in the main street,
of a bullet missing the Finnish ambassador's wife by millimeters while
she was drinking coffee at a friend's house - and the local police allegedly
commenting: «What can we do, there are bullets flying everywhere!» etc.
But the story above represents the utmost scare for Western people living
in Tallinn. It combines the crime factor, insufficient medical infrastructure
(no anesthetics at the hospital), the unpredictability of the Estonians
(why did the hospital not call the Western employers at once?) and emphasizes
the differences between East and West (he is flown out of the East in
a helicopter to get proper treatment in the West).
Some of these stories are rooted in
reality, but their meaning is generated through their use in discourse.
The stories are utilized not only as a way of coping with the difficulties
of living in Tallinn and dealing with fear, but also as a way of reinforcing
the myth of Tallinn as a challenging place for a Western person to be
and to «do business». Thus the myths of Tallinn may be utilized as explanations
for some of the problems Norwegian and Western business people experience
in Estonia. The stories also function to personify the experiences of
Tallinn. When a Norwegian business person (or anthropology student) tells
or relates to the stories, they mediate the difference between themselves
and the Estonians. The Estonians are «less developed» and live in an unstable
country as opposed to the stable and civilized West. They are also saying
that they are brave individuals who are able to master life in Tallinn.
The Estonian author Viivi Luik describes, in her novel Ajaloo ilu
(The Beauty of History), how the scare of being summoned for
interrogation during Soviet times sounded both impressive and indeterminable
(Luik 1994:61). She presents the uncertainty of not knowing when or for
what reasons one could be summoned, but the certainty of knowing
that there existed a threat, that was mystical, scary, impressive and
real at the same time. Similarly the scare of corruption, violence and
the Mafia today generates stories which might be based in reality, but
mostly support the idea of Tallinn as a barbaric and wild place. Why else
would I choose to do fieldwork in Tallinn rather than in civilized places
such as Berlin or Paris! But despite, or maybe because of, its criminality
and risk, the East continued to be seen as a place with new possibilities.
I have often heard Tallinn described as a «Boom Town», a metaphor associated
with the Gold Rush in California, and Eastern Europe as a whole described
as the «Wild West». These metaphors are connected to the history of North
America. Frederick Jackson Turner presented his 'Frontier Hypothesis'
in 1893, where he focused on the importance of the conquering of the American
West in American history. Turner argued that the idea of «the frontier»
shaped American mentality in important ways. He described life on the
frontier as follows:
«[...] at
the frontier the environment is at first too strong for the man. [...]
Little by little he transforms the wilderness [...]» (Turner 1966:11).
Whereas Turner focused on the effects
of «the frontier» on Americans, America was often viewed, by Europeans
and foreigners in general, as a «frontier society». This image of the
USA was an important part of the European myth of America. Similarly,
the Western focus on the East in general and on Tallinn in particular
as unstable and explosive generates an image of the East as a «frontier
society». But in Eastern Europe it is the barbaric culture which needs
to be «transformed», not the wild nature. Both Western and Eastern Europeans
can thus take part in a quest of civilizing the East, although with different
motivations. The conquering of a frontier can be a suitable task for business
people who, as the ideal model of business presented in Chapter One implies,
are supposedly competent in handling risks and entrepreneurship. New markets
such as the Estonian offer unused business opportunities and risks which
may prove profitable. The ultimate Eastern frontier would be Russia, of
course, but Estonia seems to offer many of the ingredients of a «frontier
society» in more moderate form; it stands as a «frontier» between «uncivilized»
Russia and the «civilized» West.
«To
describe Estonia seems like an infinite task, as it presents new facets
of itself with every step one takes.» (Ann Tenno, Estonian
photographer).
We have so far focused on the production
and contents of Western and Norwegian myths of Eastern Europe and Estonia.
But the Western images of the East may not coincide with local identity
or the local «ideology of self». By looking at actual historical facts
as well as myths of Estonia based on history, some aspects of Estonian
collective identity will emerge.
With its strategic location by the
Baltic Sea, Estonia and its capital Tallinn has throughout history been
a center of international trade and commerce. Estonia was an important
link in the Viking trade routes via Russia to the Byzantine empire as
early as the ninth century (Cannon and Hough 1995:21). During the first
two periods of German rule in Estonian history (1227-1238(9)and
1346-1561), several Estonian cities were members of the Hanseatic League,
and Tallinn was the most significant of the Estonian Hanseatic cities.
Walking through the streets of the Old Town of the city once called Reval,
one can still see typical trade houses and Guild Halls from the Hanseatic
period. The Old Town is in many ways the heart of Estonia. It is a unique
place because of its beauty and well-preserved architecture. Each house
in the Old Town represents a period of Estonian history and the extensive
renovation carried out after independence has brought new life into each
characteristic place. The mixture of past and present is striking. A McDonald's
sign is the first thing you see when entering the Old Town through its
city gates, but the fast food restaurant is housed in an old building
which is beautifully restored. Close to McDonald's, women are selling
high quality home knit sweaters to mainly Finnish tourists from market
stalls. Outside the Old Town the city is growing fast, and in 1996 the
Estonians were discussing whether or not to build a skyscraper. A bit
further from the city center one finds shabby apartment buildings from
Soviet times, but also residential districts with single family houses.
Present day Tallinn is a city which
has gone through a lot of changes. Eight different flags have flown from
Pikk Herman (Long Herman) at the castle of the Estonian parliament through
history. The Danes ruled from 1219-1227 and from 1238-1346. In a short
interval between the Danish periods, the German Teutonic Knights administered
Estonia. They returned in 1346 and stayed until 1561, after which the
Swedes controlled Estonia until 1710. From 1710 until 1917 the Russian
Tsars governed. In 1918 there was again one year under German rule before
Estonia gained independence in 1918. But this lasted only until 1940,
when the Soviet Union held Estonia for one year, before Nazi Germany took
over. Estonia was annexed by the Soviet Union again in 1944 and this time
it lasted until what is referred to as The Singing Revolution culminated
in independence from the Soviet Union in 1991. The term 'changing society'
can be used to describe Tallinn in many periods of history, but the speed
of the changes during the last six years since independence is perhaps
unprecedented.
Starting in the late 1970s, the Soviet
Union experienced a dramatic economic decline, a measure of which can
be seen e.g. in the decline in energy and steel production (Nielsen 1996).
By 1989 the Soviet press could report record inflation levels, a nationwide
coal strike, low labor discipline(10),
ethnic conflicts, increased absence from work, and a shortage of grain
(UPI 1990). Public protests against official politics which started with
the onset of Glasnost in the middle 1980s came as a result of economic
crisis as well as the liberalization of politics under Gorbachev, which
increasingly allowed critical views to be voiced through the media. In
1987(11), Estonian television revealed
plans to extract phosphorite in the north-east of Estonia. This would
allegedly affect one third of the ground water in the country. As a result
of the frustrations of the economic recession and the new liberalization
of the press, the issues concerning the extraction were heatedly discussed
in public. Important groups such as the bar association of lawyers and
the university council declared their opposition to the planned extraction.
This debate formed the starting point for wide protests against Soviet
hegemony. In June 1988, 150 000 people gathered at the song ground in
Tallinn and later 300 000 gathered in September, as a manifestation of
opposition against Soviet rule, and the name The Singing Revolution was
coined. The song ground normally hosts the traditional song festivals
where traditional Estonian songs and dances are performed, which are,
depending on the political climate, held around the first of July every
fifth year in memory of the first song festival in 1869. Folk songs played
an important part in the national movement in Estonia both during the
national awakening in the late 1800s and during the process of regaining
independence from the Soviet Union. At one point during the Singing Revolution,
a human chain of some two million people held hands across the Baltic
nations on the sixtieth anniversary of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, on
August 23rd 1989 (Lindström 1994:53). A young Estonian told me that
he had never felt so happy before: «I cannot explain the maddening feeling
of happiness in my stomach», he said. During the Singing Revolution, people
demonstrated against Soviet rule and a nationalistic people's front was
formed and won a majority of the seats in the Estonian Soviet during the
first elections with more than one party participating in 1990. All through
the Singing Revolution, the Soviet army reminded the Baltic people of
its existence by driving through the streets of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania
by night in combat vehicles, and in the first half of 1991 the situation
came to a head. On January 13th 1991, Soviet forces stormed the TV tower
in Vilnius, Lithuania, and fourteen people were killed in front of TV
cameras. The pictures were broadcast world wide. A week later there was
shooting in Riga, the Latvian capital. On August 19th conservative communists
seized power in Moscow through a coup and Soviet groups occupied TV towers
and radio stations throughout the Baltic States. The ports were blocked
and troops were flown in from Russia. The Baltic parliaments declared
the coup illegal and Estonia declared independence the next day. After
the coup in Moscow failed, the Soviet Union swiftly recognized Baltic
independence. Estonia had regained independence through the Singing Revolution
after having been part of the Soviet Union for more than 40 years (1940-1941
and 1944-1991).
An Estonian friend returned to Tallinn
from Norway in Christmas 1991, four months after independence. The trade
agreements with Russia had been canceled and the economic recession was
worsened. There was no electricity or gas and Tallinn was blacked out.
She told me that she had never seen so much poverty in Estonia. Her family
ate porridge for Christmas instead of the traditional Estonian Christmas
meal consisting of, among other dishes, Estonian blood sausages. But the
new year promised changes and optimism for Estonia. The optimism and the
need and wish for change was typical of the period before and immediately
after independence. Estonia was a country which yearned for changes, and
the withdrawal from the Soviet Union was seen as the solution to all problems.
However, the reality after independence was different from what many Estonians
had hoped. Kristin Rande, who did fieldwork in Lithuania in 1992, describes
how the optimistic visions of the future which had been so evident in
Lithuania during and right after independence were transformed into feelings
of instability and failure (Rande 1996). She explains the growing pessimism
as a consequence of the discrepancy between the expectations of life after
independence and actual reality. Something similar, though perhaps not
as dramatic, happened in Estonia, and the hardships after independence
(together with the Soviet legacy) were often blamed for the declining
standards of living and the disappointments many Estonians felt.
The optimism and enthusiasm during
and after independence can partly be ascribed to a «collective memory»
(Connerton 1989) of the first Estonian republic, which lasted for 22 years
(1918-1940), between the two world wars. The myth of Estonia as an independent
nation and part of Europe instead of Russia, which had been kept alive
all through the Soviet period, suddenly promised to be realized in practice
during the liberation process and the years of Estonian nation-building.
Torstein Bach, who has done fieldwork in Estonia, points out that the
First Republic was used as a model during the establishment of the present
Estonian republic. Independent Estonia after 1991 was also often viewed
as a continuation of the first republic in 1918 (Bach forthcoming). The
meaning of national ideology is, according to Rande (following for example
Anderson 1983 and Kapferer 1988), shaped by what she calls the «historical
present» (the «presence» of the past in the here and now), and provides
meaning for the nation as well as for individuals (Rande 1996:23). Such
interpretations of history were widely used in the process of creating
an Estonian national ideology after independence, and some periods of
the country's history were given stronger emphasis in the forming of national
consciousness than others. Selected aspects (both positive and negative)
of Estonian history which were considered to be of current interest, were
part of the creation of a national ideology.
An Estonian friend of mine told me
that right after independence Estonian national identity was debated among
Estonians. The participants were looking for historical facts or events
which would describe Estonians. My friend told me of an Estonian proverb
which was commonly referred to as characteristic of Estonian character:
«The favorite food of an Estonian is another Estonian» (Eestlase lemmiktoit
on teine eestlane(12)). When I confronted
people with this saying they all recognized it (except Russians living
in Estonia) and agreed that it was descriptive of Estonians. Many Estonians
would characterize Estonian national identity as competitive and envious.
They saw this as both a negative and a positive trait of their people.
Estonian business people would voice similar opinions when they described
Estonian ways of doing business. The Estonian novelist Anton Hansen Tammsaare
portrays two Estonian villagers/farmers in his five-volume epic Tõde
ja Õigus (Truth and Justice), who initiate a feud between their
families which lasted for generations (Tammsaare 1926-33). They were competing
to dig a grave, but neither of them wanted to give up before the other.
This novel is well-known in Estonia as a description of the developments
of the Estonian nation from 1870 to 1930, but was also referred to as
an example from literature of the Estonian competitiveness and envy of
other people. Other aspects of history were also utilized in order to
understand and analyze Estonian identity. Quite often this interpretation
and use of history would portray Estonia and Estonians as different from
Russians and as oriented towards Western Europe.
Estonia was seen as a special place
in Soviet times by both Estonians and Russians, and was often referred
to as «Our West» within the Soviet Union. It was common for people living
in Russia to go on shopping trips, take vacations and buy summer homes
in Estonia and to regard this as a somewhat «Western» experience. The
Baltic states became a socioeconomic laboratory within the Soviet Union
as early as in the 1960s (Mailand-Hansen 1988). Around 1970, Estonian
salaries were paid on the basis of labor achievement, production was decentralized,
and working hours were reduced ten years before these reforms were attempted
in the rest of the Soviet Union. Several major economic reforms were initially
tested in the Baltic states, and some remained in force there, even after
they were abandoned in the rest of the Soviet Union (Nove 1977). People
from the Baltic States were allowed to travel rather extensively to the
West. But even though this exceptional position within the Soviet Union
perhaps made the Estonians more oriented towards Western ways of life,
Tallinn in 1991 was still definitely outside the sphere of direct Western
European influence, and the coastal borders to Europe were often completely
sealed off by military posts. Nevertheless, Estonians being situated on
the Western border, receiving Finnish television, having a European history
and enjoying a special status within the Soviet Union, had an awareness
of being different form Russians and at odds with Soviet ideology, even
while they were a part of the Soviet Union.
Estonians will emphasize the Hanseatic
period, the Swedish era and the first Estonian republic as the most positive
periods in their history. The Soviet times are often blamed for everything
that is dysfunctional in Estonia today. This is similar to what Rande
noted in Lithuania two years after independence. She argues that the Lithuanians
used the Soviet legacy as an explanation of why things had not gone as
planned (Rande 1996). The «Hanseatic spirit» is treasured and brought
to the surface in many parts of Estonian life today. The Old Town is a
magnet for tourists, but also a symbol of pride to the Estonians. The
Hanseatic history is often used by Estonians as an example of a prosperous
time when Estonia played an important part in the trade within Europe,
and contrasted to the Soviet period. It is also said to prove that Estonians
are traders at heart, have long traditions of commercial activity and
know not only how to relate to the planned economy that existed during
the Soviet period. The Swedish times are associated with education. Estonia's
first university; the University of Tartu, was established by the Swedish
king as Sweden's second after Uppsala. These periods are examples of historical
events which are viewed as better for the Estonian nation than other historical
periods(13).
But despite these positive visions
of Estonia in history, the Soviet legacy exists for better or for worse
in present-day Estonia. Almost anything can be blamed on the Russian influence
or the Russians still living in Estonia. Some things are easy to notice
like the Soviet-style buildings or the ethnic Russians, but certain kinds
of behavior and certain legal and administrative traditions are also explained
by reference to the Soviet period. Parts of Estonian management styles
and behavior in the workplace would be accounted for by my Estonian and
Norwegian informants as results of the Soviet past. For example one Norwegian
businessman complained that his Estonian employees were unable to plan
ahead and take responsibility. He interpreted this as a result of the
Soviet system. During Soviet times, he said, Estonians did not own their
own apartments or have any real influence on their jobs. Since they were
told what to do and were unable to make truly individual decisions, they
did not feel obligated to act responsible at work. This behavior continued
to be a part of their lives in 1996, according to him. An example of how
Estonians themselves 'blame everything on the Russians' was when I discovered
cockroaches in my room. The Estonians would give me a sad look and tell
me that I would never get rid of them and that there were no cockroaches
in Estonia before the Russians came. But Estonians are not only negative
about their recent past. Many people would complain and say that some
things used to be better prior to independence. The level of crime was
lower, it was easier to keep a job, the pensioners had a more secure situation,
everyone could afford medical care and society was generally more secure.
But if you ask any ethnic Estonian whether he or she wishes the country
to return to the Soviet Union they will most certainly say no.
One of the most visible results of
the Soviet influence is a Russian ethnic minority which constitutes approximately
30% of the Estonian population (U.S. Bureau of Census 1989). The majority
of these Russians moved to Estonia during the Soviet period, mostly because
of higher salaries and somewhat higher living standards in Estonia and
a shortage of workers. Some Russian families also have roots going back
to Tsarist times. There exist a number of obstacles to obtaining citizenship
for Russians in Estonia, all sorts of discrimination against the Russians,
the Russian language and the general legitimacy of Russian culture. The
antipathy towards Russians has long historical roots, and Estonians and
Russians today have limited contact. Estonia has been criticized by Russia
as well as the rest of the international community for the handling of
their Russian minority, especially the knowledge tests in the Estonian
language and culture that are required in order to acquire Estonian citizenship.
This has worsened the political relationship between Russia and Estonia
and among other things led to high customs on Estonian goods exported
to Russia. This is an important issue for Estonia which wishes to promote
itself as a transit country between the West and Russia and as a country
which is well-informed about how to do business with Russia.
During the first Estonian Republic
a notable number of foreign companies settled in Tallinn and Estonia.
From literature and historical sources it seems as if in the commercial
sphere at least much of what happened during the first Estonian republic,
is repeating itself today, only to a much greater degree (Kross 1991).
Already during the Glasnost period foreign investors started to regard
Estonia as an interesting market, and in 1996 Estonia received more foreign
investment than both its Baltic neighbors together, although both Latvia
and Lithuania are bigger than Estonia. (This tendency seems to be changing
in 1998, as an EU report claims that development in Estonia has slackened
and that Latvia is about to take over as the most progressive Baltic nation
(NRK Tekst TV 1998).) Most of the Western capital was directed towards
Tallinn. Among the Nordic countries Finland has made the largest investments
in Estonia. But Sweden and Denmark are also well represented. Norway,
with traditions in export of raw materials like oil and fish, rather than
trade outside its borders, is only represented with few and mainly relatively
minor companies (see Chapter Three and Appendix One).
Estonia has through its history been
influenced by both Western and Eastern Europe. These different influences
affected the formation of an Estonian national identity after 1991. We
have so far focused on how Estonians see themselves as competitive, different
from the Russians, and as «natural traders», as a result of the focus
on the Hanseatic period in the country's history, a tendency to contrast
themselves to Russians, and an idea of Estonians as individualistic and
competitive as opposed to the communist ideology. The awareness of these
national collective traits may be more dominant in the capital city than
in the rest of the country, as there are considerable differences in lifestyles
between Tallinn and the rest of Estonia. It is difficult to know how aspects
of the collective national identity, such as the «favorite food» proverb,
create meaning for individual Estonians and affect their actions. But
through studying the Estonian business people's practices and reactions
to the Norwegian-Estonian cooperation, we may be able to understand the
effects of some parts of the national ideology on for example
Estonian business practice. Another issue which influenced the Estonian
business people's cooperation with the Norwegians was their idealized
conception of the West, fondly nourished throughout the Soviet period.
After independence many Estonians expressed disappointment. Life in independent
Estonia did for many people seem more difficult than during Soviet times.
Similarly, Estonian business people were often disappointed when they
did business with Norwegian business people, as they did not live up to
their expectations of the ideal Western business person.
The old town of Tallinn is today a
mixture of historical architecture and new Western style restaurants and
stores. It is a place where people seem to be constantly rushing somewhere
to become rich fast. Women dress according to the newest European fashions
and men in suits with mobile phones are a common sight. New stores and
bars pop up almost every week and old ones suffer bankruptcy. People who
have experienced the changes from communism to capitalism describe them
as unbelievable. Estonia has in many ways gone from one extreme to another.
Today only Hong Kong has more liberal trade regulations. The younger generation
stresses the liberal, individualistic and competitive nature of their
society, and expresses pride in Estonian national identity. The Estonian
Finno-Ugric language, which is closely related to Finnish, is a distinctive
national stamp which the Estonians take pride in. And it seems as if Estonia
is on the right track, if they want to achieve what they term a 'Western
standard'. The economy is growing fast, the local currency which is pegged
to the German mark is strong and Tallinn has its own stock exchange. Just
recently Estonia was invited, as the only Baltic country, by the EU to
start membership negotiations.
Outside of the old town, Tallinn looks
different. The suburbs are dominated by high rise «cookie box» buildings
built during the Soviet era. Here the old «trolls» (electric buses) and
trams run crammed with people next to the rush hour bumper-to-bumper-line
of new Western cars. Tallinn is a city of contrasts and in some respects
it has always been so. The manor houses from the 1700s inhabited by the
German aristocracy in the Estonian countryside do not look anything like
the plain wooden Estonian farm houses from the same period. And though
the communist philosophy was one of equality, even during Soviet times
people talked about a «threshold» culture:
«During Christmas time we celebrated
at home, but once we left the house there were no signs of Christmas.
We even had a tree at home.» (30 year old Estonian woman).
Behavior and even language could change
literally by crossing a threshold. At home one could express opposition
towards Soviet rule, but once out of the house people would conceal such
opinions. Today the fancy new offices down town have little in common
with the small and crowded apartments in some of the suburbs of Tallinn.
But modern offices may be concealed behind steel doors in run-down buildings.
The gaps between rich and poor, old and new, ethnic Russians and ethnic
Estonians, and Tallinn and the rest of Estonia are growing fast. It is
for example not difficult for a Western firm to hire qualified Estonian
workers. It is common for many young Estonians to speak competent English,
Finnish and Russian in addition to Estonian, and to be well informed on
Western ways of running a business. Some of the Norwegian firms even hired
Estonians who were fluent in Norwegian or Swedish. But there are significant
differences between the people who have this knowledge and those who do
not. People who have the skills to work in Western firms or private businesses
have a better possibility to make more money or to get a job than those
who only have a Soviet education. It also seems as if the people who are
oriented towards the new philosophy of private enterprise and Western
values are more optimistic about their future than the people who do not
hold this knowledge. This divide is also reflected in other spheres of
the society. There are parts of Tallinn which only serve the needs of
Estonian and Western business people, Western-oriented Estonians and Westerners
living in or visiting Tallinn. These coffee shops, hotels, stores or apartments
may be almost unknown to some inhabitants of Tallinn. One example is when
I took an Estonian friend of mine who is from a village outside of Tallinn,
but studying in Tallinn, to a coffee shop, and it was the first time in
her life. Tallinn today is a place where people living and working next
to each other may inhabit completely different life-worlds. The Norwegian
business people who come to Tallinn mostly participate in the modern aspects
of Tallinn and relate to Estonians who are oriented towards Western-style
business.
The first Norwegian business
people came to Tallinn in 1989. One of the businessmen who arrived early
was «Frank» (fictive name), who a few years later, when it became legal
to form Estonian companies with foreign ownership, established his own
firm. Frank had a background in a business experience from Russia. He
went to Moscow, in the early years of the Glasnost period, with the intention
of selling and repairing vacuum cleaners. He was asked to give a price
estimate on the repair of a stock of vacuum cleaners by business associates
he established contact with in Russia. Frank made the estimate in Norway
and returned to Moscow to present it to his new Russian partners. Once
back in Russia he never saw the men he had established contact with during
their first trip, but were met by people with whom he was unacquainted.
This incident made him feel uncertain and he returned to Norway.
Back in Norway he heard
that Tallinn held interesting business opportunities and that Estonians
were much easier to do business with than Russians. He came to Tallinn
in 1990. In Estonia he had made arrangements to organize the running of
an Estonian textile factory. He had bought second-hand machinery and received
financial guaranties from Norway. The first problem he faced concerned
the transportation of the equipment to Estonia. It proved difficult to
rent containers in Scandinavia because Estonia was considered a high-risk
area. When he managed to rent containers in the Netherlands at a higher
cost than he had originally calculated, his initial time schedule was
delayed. The factory was put in operation in 1991. The first months went
by without any problems, but when the factory started to pay off financially,
the problems arose. According to Frank the Estonian management was unwilling
to reinvest money that was made back into the factory. Instead they wanted
to increase their personal salaries. Simultaneously the factory faced
problems with obtaining raw materials. They were unable to find high quality
raw material in Estonia and had to import from outside Estonia. Frank
was blamed for the difficulties and two years later the Estonian management
was running the factory. Frank said that one of the mistakes he made was
to provide the majority of the capital without securing his interests
properly. He returned to Norway.
In 1995 he was asked by
the management of the factory to return to Estonia as they were still
experiencing difficulties. Frank, who was facing financial difficulties
in Norway, decided to go back to Estonia. His main project in Estonia
in 1996 was his position as the Chairman of the Board of the factory.
But he was also involved in a number of other projects. He owned a beauty
parlor, was a member of the board of a consulting firm, and owned another
factory outside Tallinn. According to his own account, he has had problems
with all of these projects except the beauty parlor (maybe because Estonian
women is known for their vanity). Frank stays in Tallinn partly because
he knows the town and has business contacts there by now, but also because
he has no business to return to in Norway. He also said that it was interesting
to observe the changing society of Estonia up close, although he was highly
critical of Estonians and the Estonian system. He has once been quoted
in an Estonian newspaper describing Estonians as very lazy. Even though
Frank has experienced a number of problems during his stays in Tallinn,
he remained in the city. It is tempting to describe Frank and business
people like him as unsuccessful in business. But, like many Norwegian
business people in Tallinn, he kept trying over and over again when his
projects failed. He showed initiative and proved to be inventive when
coming up with new business ideas.
Apart from Coca Cola and Statoil,
the remaining Norwegian-Estonian companies that I studied in Tallinn,
shared some significant traits (see appendix 1 for more detailed descriptions
of the individual companies). One of the most common characteristics of
the Norwegian business people was that they belonged to a marginal group
of business people in Norway. They were not what one normally would think
of as business people. There was one priest, one with a degree in philosophy,
another used to be a local politician, yet another man had been a diplomat,
there was a diver, and one of the business people was a designer. But
there were also Norwegian business people who had graduated from business
schools. An illusion often held by Estonian business people, was that
these kind of business people did not exist in the West. Even though the
Norwegian business people in Tallinn belonged to a marginal group, they
still related to and had a Norwegian local business habitus at the same
time as they wanted to be seen as «proper» business people. But the situation
of marginality also influenced their business behavior. Frank and his
firm was in many ways representative for the Norwegian involvement in
Tallinn. He had his own small company founded by himself, had a relatively
long-term engagement in Estonia, spent most of his time in Tallinn, was
involved in a number of different projects at the same time and lacked
a fixed plan for his business. Each of the twelve small Norwegian-Estonian
firms, was established by one or two Norwegian business people. They would
sometimes cooperate with an Estonian colleague in the initial phase, but
the initiative always came from the Norwegian party. The companies were
small, often consisting of 3-4 people on the management level. Sometimes
the management level would form the whole company. Eight firms were involved
in more than one project simultaneously, four provided consultancy services,
seven produced goods in Estonia for sale in Western Europe, three sold
Western goods on the Estonian market, one was a travel agency and one
company ran a printing press. Some of the Norwegian business people had
previously traveled and done business outside Norway prior to coming to
Estonia. Two of my informants had done business in Africa, one on Iceland,
four had been to Russia and some were doing business in Latvia or Lithuania
in addition to Estonia. A number of the business people had throughout
their careers been involved in many different sectors of business.
The main bulk of the firms I studied
in Tallinn in the spring of 1996 were established in 1992-1993. When I
returned to Tallinn, in November 1996, three out of the twelve firms had
been terminated or suffered bankruptcy. Six months later two additional
firms left the country.
The Norwegian business people in Tallinn
can be seen as adventurous and profit-seeking because they chose to do
business in Eastern Europe. But each individual come for his or her own
specific reason, each has his or her own story: some came because of the
chance of making fast money, some because they wanted adventure, some
because they have failed in Norway and wanted a fresh start, and some
merely by chance. One of my first questions when I met the Norwegian business
people was why they came to Estonia. They all hoped to make money in Tallinn,
but very few had planned to go to Estonia in particular. The two largest
Norwegian firms in Tallinn had a business plan with special emphasis on
the Estonian market. The remaining ten firms were established in Tallinn
more or less by chance. One man came because he went with a friend on
vacation to Estonia. Another because of a bet with a friend in Norway.
Some had connections outside the Estonian business environment such as
one man who had connections with Estonian youth choirs, and another who
was connected to the Estonian scout organization. Two of the founders
of two Norwegian firms originally started out in Russia, but did not succeed,
and moved on to try their luck in Estonia. At least four came to Estonia
because of a lack of success in Norway.
When I asked the business people if
they hoped that their specific project was significant for the development
of Estonia, two quotes cover most of the answers: «One is not sentimental
when it comes to money» and «That is not my task, but of course it is
satisfying if you can create jobs». These attitudes,
however, were only partially reflected in actual practice. A number of
the Norwegian businesses were involved in idealistic projects, such as
the organization of aid from Norway to Estonia and the organization of
language courses for Russians. Only three of the companies had received
funding from the Norwegian Action Program for Eastern Europe. Some would
even criticize aid programs in general on the basis that the programs
were out of touch with the actual situation for Western businesses in
Tallinn. None of the business people would emphasize the insecurity or
adventurous aspects of Tallinn as the main attraction for themselves.
But they would often use this aspect as an explanation for other business
people's presence in Tallinn. Contrary to how they described themselves,
I will portray them as bold business people attracted by adventure as
well as a group of people who were versatile and many-sided in their business
careers.
From an Estonian point of view, Tallinn
carries a historical heritage as a center for trade, a place of contrasts
between people, and a society which at times has been isolated from the
Western parts of Europe, all at the same time. As a nation which has experienced
independence for less than ten years, Estonia is trying to create a sense
of national unity and identity, often using aspects from its history.
Indeed history is hard to escape when the Soviet apartment buildings are
still housing thousands of people and the Hanseatic houses are inhabited
by new businesses. Official politics in Estonia are liberal and directed
towards Western Europe as opposed to the centrally regulated economy of
the Soviet Union. But Estonian behavior is still often explained on the
basis of their history. This is a place which in many ways would seem
to be predisposed to welcome foreign capital and business people. International
business is «being done» in a setting shaped by a historical awareness
and sometimes nostalgia, a wish to become Western Europeans, and at the
same time a skepticism to the changes.
Norwegians, in contrast, see Tallinn
as an arena of challenges, but also of insecurity and change, where they
can have a moral sense of helping while making good money on the promise
of adventure. What kind of people took up the challenge of such an environment
and did they find what they sought? The answers are not simple. «Business
people who come to Estonia because they are seeking adventure will find
or even create what they are looking for», said a Norwegian businessman
in Tallinn. Both the Estonians and the Norwegians were seeking to realize
a dream or a business ideal, but the ideals they sought may differ. They
believed that they shared the same global ideology of business,
but also experienced both frustrations and positive surprises when finding
what they sought in practice. The following chapters will explore in detail
the relationships between the Estonian and Norwegian business people's
business ideals and their practice of «doing business» together.
As we saw in Chapter One, the global
discourse on how to «do business» generates a set of ideological expectations
among business people everywhere about how the new business ventures they
plan will turn out in practice. These expectations are in important respects
shared by all business people, regardless of their nationality or cultural
background. Thus, my Norwegian and Estonian informants are participants
in an imagined global business community (Anderson 1983), and share a
commitment to a common identity as business people. They have learned
that there exists an ideal business habitus, and that «good business»
will result from conforming to this ideal. This sense of inhabiting the
same, already well-known, world, and of interacting with people of the
same «kind» as oneself, may lead business people in cross-cultural settings
to assume that business is the same everywhere. But business is always
done by people with a given cultural background, and in given local settings.
Before one becomes a business person, one becomes a person, in a specific,
local sense. Thus the universal idea of a shared ideal business habitus
confronts the local realities of habitus that have been learned through
socialization into specific life-worlds. On an ideological level, Norwegians
and Estonians may thus interact as «business people», but on the level
of practice they must still meet as «Norwegians» and «Estonians». Scandinavian
practices of «doing business» have been described by Richard Hill in his
book EuroManagers & Martians (Hill 1994). He notes that Norwegian
management often reflects the egalitarian social system of Norway and
functions in what he terms a «democratic» way, involving consultation
of the employees in business matters. Estonian business people on the
other hand, have often described Estonian leaders as distanced and formal.
According to such descriptions, Estonian bosses create distance between
themselves and their employees through physical boundaries such as closed
office doors and through a focus on formal positions by clearly distinguishing
between the role of the employer and the employees. The question is how
these local business practices interact with the global ideal of
business practice, and how the global ideas of business are articulated
through the practice of «doing business» in the Norwegian-Estonian setting
in Tallinn. Some of the variations among Norwegian and Estonian business
people resulted from different degrees of commitment to global
business ideology, to the locality and to their image of self.
The Norwegian and Estonian business
people's expectations were, thus, not only based on their commitment to
the global idea of business. Chapter Two dealt with some of the factors
which shaped the expectations directly linked to the specific translocal
cooperation situation between Western and Eastern European business people.
The focus in the West on the financial growth of the countries in Eastern
Europe, their need for Western know-how, and their adventurous business
environments, were factors which influenced the Norwegian business people's
attitudes towards doing business in the East. The Estonians, on the other
hand, were forming a national identity that committed them, among other
things, to changes towards a capitalistic and liberal society. The Western
business people who came to the country were initially welcomed as agents
of change, who «knew how», e.g. business was done. The business people
thus had concrete ideas of how Eastern and Western Europeans would «do
business». The Norwegians had ideas of how the communist past had affected
their Estonian business associates' way of «doing business». They believed
that the Estonians lacked business initiative and that they were committed
to a bureaucratic management style, as a consequence of their Soviet history.
Many Estonians, on the other hand, said that they expected Western and
Norwegian business people to run their businesses with a focused drive
towards financial profit through the running of calculated risks. There
were, however, conflicts between these expectations and the actual business
habitus held by the Norwegian and Estonian business people. Contrary to
Estonian belief, Norwegian business people valued social justice and equality
in the running of a business and were often unsuccessful in initiating
progressive business plans. This made the Norwegians look somewhat naive
in the eyes of Estonian business people. The Estonians surprised the Norwegian
business people with their competitive business drive rather than being
restricted in «doing business» because of a Communist past. Some of the
expectations were also confirmed through practice. The Estonians' formal
and distanced attitude could be interpreted as a result of life under
authoritarian rule, while in fact it is possible that the behavior was
meant as politeness. The Norwegians' «democratic» running of their businesses
could be viewed, by the Estonians, as a consequence of living in a free
and democratic country. But it could also very well be a result of not
knowing how to behave in a dynamic and new business setting. In this sense
both parties could confirm their expectations without knowing that they
were misunderstanding each other.
Business as a global discursive object
describes and prescribes certain ideals of habitus. The model of business,
as presented in Chapter One, seeks to give a description of some common
aspects of the discursive object business. These general traits influence
the expectations business people everywhere have towards ideal business
practice, and give them a sense of belonging to an «imagined business
community». Profit, risk, entrepreneurial activity, responsibility and
networking are the five general traits which constitute my (incomplete)
model of business. The ideal of constant maximization of profit, is the
superior aim of any business activity. Profit thus constitutes the primary
hallmark of business as a global discursive object. Risk, entrepreneurial
activity, responsibility and networking can be seen as ideal means
towards the generation of profit. But since business people everywhere
are committed to global ideas of business, in the sense that
these ideas form part of their business identity, the model of
business must constantly be reinterpreted to fit local circumstances.
This can for example be seen through the way Estonian and Norwegian business
people commented on their own professional reality. The importance of
profit, risk, entrepreneurial activity, responsibility and networking
in business was constantly emphasized and debated. By exploring how the
local business people actually took risks, initiated new projects, took
on responsibilities and created networks, we will be able to learn something
about the interplay between the global ideal expectations of business
habitus and the local practices of «doing business». We shall see that
Estonian and Norwegian business people often had different expectations
towards how business should be done and different practices of «doing
business». Nevertheless, even though local Norwegian and Estonian business
practices clearly influenced the way the business people «did business»,
both Estonians and Norwegians had a sense of doing the same thing.
The business activity and the discussions of how business should be done,
which took place in the Norwegian-Estonian business setting, were at the
same time results of the global ideals of business, and parts of and contributions
to the ongoing global discourse on business.
Truly becoming a business person is
a practical task, and in order to investigate how the Norwegian and Estonian
business people articulated the global ideas of business, one has to study
the local practice of «doing business». The following two chapters will
present four cases from the Estonian-Norwegian cooperation situation.
The cases have been entitled «Risk», «Entrepreneurship», «Management Styles
and Responsibility», and «Networking», and deal directly with how the
Estonian and Norwegian business people acted on and related to the ideal
aspects of business described in my model of business. Profit has not
been isolated as a separate case as it is a prerequisite for all business
and consequently every case deals with profit directly or indirectly.
The divisions between the four other categories are also analytical, every
case will therefore contain elements of all the factors. The «Risk» and
«Entrepreneurship» cases, which will be presented in this chapter, present
two situations where cooperation was unsuccessful (but not altogether
so), i.e. characterized by problems and misunderstandings. The cases dealing
with responsibility and networking will be presented in Chapter Four,
and focus on (mainly) successful aspects of Norwegian-Estonian business
cooperation. In the course of this presentation we shall see that it is
not accidental that Norwegian and Estonian business people have problems
cooperating in situations involving risk and entrepreneurial activity,
while management and networking are far less problematic. Norwegian and
Estonian business habitus differ in certain crucial respects, and tend
to «fit» each other better (to be more easily «orchestrated», to use Bourdieu's
term (Bourdieu 1971:81)) in some types of settings than in others. The
following two chapters will explore the reasons why some aspects of the
Estonian-Norwegian business cooperation are successful and others not.
The cases will also show that, when confronted with the real practice
instead of the imagined practice of business ideology, the business people
not only acquired and related to new skills of «doing business» but also
produced new business identities based on their new experiences.
The empirical examples used in the
following are based on actual episodes with which I became familiar
during my fieldwork. Most of the examples are based on events which I
myself have observed directly, or on stories I was told by my informants.
As the Norwegian business environment was small and transparent, I have
tried to keep the identity of actors and firms anonymous. I have put together
bits and pieces from different firms, people and situations, and the companies
presented in the cases below are consequently not real companies.
Each case is constructed to illustrate situations that were typical of
all the smaller Norwegian firms in Tallinn at the time of my fieldwork.
The cases thus have a more or less fictitious composition at the same
time as I have tried to make them resemble what could be real firms and
episodes as much as possible. As previously mentioned, Coca Cola and Statoil
are excluded from this survey, and examples involving these companies
are based on statements made by business people connected to the small
Norwegian-Estonian firms.
I have above identified risk
as one of the common denominators of global business ideology. To take
risks in business is one way of achieving financial profit, at the same
time as it involves a chance of injury or loss. Risk will always be an
important part of «doing business» everywhere and a business person is
expected to take risks. Nevertheless, the degree and type of uncertainty
involved in taking risks depends on the business setting and the business
person. The running of risks demands a certain degree of predictability
in the surroundings. In cases where this is lacking, the actors may be
concerned with trying to reduce factors of risk. Clifford Geertz has thus
shown in his presentation of the «bazaar economy» in the Indonesian town
Modjokuto, that the very small-scale traders operating in the marketplace
were very reluctant to run substantial risks (Geertz 1963), and tried
to spread their investments as thinly as possible. This clearly also reduced
the profitability of their investments, and as a result, Geertz points
out, it proved nearly impossible to get the «profit spiral» going and
the market remained unpredictable and fragmented. These traders are not
business people, in the sense here discussed. Since their environment
is too risky, they are unwilling to take risk. Compared to Modjokuto,
Tallinn is a comparatively low risk environment, and in this sense, it
is far easier to «do business» here. Nevertheless, compared to typical
Norwegian business settings, Tallinn is a high-risk locality, and taking
a risk in Tallinn is thus very different from taking a risk in Oslo. Norwegian
business people arriving in Tallinn were prepared for risk in theory,
but had little experience of what it entailed in practice.
I shall in the following focus on
Estonian and Norwegian styles of risk-taking. A specific form of risk
that was typically taken by Norwegian business people in Tallinn may be
termed the business stunt. It may be surprising that Norwegian
business people, who are «doing business» in an unfamiliar setting, who
are used to a secure Norwegian business environment, and who hold a business
habitus previously described as «democratic» rather than risk-willing,
indulge in business «stunts». The reasons lie partly in the Norwegian
business habitus and partly in the Estonian setting. Business stunts will
be compared and contrasted to the calculated risks, that are
characteristic of the Estonian business people. Again, the explanations
of why the Estonians take risks of this kind can be found through looking
at the Estonian local business habitus, and its relationship to the local
Estonian setting.
Business stunts can be characterized
as dangerous, daring, original and flamboyant actions which are often
performed on the spur of the moment. They offer chances of considerable
profit as the stakes are high and the projects normally require minimal
planning. Stunts may therefore be tempting for small and marginal businesses
such as the Norwegian-Estonian companies. These firms have limited financial
resources and limited human capital to plan their projects (as opposed
to Statoil and Coca Cola, which do not perform business stunts). A stunt,
however, does not need planning and, if successful, gives profit. Business
activity in Norway can be described as predictable and routine rather
than dangerous and daring. Tallinn can apparently offer more excitement
within business than for example Oslo, and the prospect of a place suitable
for business stunts may be one factor that attracts a certain category
of Norwegian business people to Tallinn. Webster's Dictionary
also describes a stunt as an action which is often meant to attract attention
(Webster's 1989:1411). If a stunt is sufficiently original it may pay
off financially and because of the high profile of many stunts, the success
will be duly noted. A failure will be similarly visible. All of these
characteristics give stunts a flare of adventure rather than rational
business projects. A business adventure may open for a form of idealism
on behalf of the actors. This was precisely the case for many of the Norwegian
business people, who often tried to add aspects of aid and transfer of
know-how to their business (ad)ventures.
The examples below will describe a
Norwegian company in its initial face of establishment in Tallinn, and
how the Estonian and Norwegian actors within the company articulated the
global ideology of running risks in business through the practice of «doing
business» in a local setting.
A small Norwegian firm,
which had a franchise agreement with a Norwegian chain of stores, established
their business in Estonia in 1995 in order to introduce the stores in
Estonia. Their main priority area was Tallinn. The 'store company' came
to Tallinn more or less by accident. One of the owners was challenged
by a friend, who dared him to do business in the former Soviet Union.
The company established an office in Tallinn in order to organize the
running and establishment of the stores in Estonia. The office was run
by an Estonian administration, which consisted of a Project Manager and
a Financial Manager, and one representative of the Norwegian owners. One
Norwegian man was also hired to assist directly in the organization of
the individual stores. There was regular contact between the Tallinn office
and its Norwegian owners. Initially, the Norwegian owners assumed that
the stores in Estonia would multiply at an even higher rate than they
had in Norway. They assumed that within the first years they would have
established around 20-30 stores in Estonia. But after one year they had
only managed to set up five stores.
During the six first months
of the venture the goods for the Estonian stores were ordered by one of
the Norwegian owners who was unfamiliar with the wants and needs of Estonian
consumers. As a result the stores were unable to offer some goods which
were viewed as essential for that kind of store in Estonia. One example
is that in Russian parts of Tallinn there is a demand for tea sold in
bulk weight instead of tea bags and for darker bread than in the Estonian
areas. The Estonian partners in the administration of the Estonian branch
of the 'store company' were surprised that the routines for ordering goods
were changed only after a number of months and not immediately. According
to them this proved that the Norwegians needed more information prior
to coming to Estonia. The Estonian Project Manager said that:
"Everything is different
here. You notice that already at the airport when you have problems finding
a baggage cart(14). Our bosses had too
little information about Estonia before they came".
This project can clearly be termed
a stunt. The planning beforehand was minimal and the Norwegian business
people had very little knowledge of the particular business situation
in Tallinn. They were seeking profit, but they had not analyzed the market
prior to establishing themselves in Tallinn, looked for suitable partners
in Estonia or tried to hire Norwegians with knowledge of Estonia. The
fact that the company had not even tried to obtain any knowledge of Estonia,
seems surprising. The Norwegian representative of the owners expressed
this explicitly by saying:
«The only
thing that matters is that you know your job as for example an economist
and that you are qualified to this job. It is hard to know how to prepare.»
The lack of information about Estonia
was a common characteristic of the Norwegian companies in Tallinn. One
explanation for this was that many of the business people did not have
time to plan their projects prior to their arrival in Tallinn, as they
decided on how and where to «do business» in the nick of time. Another
reason may be that the Norwegian business people felt secure that they
would know how to «do business» in Tallinn. Indeed, if, as the global
ideology of business claims, business is the «same» everywhere, then it
is sufficient to «know one's job», as the representative of the owners
of the above case claimed. Such beliefs cannot be attributed to mere ignorance
on the Norwegians' part. After all, Estonia was changing towards a capitalistic
society and Estonians' experience of commercial business was limited.
Some of the Norwegian business people may thus have arrived in Tallinn
believing that their knowledge as Westerners would pull them through.
If the company had run a market analysis
ahead of their arrival they might have learned that there are important
differences between the Estonian and the Norwegian markets. Estonia does
not have a large wealthy middle class, as Norway or the rest of Western
Europe and the most important factor for the Estonian consumer is in most
cases still the price, as an Estonian businessman put it. As mentioned
above the Estonian consumers also have specific demands which are not
necessarily obvious to Norwegians. Apart from darker bread and tea in
bulk weight in Russian areas, another example is the preference for salted
pickles in Estonia rather than the pickles sold in Norway which often
contain sugar. Competition is also stiffer in Estonia. The market places
from the Soviet period are now filled with cheap and relatively high-standard
goods. Ever since Soviet times there have existed small basement stores
which sell groceries. These stores have very reasonable leases and can
thus often offer cheaper goods than the supermarkets.
The 'store company' also
faced problems in the running of the individual stores. The Norwegian
company hired Estonians as managers of the local branches. There were
misunderstandings concerning routines, cooperation, marketing, planning
and the organization of the goods in the stores. The Norwegian man working
as an assistant during the establishment of new stores gave me an example
of an incident he had found frustrating. He asked the staff to place a
stock of children's shoes in visible places in the store. He pointed out
the exact places to the staff. The shoes were on sale that week and the
Norwegian wanted them to be especially noticeable to the customers. His
orders had not been followed when he returned to the store the next day.
He consequently had to arrange the shoes himself. According to him this
situation illustrated how the Estonian staff was unable to understand
how to market and sell goods efficiently.
Here we see another and somewhat subtler
example of how poorly the Norwegians understood the Estonian situation
they were «doing business» in. The Norwegian supervisor had expected that
his knowledge about marketing from the West would apply in Tallinn. He
was genuinely surprised when the Estonian workers did not understand the
importance of his suggestions. But the Estonians may well have been aware
of the importance of marketing, but had a different attitude towards how
marketing should be done. One incident which was retold to me by one representative
from the Estonian administration of the company in question may serve
as an example of this. He said that he had seen one of the Norwegians
offering free coffee to the public as a PR stunt. He described the Norwegian,
when he was doing this, as acting «pushy» towards the customers in a positive
sense of the word. He said that he could not imagine any Estonian offering
free tastings in the same manner. He used this as an example of how differently
Norwegians and Estonians view and react to marketing.
The Norwegians' lack of planning seemed
to surprise the Estonian partners in the company, and many Estonians working
for other Norwegian firms in Tallinn would voice complaints similar to
those of the Project Manager of the 'store company'. One example was an
Estonian woman hired as a Project Manager in another Norwegian firm, who
said that her boss wrongly assumed that things worked the same way in
Tallinn as in Norway. She claimed that he failed to realize that competition
is stiffer in a capital city like Tallinn which is also undergoing major
changes and is the object of substantial international business interests,
than in a small town in Norway, like the place her boss came from. She
said that it is vital to asses the situation thoroughly before doing business
in Tallinn, as it is a demanding place to «do business», particularly
for a Norwegian business person.
The Estonian Project Manager
of the 'store company' went on to say that since Estonia is an unstable
society you need to know what sorts of risks you take. Estonians, he said,
take risks in a different manner than Norwegians:
«We
calculate our actions. After a thorough evaluation of the situation we
act, and then we may run seemingly bigger risks than the Westerners».
He gave me an example from
his own experience to exemplify this statement: «Normally, goods ordered
by our company are paid for after delivery, and especially if they come
from Russia. One of our regular suppliers in Russia was having difficulties
paying salary to their workers and needed money to be able to transport
the goods to Estonia. They promised us a considerable discount on the
delivery if we were willing to pay up-front. I contacted the Norwegian
owners, who were doubtful at first. They were persuaded only after I agreed
to vouch for the money personally. I was certain that we would receive
the goods, as I trusted the company and knew that they were dependent
on maintaining a good relationship with our company in order to stay comfortably
in business». I asked the Estonian Project Manager if he managed to sleep
at night, knowing that he was personally responsible for a big amount
of money. «If you borrow ten thousand dollars in a bank, you don't sleep
at night. If the bank lends you one million dollars, they don't sleep
at night», was his answer. The goods were, as the Project Manager had
predicted, delivered to Estonia right after the money was transferred
to the Russian company.
The above situation may seem like
a dangerous risk for the Estonian Project Manager to take, and we might
be tempted to call it a stunt, as we did in the Norwegian case. The Estonian
seemed to be risking his reputation as a trustworthy business person as
well as money. Closer investigation reveals that there are important differences
between the risks taken by the Norwegians and the Estonians. The Estonian
businessman claimed that he knew what he was doing, that he had knowledge
about his partners, and could trust their relationship to his company
because his experience with their business partners had taught him to
trust them. His actions may seem risky, but they were thoroughly calculated.
At the same time as he stressed the fact that his action was a risk, he
also added that he knew what he was doing. He wanted to describe himself
as a brave business person who took risks at the same time as he had an
overview of his business situation. His actions were consequently not
risky to him, but similar behavior would have been to other business people,
such as the Norwegians, who did not know the setting they were operating
within. The description the Estonian businessman gave of himself, corresponded
to the global ideology of business, consisting of responsible, but risky,
business actions. The description was meant to make me see him in a certain
way. He exercised impression management (Goffman 1959) to guide my impressions
of him, so that I, as a result, would consider him a successful businessman
operating according to the global business habitus.
The distinction this Estonian businessman
made between how Norwegians and Estonians took risks in business was repeated
by many Estonian business people. One Estonian businessman said that Estonians
will check and then double-check before they dare take a risk. Another
man said that he had to slow his Norwegian partner down. His partner had
too many unrealistic ideas which the Estonian had to prevent him from
realizing. The analogy of a game of poker seems appropriate of the Estonian
ways of taking risks. It is of crucial importance to conceal whether your
hand of cards is good or bad. Similarly one might want to keep one's intentions
a secret in business. The next move in poker always needs to be carefully
planned by deducing the cards and moves of the opponents. I once observed
an Estonian businessman talking to a Russian businessman who was making
him an offer, which I knew he found very interesting. The Estonian never
unveiled his real interest and the result of his calculating attitude,
or «poker face», was a favorable deal with the Russian businessman. Calculated
risks, like stunts, involve gambling. The Norwegian business people in
Tallinn, being a marginal group (both at home, in Norway, and in the Estonian
context), may have been more inclined to perform business stunts than
the Estonians who were much more committed to the locality in which they
were «doing business», as Tallinn was their «home port». The Norwegian
business people did not risk, for example, their reputation through unsuccessful
business deals to the same extent as an Estonian businessman in Tallinn.
Another explanation may be that the Norwegians expect a predictable and
safe world, whereas the Estonians believe that the world is fundamentally
unpredictable. As mentioned earlier, Norway is a secure and stable society
with safety nets such as the state or local communities. This makes it
difficult to take a truly hazardous risk and the Norwegians are thus not
trained in calculating their actions. In Estonia, a changing society,
and before the changes, a society governed by capricious authorities,
people are used to assuming that people and situations cannot be trusted,
and therefore need to calculate their actions.
An example of the Norwegian behavior
patterns (habitus) I am here describing might be the rather surprising
tendency of the Norwegian firms to be involved in numerous and often odd
projects:
The 'store company' was
also involved in a number of other projects besides the establishing of
stores. They arranged Estonian language courses for their Russian employees,
arranged a trade fair for Norwegian producers and were involved in sending
an Estonian choir to Norway. Apart from the language courses which cannot
be termed a business venture, as they were non-profit, all of these projects
failed. At one point the Norwegian representative in Tallinn suggested
to his secretary that she should make an archive of unsuccessful projects.
For the trade fair they invited Norwegian producers to one of the main
hotels in Tallinn. They presented their goods to prospective customers
in Estonia. The idea was that the company would function as a mediator
between the Estonian customers and the Norwegian producers and sellers.
Very few deals were struck as a result of the fair. One of the few deals
that was made was between a Norwegian company based in Tallinn and a Norwegian
exporter. The parties met at the trade fair, but the deal was made independently
of the organizers of the fair. The Norwegian representative was very bitter
because of this. He said that he felt that the Norwegian company based
in Tallinn should have gone through him since he had created the contact
by arranging the fair.
The company also tried to
organize a concert in Norway for an Estonian choir during a large cultural
event in Norway. The Norwegian company took the financial responsibility
for the concert. They rented a large concert hall and advertised the event
in Norway, organized the housing of the choir during their stay in Norway
and solicited financing from sponsors both in Norway and Estonia. The
main Estonian sponsor was the City of Tallinn. This project received a
lot of public attention in Tallinn. The Estonian choir also took great
care in their preparations for the trip. They even translated parts of
their repertoire into Norwegian. Then, the project was canceled by the
Norwegian company only three weeks before the planned concert. The official
reason was a hotel strike in Norway. The Norwegian company claimed that
very few people would come to the concert as a result of the hotel strike,
since the festival relied on out-of-town visitors. The strike was called
off one week later. The Norwegian representative also told me that they
had sold very few tickets to the concert. The Estonian Project Manager
of the company, on the other hand, thought that the real reason was «bad
planning». They had only started to plan the concert one and a half months
in advance. He thought that this was too little time. This is how he described
the Norwegian owners of the company:
"They
moved too fast and made decisions too quickly. They are too optimistic.
I miss a plan for the choir project, but also for their whole business
venture here in Estonia."
As we saw initially, this company
started its career in Tallinn by taking a rather dramatic and unnecessary
risk. The story I have told indicates that the company did not learn from
this experience. The fictitious company I have here described is in this
sense typical of the actual companies I studied. The Norwegians kept taking
risks, which their Estonian partners frowned upon. As mentioned earlier,
the Norwegian and Estonian business people were committed to Tallinn in
different ways. For the Norwegians, Tallinn was often considered a temporary
place for their business. The Estonians, on the other hand, saw business
as a serious matter as it was part of their Estonian national project.
In this sense they are not only representatives of different local business
habitus, but different kinds of global actors. The Estonians relate to
a global ideology in their own country, whereas the Norwegians articulate
global business ideology in a place they can never be as committed to
as the native Estonians. In this sense the Norwegians have far less to
risk than the Estonians. As a result of their lack of knowledge of the
locality, their local habitus and their low obligation to Tallinn, their
risks in business come out as stunts. In their search for profit the company
was involved in many projects simultaneously as were many other Norwegian
companies in Tallinn. They hoped that at least one of the projects would
pay off. But as Geertz' example from Modjokuto showed, the spreading of
business involvement may make it difficult to attain profit. The Indonesian
small traders found that involvement in many projects would lessen their
risks, but it also made it harder to make profit. The spreading of involvement,
may similarly have functioned as a «life insurance» for the Norwegian
business people. Instead of risking all one's assets on one business project
the risk was spread on many smaller projects.
Both the Estonian and the Norwegian
business people acknowledged that risk was an important factor of «doing
business». The examples above have illustrated that although they agreed
on the importance of risk, they articulated the global ideology of risk
in different local ways. The Norwegians' stunts may be a result of their
lack of knowledge of the situation. But what was striking was not so much
the lack of knowledge in itself, but the fact that the Norwegians did
not try to improve their knowledge of the Estonian context. This is indeed
paradoxical. For on the one hand, the Norwegians seemed to assume that
their experience of «doing business» in Norway would be sufficient background
for «doing business» successfully in Tallinn. But on the other hand, as
we saw in Chapter Two, one of the main reasons why they were attracted
to Estonia in the first place was the Western image of Eastern Europe
as a place that was very different from Norway, because it was
a more risky place to «do business». The fact that these Norwegian business
people sought a business setting which was different from Norway, implied
that they desired changes. They wanted a fresh start and something new,
but did not want business in itself to change. In practice, however, they
seemed convinced that business is the same everywhere and that they knew
how to «do business». The Norwegians were marginally committed in Tallinn,
in the sense that if they took a risk, they mostly risked their own reputation
and their own personal profit. If they failed they had a chance to move
on or return to Norway where almost no one would be familiar with their
mistakes.
The Estonians held another agenda.
They had to be more careful as they might risk their reputation in the
city where they were going to keep «doing business» maybe for the rest
of their lives. They knew the Estonian situation better than the Norwegians
and had a more intimate knowledge of the local setting. They were therefore
able to avoid needless risks far better, as the example of the Estonian
«doing business» with Russians seems to show. More fundamentally still,
they were strongly committed to building a local national identity at
the same time as they were «doing business» and thus the results of their
actions mattered in the society as a whole. As mentioned earlier Estonia's
national policy favored a liberal democratic system of government. The
emphasis on free trade, the improvement of business conditions, and in
general, the achievement of economic growth in a classical, liberalistic
sense, are tightly linked with Estonian national identity. Estonians are
committed to their business because they need to uphold a reputation in
Tallinn as good business people. But they are also strongly committed
to the building of the Estonian nation in which commercial business plays
an important role. The Norwegians on the other hand, normally spend a
limited time in Tallinn and their agendas for doing business are mostly
personal, although they were influenced by the general Western attitudes
towards Eastern Europe. In a way they were more global in their orientation
as Tallinn was just another place to «do business» in the global world
of business. These differences in commitments resulted in different ways
of «doing business». It was important for the Estonians to calculate their
risks, so that they did not fail, whereas the Norwegian business people
could afford to take risks without considering the consequences to the
same degree as the Estonians.
Estonians also seemed to view themselves
in general as more calculating than the Norwegians, and often described
themselves as a «calculating» people. They seemed secretive in
their business activity and unwilling to reveal their intentions until
it was necessary. One way in which this was often expressed was that Estonians
were used to planning and thinking ahead, since their society had been
through such dramatic and unpredictable changes in latter years. The Estonian
description of their own risks in business as calculating matched the
Estonian construction of national identity. Chapter Two described parts
of the Estonian collective ideology as individualistic. This idea of themselves
seemed to contradict the complaints about the lack of collective solidarity
and the loss of the feeling of safety after independence from the USSR.
This may again be connected to the dual influence consisting of both a
communist past and a Western orientation.
As I mentioned above, when Norwegian
business people described other Norwegian business people in
Tallinn they often portrayed them as insufficiently prepared for the Estonian
business situation. Frequently repeated descriptions were adventure seekers,
ignorant towards the Estonian situation and badly prepared. Such statements
show that the Norwegians were aware of the high rate of badly planned
and very risky Norwegian business projects in Tallinn. They would however
never describe themselves in this manner. The reluctance to see
themselves as badly prepared for the Estonian business setting shows on
the one hand, that they are aware that according to global business ideology,
a business person should plan his or her business ventures. On the other
hand, «adventure seekers» is not necessarily a completely negative description.
Taking a risk means being bold and thus adventurous. The more one risks
the more one stands to gain.
This case has shown different articulations
of risk in business among Estonian and Norwegian business people. The
two parties had different business habitus and different motivations for
«doing business» in Tallinn. Estonian business people calculated their
risks and wanted to work with well planned projects. One way of putting
it is that they wanted to do «proper» business. One reason for this was
their specific business habitus, but also their inexperience in commercial
business activity and consequently a need for plans. The Estonian society
is also unstable and the Estonians were used to high-risk everyday life.
Finally, the business activity was part of their nation building and it
was thus important to succeed in business. Norwegian business people were
not used to relating to a high-risk business setting in Norway. Consequently
they were not sufficiently prepared for handling the factors of risk in
Tallinn. They believed in a fair system and felt disappointed when they
were treated unjustly. The Norwegian businessman who arranged the trade
fair, and became bitter when he discovered that a deal was struck without
his knowledge, can serve as an example of this. Coming to Tallinn might
have given the Norwegian business people a chance to finally operate within
a high-risk business environment, and since they were not used to this
type of setting their business risks became flamboyant stunts.
3.3 Entrepreneurship
Tallinn in 1996 could offer many unused
business niches, and the importance of being the first to utilize a new
niche was constantly emphasized, by both the Norwegian and Estonian business
people. The existence of many new niches and poorly established business
structures attracted small-scale, globalized actors from Norway and other
countries, and was probably the main contribution to the «bonanza» feature
of the business environment in Tallinn. At the same time, Tallinn was
a high risk economy and the exploitation of new niches was often connected
to risk. Paradoxically, the Norwegian business people often experienced
fear and enthusiasm at the same time, when «doing business». The abundance
of possibilities coupled with risk led to, as we have seen, a strong tendency
among Norwegian business people to be involved in many projects, often
at the same time. In this sense the Norwegians can be compared to Geertz'
bazaar traders. The Norwegian business people often approached their new
business initiatives with both arrogance and hesitance. They were arrogant
in the sense that they became reckless as they were unaware of what they
were doing. They were hesitant because they had failed before or heard
stories about Western business failures. These factors led to a reluctance
to stake a lot on one project and consequently the Norwegian business
initiatives often seemed reckless and irresponsible and insufficiently
committed.
Estonians had a completely different
attitude towards entrepreneurial activity. When they are exploiting new
business niches they are at the same time reconstructing national identity
and spreading progress and «Western civilization» to new parts of their
nation. The Estonians are thus much more committed to their business activity
than the Norwegians, at the same time as they have a better understanding
of the limitations and possibilities of business done in Tallinn. But
Estonian business people, maybe as a result of their high degree of commitment,
tend to be too conservative in their business initiatives. The Norwegians,
who enjoy the luxury of seeing the situation from a distance, may contribute
with new and creative business ideas. The Estonians hold the local knowledge
required to evaluate the validity of the new projects. They can among
other things, estimate how time consuming planning in Estonia may be or
inform the Norwegians of the importance of networks and contacts (as will
be shown in Chapter Four). One of the aspects of the situation which the
Norwegians do not fully realize is the stiff competition in Tallinn. They
see the possibilities, but fail to acknowledge the struggle needed in
order to attain profit.
The first case presented the way a
Norwegian company ran their business as a whole, with a special focus
on stunts. We saw how a number of different actors related to certain
situations and how the business venture developed during the firm's initial
stages. The following case will analyze a business meeting in order to
illustrate a particular sequence in the process of «doing business» where
a Norwegian firm tries to force itself into a new niche. The company and
its Norwegian President is however denied access to the new niche for
reasons unintelligible to the Norwegian. The previous case showed some
cooperation situations which will be similar to the one about to be described,
and we shall see that the Norwegians' tendencies towards irresponsible
and half-hearted business commitments are unsuitable for entry into new
business niches.
The Norwegian President
(in his mid-forties) of a consulting firm and his Estonian Project Manager
(in her early twenties) went to a bank meeting for a loan application
and I was allowed to be present. The Norwegian President said that it
would be nice for a change to have someone there who was familiar with
the «Norwegian way of thinking». The Norwegian firm and the owners of
an old apartment building in the Old Town of Tallinn had drawn up a rental
agreement. The Norwegian firm had formulated a business plan and taken
the initiative for a project involving many of the other Norwegian business
people in Tallinn. The plan was to rent the building and convert it into
a "Scandinavian Center". The building would house a Danish store, a workroom
for visiting Scandinavian artists, office space for Scandinavian businesses
in Tallinn, and offer penthouse flats for rent. The apartment building
was in need of renovation and the "Scandinavian Center " project was willing
to undertake this task. The capital stock alone did not cover the full
costs of the rent and the renovation, and the loan was supposed to finance
the remaining expenses. The other participants in the meeting were an
Estonian bank employee in his mid-twenties and an Estonian representative
of the owners of the apartment building (in his late forties).
This case introduces us to a middle-aged
Norwegian businessman and two generations of Estonian business people:
the young, male banker and the female Project Manager, on the one hand,
and the middle-aged representative of the owners of the building on the
other. All three Estonians had different views on how to «do business»
and thus related differently to the project proposed by the Norwegian.
We shall see that the different assumptions of the actors can cause communication
break down.
This business initiative was an example
of ambitious entrepreneurship in several ways. It involved extensive cooperation
between the Norwegian business actors in Tallinn, which was unusual. It
planned to introduce a «Scandinavian Center» in Estonia, which presupposed
an interest for Scandinavia in the Estonian public. It was initiated by
a small Norwegian firm with limited means, and by foreigners in Tallinn.
The Norwegian President had started the project by himself. He designed
the business plan, contacted the other Norwegian firms, and persuaded
them to invest in the project. The idea was new and might potentially
turn out to be a big success, as no one had ever before tried to organize
an extensive cooperation between the Norwegian business actors in Tallinn.
The bank we were going to
was one of the new and successful Estonian banks(15).
Its logo looks almost like a Japanese character and the furnishing is
stylish and modern in shades of gray and black. We were received by a
bank employee who was very polite and correct. He shook hands with the
men and bowed to the women (myself and the Project Manager), while wearing
a polite and professional expression. We were led into the room where
the meeting was to be held and seated around an oval table. Then we had
to wait ten minutes for the representative of the owners of the building
to come before the meeting could start. The Project Manager was supposed
to function as an interpreter for the Norwegian President if this was
needed. She started by addressing the banker in Estonian, in spite of
the fact that the Norwegian President did not speak Estonian. This repeated
itself a number of times during the meeting. We later realized that the
banker spoke good English, but when he was addressed in Estonian he answered
in Estonian. The Project Manager translated the Estonian sections of the
conversation into English in the beginning, but after approximately ten
minutes she started having long conversations with the banker, which she
failed to translate. She also took private notes. Her boss was unable
to follow the discussion and began to look confused and uncomfortable.
I was surprised, and it felt very frustrating not to be able to pick up
the official Estonian.
After a while the banker
wanted to check the credentials of the Norwegian man's company and the
new joint-stock company which had been formed by several of the Norwegian
business people in Tallinn. He especially asked questions about the financial
reliability of the individual companies which formed the new joint-stock
company. This clearly annoyed the Norwegian businessman who replied shortly
that all of the companies were stable and trustworthy. He added that the
Norwegian Prime Minister was visiting Estonia soon and it would look good
if this project was up and running by then. The banker just shrugged his
shoulders.
Business meetings are maybe the most
common events in the process of «doing business», and the «rules» of behavior
at such meetings are well known to any business person. They are an established
part of business as a global discursive object. These «rules» are in part
very general (politeness, formality etc.), in part focused specifically
on the business meeting as such. Examples of the latter category range
from formal procedures for drawing up contracts, to standards of what
constitutes a valid and trustworthy argument. The existence of such generally
accepted rules, makes the misunderstandings and divergent behavior among
the participants in the business meeting described above seem particularly
surprising, both to the onlooker and to the actors themselves. It is surprising
that the Project Manager excluded her boss from the conversation. The
only thing she seemingly stood to gain from this was to undermine the
authority of her boss and the company she worked for. It also seems strange
that the banker immediately accepted her behavior, since he did not know
the Norwegian President, and had no a priori reason to distrust him. After
all, he was a man, had a Western background, and represented an ambitious
and innovative business venture. He also represented a Western business
culture that Estonian business people admire. And finally, it is very
surprising that the Norwegian President did not intervene in the situation
and force his employee to interpret the Estonian conversations, as they
had agreed.
The Estonian banker probably observed
this latter behavior and wondered at it. The fact that the Norwegian did
not manage to control his employee must have been disquieting. The banker
probably interpreted this lack of control as unprofessional, and indicating
lack of commitment to the project. Such a man cannot be trusted
off hand. Even though the Project Manager was a woman, and even though
she was not exactly acting «professional» herself, he may have chosen
to trust her as a fellow Estonian, whose commitment to Estonian
business he could at least take for granted. The banker would be strengthened
in his conclusions by the knowledge that many Estonian business people
have had negative experiences with Western business adventurers. And after
all, as the previous case showed, Estonians tend to calculate their risks.
When the President mentioned that
the Norwegian Prime Minister would be coming to Estonia, the banker may
have interpreted this as yet another sign of unprofessional weakness.
The Norwegian seemed to be clinging to his last straw. But it is also
very possible that the banker interpreted it as an aggressive move. The
President was trying to force his way into this new niche, by
threatening the banker with «the authorities». But the Estonians
have had extensive experience with the dangerous and unpredictable Soviet
«authorities», and are good judges of whether or not a threat is real.
The Norwegian's threat was not very convincing. He was claiming that he
could convince the highest Norwegian authority to back his venture, when
he could not even make his Project Manager behave correctly! All of this
made it quite easy for the banker to dismiss the Norwegian as a «bad business
man», measured by the yardstick of global business ideology.
From the Norwegian's point of view,
things probably looked quite different. We have previously mentioned that
Norwegian business practice tends to be «democratic» and consensus-oriented,
and we shall return to this below. At present it is sufficient to observe
that it is unlikely that the Norwegian was explicitly challenging
the banker in this way. The Norwegian President was trying to give a good
impression, of himself, his firm, and the new joint-stock company, in
order to be granted a loan. And just like the Estonian, he measured his
own performance by the standards of global business ideology. He was claiming
that he represented a Western, capitalist nation and therefore «knew how»
to «do business» (he mastered global business ideology), and that the
project mattered to Estonia as a nation and the banker was an
obstruction to «development».
This last claim has a peculiar duality
to it. The Norwegian is making a Norwegian «democratic» gesture. In Norwegian
politics it is always a good argument that «it matters» to the (local)
collective. At the same time, the Norwegian has spent enough time in Estonia
to recognize the strong commitment Estonians feel to their nation, and
he is making an explicit appeal to it. But perhaps he does not recognize
that Estonians do not commit themselves to the same kind of collective
as Norwegians.
As we shall see below, the «collectivist»
aspect of Norwegian business habitus may under certain circumstances be
well received by the Estonian party, and may contribute to business success.
In the present situation, however, the Norwegian entrepreneur is attempting
to «open doors» into a new niche. Here Norwegian business habitus appears
to be counterproductive. It is neither able to convince others to open
doors, nor to force them to open on its own. This became increasingly
clear as the meeting progressed:
The banker then wanted to
know if the Norwegian firm could receive a loan in Scandinavia and then
refinance it in their bank. This led to a relatively heated discussion.
Projects in Estonia are not always considered credit worthy in Scandinavian
banks because Estonia is viewed as a high-risk country. The interest rates
are very high in Estonian banks and therefore not favorable for the lender.
This makes it hard for a foreign business to start new projects without
having sufficient capital beforehand. The Estonian banker wanted the Norwegian
firm to take up a loan in a Scandinavian bank and then refinance it. This
would provide the Estonian bank with security, as to whether they could
trust the Norwegian loan applicant or not, but would make the investment
almost impossible for the Norwegian firm. The Norwegian party would probably
prefer it the other way around and take up a loan in an Estonian bank
and then refinance it in a Scandinavian bank with lower interest rates.
The high interest rates in Estonian banks were often criticized among
Norwegian and other Western business people.
The banker was together with the Estonian
Project Manager a representative of the young and new generation of Estonian
business people and had a very formal approach to his job. When the Norwegian
man became annoyed because of his wish to check the validity of his firm
and the firms which formed the new joint-stock company, the banker failed
to see why the Norwegian President reacted the way he did. The banker's
wish was reasonable, but it was also a retaliation against the Norwegian's
«threat». When the banker also wanted the President to lend money in a
Scandinavian bank, the Norwegian man thought he was being unreasonable.
Projects in Eastern Europe are, as mentioned above, seldom viewed as creditworthy
in the West and an Estonian banker would know this. The Norwegian man
may have felt that he should have been given some goodwill, at least from
the Estonian financial sources, since he wanted to start an idealistic,
new project in Estonia. The Estonian banker, on the other hand, had to
ensure the bank's interests. Many Western companies have failed to carry
out their business plans in Estonia and let down both financial sources
and people who believed in them and made an effort for them. The issue
of whether or not a Western business can be trusted has grown to be a
very important factor for potential Estonian cooperation partners.
The representative of the
owners of the building was very quiet during the meeting. When the amount
of the loan was discussed he only commented that if there was a will to
do things they could be done regardless of the money. The Norwegian President
told me afterwards that this had annoyed him. The prospective deal between
the owners of the building and the Norwegian firm was viewed, by all the
parties, as lucrative for the owners. The Norwegian President felt that
it would be in the owner's interest if the Norwegian firm received a favorable
loan in order to carry out the project according to their plans. The representative
of the owners was asked, by the banker and the Norwegian President, to
give an account of the present terms between the owners and the tenants
now living in the building. Both the banker and the Norwegian President
seemed to think that he would be able to answer at once, or if not, to
get the information. He claimed, however, that the information was sensitive
and hence unavailable for the loan applicants. But this would make it
impossible for the new lessors to plan the redecoration and the new rent
prices. As the income from the renovated flats would contribute to repay
the loan, the facts about the leases were crucial information for the
Norwegian firm in order to plan the project and for the banker to assess
the validity of the plans. The representative of the owners later said
that he would try to get the information. He left the meeting early.
After the representative
of the owners had left, the meeting went nowhere. No agreement was reached
among the parties. The project was later abandoned mainly because of the
lack of financial support.
The representative of the owners of
the building belonged to a generation who has lived and worked most of
their lives in the Soviet Union. A meeting with a Western partner in a
commercial Estonian bank would have been unthinkable only six years ago.
For the middle-aged man, the «business meeting» and its «rules» are largely
new and unfamiliar. Instead of focusing on the importance of the loan
he concentrated on signaling his good will: redecorating and restoring
the house could be done independently of the amount of money. It is likely
that he simply failed to understand that the project never would be implemented
unless the company could borrow money, and that no one would show any
interest in the project unless it had financial backing. The other people
present at the meeting seemed surprised by his approach. His knowledge
was out-of-date and his skills vastly inferior to those of the young and
progressive banker. (At the time of my fieldwork Estonian business people
were mostly very young and when advertising vacant positions it was common
to have an upper age limit often as low as thirty years). In this context
it was very hard for the representative of the owners to exercise any
authority in a business meeting with a young banker, as his expertise
was irrelevant and unwanted. To the banker, seeing this man in a business
setting must have seemed almost pathetic and he may have deliberately
chosen to disregard what he said. The Norwegian apparently failed to understand
this situation. If he had, he would have obtained the information on the
leases beforehand. He would also have known that the middle-aged Estonian
would be unacquainted with the rules of a business meeting. Yet again,
the banker lost confidence in the President when he realized that the
he had not checked with the Estonian man beforehand.
When we walked back to the
office, the Project Manager walked in front of us in silence. The Norwegian
President and I spoke in Norwegian. I asked him how he felt about the
meeting. He said he was confused, but that he was used to this. He added
that he did not feel that he should have to take this sort of treatment.
He should not have to accept anything here that he would not have to accept
in Norway. He went on to say that his Project Manager had resigned. She
had asked for a raise and he had refused. This was, according to him,
the reason why she was leaving the office and he claimed to be happy about
her leaving. She was not accommodating enough towards his business associates
and her behavior during the meeting was inexcusable. He could not accept
that she was excluding him by having long conversations in Estonian.
I later spoke to the Project
Manager about the disagreements between her and the President. She told
me that she was dissatisfied with her working conditions because she was
not given the information which she felt she needed in order to do her
job as a Project Manager. She said that she had worked for Estonian firms
which operated much more professionally than this Norwegian firm. She
had expected more experience from a Western businessman. She said her
boss lacked good business plans and that he had dreams for his business
and sometimes even good ideas, but no idea of how to realize them. According
to her, this was a common trait of the Norwegian and Western business
people she had met:
«The Western businessmen
decide to do something one week and then do it the next week. That's how
business works. They come up with a good idea and just do it. They don't
have much knowledge beforehand, and some of them learn as they go, but
not my boss».
She also explained that
her boss never told her what really went on in the office: "He never tells
me anything. Important issues are discussed in Norwegian in private meetings
or on the phone". He speaks Norwegian on the phone as well as with his
Norwegian business partners. This made it hard for her to get an understanding
of how the business was run and thus to perform satisfactorily for the
company. The secretary of the company told me that the Project manager
and the President communicated through her. She delivered their messages
to each other. The Project manager would call her and ask her to tell
the President so and so and vice versa.
Both the Project Manager and the President
were frustrated after the bank meeting and dissatisfied with their working
relationship. She used the Estonian language to exclude her boss, just
like she felt he did when he spoke Norwegian on the phone. But her boss
failed to see why she was disappointed and interpreted this as an example
of her inadequate ability to «do business correctly» according to global
business ideology. He had been disappointed with her for a long time,
but had not fired her, nor had he discussed the problems with her, to
try to get her to sympathize with his situation. He was dependent on her,
but unable to exercise any authority over or towards her. As with the
banker, it was the level of professionality in the firm which disappointed
and surprised the Project Manager. Through the formulation of her expectations
she revealed one idea of how business «should be done» which was repeated
by many Estonian business people working with Western partners, namely
the wish for professionality and «correct» running of businesses. The
Norwegian was not an experienced or professional businessman in the Estonian
setting. He was an entrepreneur who was feeling his way into the Estonian
market and unaware of local expectations of a Western businessperson.
The Project Manager, on the other hand belonged to the first generation
of market oriented Estonian business people, trained in modern Western-style
business schools. Although Estonia is an unstable market, it is possible
that her training has focused on business procedures in established firms
and not in insecure settings like this Norwegian firm. But her Norwegian
boss had not taken the time to explain how he wanted to conduct his affairs,
in part, because he was unaware of her frustrations and in part, because
he was convinced that he knew how to «do business». Both parties were
thus committed to the global business ideology. The Norwegian was «certain
that he knew how» and the Estonian was «willing to learn», but not if
the learning contradicted certain aspects of her local habitus.
3.2.1 «Idealistic» Entrepreneurs and «Professional»
Estonians
The 'Scandinavian Center' project
is an example of an attempted entrepreneurial stunt which failed. My data
show that this case is not a-typical. A considerable number of the business
ideas that the Norwegians tried to carry through did in fact fail. Many
of the failed projects were similar to that of the 'Scandinavian Center'.
They were initiated by small firms which lacked the necessary expertise,
were one of many grandiose projects, and were insufficiently planned.
Another factor that many of the projects had in common was the moral or
idealistic aspect. This was especially true for projects which were initiated
after the business people had been in Tallinn for a while. They had by
then built up a certain commitment to the place and learned to understand
parts of the Estonian local business habitus, at the same time as they
firmly believed that they knew-how «business was really done». The 'Scandinavian
Center' aimed at bringing parts of Scandinavian culture to Estonia and
attempted to integrate and emphasize the Scandinavian presence in Tallinn.
Other projects, such as the choir project planned by the 'store company',
had similar idealisti c aspects. Sending the choir to Norway would promote
Estonian culture in Norway and form stronger ties between the nations.
There are other examples such as a course in feminism directed towards
Estonian women, held by a Norwegian business person. This project was
a failure and the turnout was very low because matters of sexism and equal
rights were unpopular in Estonia and often considered irrelevant to the
Estonian context.
Tord Larsen has argued that Norwegians
have a tendency to place any new idea within an already established context
(Larsen 1993:28). He claims that Norwegians also find it difficult to
remove anything out of its familiar context, be it music or specific categories
of people. Following Larsen' s argument it is not surprising that Norwegian
business people engaged in entrepreneurial activity in Tallinn often represented
their business stunts in familiar contexts such as helping the natives
(language courses for Russian citizens in Estonia, course on feminism)
or improving communication between East and West (choir project,
Scandinavian Center, Scandinavian trade fare in Tallinn).
If Larsen's hypothesis is correct,
it is perhaps not surprising if many Norwegian business people function
less satisfactorily as entrepreneurs. Fredrik Barth (1981) has claimed
that entrepreneurial activity is most fundamentally concerned with utilizing
value differentials between economic spheres. He described an example
of an entrepreneur in Darfur who transferred collective labor services
to an economical sphere. Labor services were normally used in collective
work projects. Barth's entrepreneur utilized these services for the growing
of tomatoes. Tomatoes were sold at the local market, and labor services
had thus been used to acquire monetary gain. Merely moving something from
the sphere of culture to the sphere of business will not automatically
lead to financial gain. The conversion of activities from a sphere outside
the traditional business sphere into the business context, demanded more
than good intentions, initiative and willingness to take risks. One had
to think through how the specific conversion could be successfully brought
about and ask why it is a good idea to convert for example culture into
money.
As we have seen, the young Estonian
banker and the Project Manager related to the 'Scandinavian Center' project
differently than the Norwegians. The banker was very correct. He showed
that he was committed to his ideal of business through the way he took
his position seriously. He probably interpreted the Norwegian President's
lack of control as naiveté or maybe even as a challenge. He concluded
that the President was an unstable business partner. The Project Manager
wanted formality and professionality from the company she worked for.
Estonians seemed to expect «professional business» to be coupled with
a formality of style. Part of this «professionality» was, as mentioned
in 3.2, that projects be well prepared. The Project Manager in the present
case, specifically expressed that she missed plans. But Estonian «formality»
goes further than this. An example was an incident described to me by
an Estonian businesswoman. She had attended a formal speech together with
approximately twenty other Estonians. She described the Estonian participants
as well dressed and the atmosphere as quiet and formal. When the speaker
arrived this changed. He was an American wearing a T-shirt, and kept a
joking and informal style. She said that the Estonians laughed politely,
but added that she had been very surprised by the American's behavior,
and felt very uncomfortable. Another place where this subtle, secretive,
and somewhat formal aspect of Estonian business habitus can be seen is
in marketing and commercials. Once I visited Tallinn right before Christmas,
and was struck by the style of the Christmas decorations. In the show
window of an Estonian (not Western) shopping center a small fairy-tale
castle had been set up. The details were impressive and the display was
obviously put together thoroughly and with care. A princess, maybe Cinderella,
was standing in front of the castle, dressed in a beautiful evening gown,
nicely shaped by a crinoline. Neither the princess nor the castle were
for sale, they were there in order to create a Christmas mood and say
something about the style of the shopping center. The impression was one
style, beauty and formality and the decoration was much less glaring than
for example Norwegian Christmas decorations.
The previous cases showed, among other
things, how Norwegian business people failed to exercise authority and
power, in for example a bank meeting. Their inability to gain control
in business settings might lead us to believe that Norwegian business
people were unsuccessful leaders of their Estonian-Norwegian companies.
To a certain degree this was true, and the Estonian employees complained,
as we have seen, about the lack of planning and the insecure and unprofessional
atmosphere in the companies. It may therefore seem surprising that the
Estonians frequently expressed satisfaction with the Norwegian style
of management.
The two previous cases have focused
on how Norwegian and Estonian business people took risks differently and
how Estonians reacted to the Norwegians' entrepreneurial activity. These
are areas of business where the element of uncertainty cannot be eliminated
completely. The running of a risk can never be completely predictable
and entrepreneurial activity will more often than not involve high-risk
initiatives. As noted in Chapter One, a sense of stability and predictability
is also important in the process of «doing business» and responsibility
is an important aspect of global business ideology. If business partners
can trust one another and colleagues, for example on the management level
within a firm, form relationships of trust, the factors of risk may be
significantly reduced. The head of a business has a primary responsibility
to create predictability and make the employees feel responsible towards
the firm. But there are two types of responsibility within a firm, that
of the leader and that of the employees (Sørhaug 1996). The Norwegian
and the Estonian business people who cooperated in Tallinn agreed that
responsibility was an important part of «doing business» and that the
need for people to take responsibility at work had increased after Estonia
had entered into capitalistic society. However, both parties would accuse
the other of irresponsible actions. As we have seen, Estonians criticized
Norwegian managers for acting irresponsibly when they took dangerous risks.
The Norwegians on the other hand claimed that their Estonian employees
only knew how to follow orders and were afraid of taking individual responsibility.
The following case will focus on responsibility
within a firm and especially the importance of responsible authority and
leadership in the relationships between Norwegian leaders and Estonian
employees.
A Norwegian man in his late
forties was President of his own company in Tallinn, which he established
in 1991. Before he started doing business in Tallinn he ran a consulting
firm and served as a local government politician in Norway. (He was thus
the same kind of «marginal» business person as many of the other Norwegians).
His Estonian firm also provided general consultancy services, but their
main task was the production of containers for the Western European market.
Around thirty men worked in production, but the administration level of
the company was relatively small. Two Estonians worked closely with the
President to administer the company: one Estonian woman in her late thirties
was hired as Vice President and an Estonian man in his early thirties
worked as Personnel Manager. They have both worked together with their
boss since 1991.
The Norwegian companies in Tallinn
were, as mentioned earlier, mainly very small. The Norwegian leaders were
in most instances the same persons who had started the businesses and
had determined the firms' objectives or lack of objectives. The leader's
personal style of authority was therefore more far-reaching and influential
than one would expect in a larger business. The President of this firm
had established his company on his own, from scratch, and was heavily
involved in every part of the running of his business. Still, his Estonian
employees felt that they were parts of the firm and that they were asked
for advice:
When I asked the Estonian
Personnel Manager to describe the Norwegian President as a boss he chose
to tell me about his job interview with him. The Personnel Manager went
for a job interview with the company in 1991. The company did not have
any office space at the time and the President lived in and ran his business
from a room at a hotel situated close to the city gate of the Old Town.
The hotel was built during the Soviet period, but is now owned by Finns.
Its guests are mainly so-called «Vodka tourists» from Finland who have
come to Tallinn by boat from Helsinki, but it also houses business people.
Apart from its ordinary guests the hotel has been known to attract both
prostitutes and pickpockets. The job interview was conducted by the President
and took place in his hotel room. The Estonian man told me that he was
nervous prior to the interview because his previous job interviews with
Estonian companies had been very formal. He also felt unsure about how
to make a good impression on a Western boss. He was pleasantly surprised
to discover that the atmosphere during the interview was much more relaxed
and informal than he had expected. The Norwegian President joked with
him and the Personnel Manager described him as friendly during the interview.
The type of subjects that were brought up also surprised him. At one point
he was told that it would take him a while to learn the job and if he
had any questions at all he should not hesitate to ask. His future boss
told him that he himself did not know every aspect of the job well enough
yet. This was surprising to the Estonian. It was not the fact that the
boss was not familiar with every aspect of the job that came as a surprise,
but that he actually admitted that this was the case. The Personnel Manager
said that Estonian bosses never admit their shortcomings. They are seemingly
open-minded and interested in the opinion of the employees, but this is
only on the surface. He described them as hierarchical. He told me that
it took some time before he dared to ask his boss questions at all because
he was afraid that his boss might find him stupid. His feelings after
having worked for the company for five years was that his Norwegian boss
listened to the employees:
"We discuss issues concerning
the company together. He wants our point of view. I often tell him that
he focuses on too many projects at the same time. But even though we cooperate
he is still the one who has most of the good ideas."
The case shows that the Norwegian
had many of the same problems as mentioned in the previous examples, but
in this case he manages to turn problems into assets. The role of the
ideal leader is to create a system of predictability and order within
the firm. He or she must also make the firm seem responsible and trustworthy
to its surroundings. In order to succeed in this, the boss must behave
with just the right amount and kind of authority towards his or her employees
and partners. This is what the Personnel Manager expected of his boss
and it is what the boss wanted to do. But the way the Norwegian
boss performed as a leader, surprised the Estonian Personnel Manager.
We might say that the Norwegian was exercising authority through a personal
approach and trying to reduce the sense of difference in rank between
himself and the applicant. The Estonian, on the other hand, was used to
a more anonymous style of authority where the difference in rank was stressed,
as we saw in the bank meeting presented in Chapter Three.
One of the issues the Personnel Manager
and his boss had different views on was posing questions. The Personnel
Manager was surprised when it became clear that he was expected to ask
for help whenever he needed it, as he was used to solving problems independently
of his boss. From my data it seems that this was common among Estonian
employees. There even appeared to be resentment towards discussing problems
with their employers. Both a Norwegian and an Estonian told me on different
occasions that Estonians feel that it is better to be quiet instead of
saying something and risking making a fool of oneself. The Personnel Manager
did not want to bother his boss with his problems. This behavior may have
been an expression of the competitive and calculating aspects of Estonian
mentality, that we have previously mentioned. It might also indicate a
reluctance to attract the attention of your superiors, since power is
viewed as fundamentally unpredictable. The Estonians might believe that
if you revealed your problems, or weaknesses to your superiors, they might
use it against you. In this sense people with power cannot be trusted,
as they potentially can use what they know about you to strengthen their
own position. The conscious awareness of how power can be abused, made
the Estonians reluctant to communicate with their superiors, but it also
made them better prepared for power struggles than Norwegians, as the
previous case showed. The Norwegians tended to be surprised when they
discovered that business partners concealed information and even lied
in order to reach their goals.
Even though the meeting took place
in a hotel room, which in itself does not give off an impression of reliability,
the Norwegian President must have convinced the Personnel Manager that
he was trustworthy, as he accepted the job. The Norwegian bosses in Tallinn
were generally described in a positive way as leaders, by their Estonian
employees. There were, however, exceptions such as the Norwegian President
of the ' consulting firm' mentioned in Chapter Three. The Project Manager
of that firm could not accept the, to her, irresponsible lack of planning
and thus was not satisfied with her boss. Initially many of the Estonians
reacted with surprise to the relaxed and personal style of authority of
the Norwegian bosses and mistrusted their intentions. But once the Estonians
adapted to the Norwegian style of management, they more often than not,
said that their Norwegian bosses were doing a better job than Estonian
bosses would.
The Personnel Manager concluded
his story by telling me about his problems with alcohol and how he used
to be drunk at work. During the Soviet times when he worked as a teacher,
his drinking would be sanctioned socially at the workplace, but he never
risked losing his job. The Norwegian President on the other hand at one
point gave him one week to sober up or else threatened to fire him. The
Personnel Manager took one week off and after that he has never shown
up drunk at work. He was very proud of himself. He felt that he was part
of the business and had to stay sober in order to do a good job. He used
this as an example of how things had changed at workplaces after independence.
Many Estonians would tell me about how the approach to drinking during
working hours had changed. Some of them would quote this as an example
of the increasing insecurity in their society. Now you simply lose your
job if you are caught drinking whereas during the Soviet times you would
keep the job and your colleagues might care for you. But the Personnel
Manager was thankful for the ultimatum that was presented to him.
The drinking incident illustrates
one of the ways responsibility has changed after independence. During
the Soviet period the workers might feel responsible towards one another,
but since jobs were not scarce and the task of the organization was often
decided centrally, the sense of personal responsibility towards the running
of the organization was weak. Vladimir Bukovsky (Bukovsky 1979) describes
how one of the workers in a Soviet bus factory (in Russia during the Soviet
Times) tried to put in a full day's work, but was hindered by his colleagues.
They disliked him for raising the production targets and tried to damage
his tools whenever they got a chance. This does not mean that there existed
no sense of responsibility at Soviet workplaces. Soviet managers were,
however, under constant pressure from central authorities whose decisions
might often seem arbitrary and predictable. This created a pervasive atmosphere
of insecurity at workplaces. In contrast, when working for a Western firm
the employees were hired because of their specific qualifications and
failing to perform as expected would jeopardize their position. Many Estonians
I talked to during fieldwork, felt that they were now given more freedom
in their jobs, and that this increased the amount of responsibility expected
of them. The Personnel Manager definitively was committed to his job in
a way that he had not been before. Part of the reason for this was that
he was consulted in business matters and was given to understand that
it was his responsibility not to show up drunk at work. But partly also
his commitment was a result of the fact that his Norwegian boss handled
the drinking episode in perfect conformity with global business ideology.
As a manger, he was strict, committed and rational. This made his actions
appear logical and predictable to his employee and created an atmosphere
of trust in the business.
The Vice President of the
company started her description of the Norwegian President by telling
me that he had the same horoscope as her former Estonian employer. The
two men were born on the same day, but they were completely different.
Her former boss drank too much and drove expensive cars, but failed to
pay salaries. Not every Estonian boss was like him, but from her experience
Estonian and Norwegian styles of management were very different. Estonian
bosses would demand things from their employees and get angry if their
orders were not followed. She has never seen her Norwegian boss angry.
He never yelled and spoke in a softer tone than her former Estonian superiors.
She added that this approach worked better:
"I
really feel that the three of us work together as a team. If there is
a problem we discuss it. We do everything together. The daily cooperation
is more informal than I am used to."
The Vice Director was originally
hired as a secretary and she had only recently been promoted. Her new
task, besides still being a secretary, was among other things to create
a network for the company and get in touch with relevant contacts. She
said that it felt like too much responsibility for her, but was happy
for the opportunity.
When the Norwegian boss
first started to work together with his Estonian employees they would
stand up when he entered the office. He said that he had been totally
unprepared for this sort of behavior and that it felt very uncomfortable.
On his insistence, it stopped after a few days and now he always kept
the door to his office open unless there was an important meeting. He
said that he tried to keep everything informal, joke with his employees
and visit the production hall once a day to talk to the workers. But he
still felt that they sometimes had too much respect for him and had problems
relating to him. One example was when he confronted them both with a problem
he had earlier been informed about by the Personnel Manager. The President
asked if anything could be done to correct the problem. The two employees,
including the Personnel Manager who had pointed out the problem, denied
that they had any difficulties. The President's explanation of this behavior
was that his employees wanted to avoid conflicts and that they respected
his authority to the extent that they did not wish to complain in front
of him. He said that his employees felt that there were certain things
a boss was not supposed to do. One time when they saw him sweep the floor
they wanted to take over. The Personnel Manager said that a boss never
does things like that. "He does now", was his answer. Another possible
reason for why the Estonians preferred not to discuss their problems might
be that the Estonians doubted his ability to change the situation or thought
they ought to deal with the problem themselves and regretted having informed
him in the first place. My data indicate that Estonians were likely to
address problems less directly than the Norwegian President was used to.
The Estonians were showing respect
for their boss by standing up whenever he entered the office. The Norwegian
was not used to this, and I am sure that the Estonians must have felt
similarly insecure and uncomfortable when they understood that this was
not the kind of behavior that was expected of them. Having worked as a
secretary in Norway I know that Norwegian leaders may expect you to make
coffee, empty their garbage and order tables at restaurants for themselves
and their family. But it is not unheard of that a boss would make his
own coffee or sweep the floor. As we have seen, Norwegian business habitus
tends to be «democratic» and «consensus-oriented». In management situations
of the kind we are here discussing, these attitudes contribute to creating
predictability and trust at the workplace. Thus, the very same qualities
that discredited the Norwegians as risk-taking entrepreneurs, made them
appear as responsible and committed managers. In both cases, the same
local habitus is measured against the standards of the same global business
ideology. It is the setting; the type of business being «done», that differs,
and that makes the Norwegians' performance seem completely inadequate
in the first case, and perfectly appropriate in the other.
Problem-solving is an important part
of any job situation and especially in a cross-cultural situation where
the actors' points of departure differ significantly. Estonian and Norwegian
business associates had different ways of addressing and solving problematical
issues. Norwegian leaders in Estonia tended to handle problems by trying
to address them directly. The Norwegians would sit down with their employees
with the intention of resolving the differences and if necessary to make
up. Quite often the Estonian part would agree when asked if everything
was OK even if it was not. The Norwegians would conclude that the problem
was solved, since they had talked about it and everybody had said that
it was OK. Many Estonians told me that it took a long time for Estonians
to trust someone both personally and in a business context. This behavior
is reminiscent of the «secretive» poker-face analogy presented in Chapter
Three. In the present case, the Norwegians' avoidance of hierarchical
organization and focus on openness and cooperation instead of distance,
helped the communication within the firms. But it is not difficult to
see that the situation could have turned out differently. As Tian Sørhaug
notes, the Norwegian «democratic» business habitus can limit communication
within a firm (Sørhaug 1996:90). He writes that open correction
of mistakes and discussion of problems can seem degrading, threatening
and as a breach of confidence. This threat can seem especially real for
the «formal» Estonians who «take time to trust people».
The Norwegian President
said that lack of responsibility and initiative was the main problem he
had faced while working in Tallinn. At times the employees only did what
he asked them to do and nothing else. He wanted them to take responsibility
and make decisions by themselves:
"The
lack of responsibility runs through the entire Estonian society. They
do not know how to plan for the future. Mortgage and student loans are
unknown and unthinkable to them. During the Soviet times they filled out
forms and handed them over to someone else. Now they have to take responsibility
and make decisions. I try to teach this to my employees, but it takes
time."
The President used the drinking
problem of his Personnel Manager as an example of how he had taught one
of his employees to take responsibility. He now described him as a very
good Personnel Manager and an excellent translator. He went on to say
that it had taken a long time before his secretary was promoted to Vice
Director. In the beginning she was unwilling to make decisions on her
own. Now she was involved in literally every aspect of the business and
ready to start her own business, according to the President.
In this case, we see that the Estonians'
job situation fulfilled the expectations they had towards working in a
Western, capitalistic firm. Both the Estonians and the Norwegian boss
agreed that the President was the one who knew how to manage the business.
The Estonians, however, seemed more aware of the discrepancies between
Norwegian and Estonian styles of management. The President was convinced
that his way of running the company was «right» and never doubted his
ideas on how to manage his company. Of course, he had reason to be satisfied
with himself, but his confidence seems strange when we consider that Estonian
and Norwegian business people were used to very different styles of management
and authority. As in the case above, the Norwegian sees himself as an
advocate for global business ideology and thus «knows» that his style
of management is correct, although the Norwegian style of management is
different from for example American or French management.
In the Soviet Union the relationship
to people with power and authority was characterized by limited communication
and formality. This tendency has survived the Soviet system and Estonian
bosses were as we have seen described as formal and interested in securing
their own positions. Like the Personnel Manager, many Estonians were therefore
surprised at the Norwegian management style. They had expected differences
in style, but not the informal and personal style of the Norwegians. Still
the Norwegian way of management seemed to harmonize with their ideal view
of a responsible business person with power, and the Estonians adapted
easily to the new style of authority. They felt that they were granted
responsibility and that their roles within the companies were important.
When the relationship between the boss and the employees worked out, as
in this case, the dissatisfaction with other factors of the running of
the business also received far less emphasis. Thus, the Personnel Manager
complained that the boss was involved in too many projects, but he was
still satisfied with his job. This shows that although the President of
this firm in many ways ran his business along the same lines as the two
Norwegian firms presented in Chapter Three, he managed to have satisfied
employees.
The Norwegian boss never doubted the
legitimacy of his management ideals, and that his success was a product
of his ability to «do business», in conformity with global business ideology.
It may be claimed, however, that his business success was a product of
his local background, as a Norwegian, rather than his competence as an
ideal global business person. The ideals of equality and democracy are
often mentioned, in Norway, as distinctive stamps of Norwegians. Hierarchical
organizations are commonly frowned upon and Norwegians are suspicious
of anyone who openly shows or admits to have money or fame - especially
if they refuse to admit that this has not changed their lifestyle in any
way. Norway has experienced considerable economical growth since the seventies,
and today, media and politicians increasingly focus on the pressing social
problem of how to deal with the millionaires. Equally important as equality,
is the ideal of democracy. Ideally every interest group in Norway should
have a say in the organizing of the country (one of the side effects is
an overwhelming bureaucratic system), and the decisions should be taken
by consensus rather than competitive bargaining. Estonians, in contrast,
describe themselves as calculating, competitive, and used to relating
to differences in authority and position. Many Estonians focused on trust
as important in their business relations, at the same time as they said
that it took time before they trusted anyone. In the case above, we have
seen these two local habitus meet and interact, while the parties judge
each other's performance by the standards of global business ideology.
The Norwegian President ran his business with an emphasis on openness,
equality, direct approaches and a democratic decision-making process.
As Sørhaug points out, these practices can be clumsy ways of dealing
with delicate matters (Sørhaug 1996). Thus the Norwegian failed
to understand why his employees refused to discuss a problematic matter,
that he knew existed, in plenary. It may be difficult to trust a boss
with your problems, if you cannot be sure when he will debate them in
front of the colleagues. We saw a similar interaction in the previous
case, where the Norwegian President of the 'consulting firm' failed to
understand the real reason why the Project Manager resigned. She had not
spoken to him about her problems and the Norwegian therefore assumed that
everything had to be OK. But as the present case shows, the Norwegian
style of management was often successful, and it is easy to take this
as an indication that the Norwegians are conforming to the global business
ideology. But the reasons for the successful management in fact deviate
from the global business ideology. This ideology favors competition, whereas
the Norwegian ideology originates from a set of ideals which oppose individual
competition and stress democratic equality.
4.2 Networking
As we saw in Chapter One, networking
has always played a prominent role in business practice, and in modern
business discourse the importance of networking is explicitly acknowledged.
This is seen in both formal and informal business contexts. Thus, during
the high-profile «business day» held in Tallinn in 1996, in connection
with the Norwegian Prime Minister's official visit, the coffee breaks
were called «network breaks». The idea was that participants could meet
in a more relaxed atmosphere during the breaks and lay the groundwork
for future cooperation and deals. In less formal contexts, the importance
of having good networks was constantly emphasized by my informants.
A network is a «reservoir of social
relations through which [an actor] recruits support to counter his rivals
and mobilizes support to attain his goals» (Boissevain 1974:25). Networks
in business can make it easier to make deals, they can function as sources
of information, places to get favors, as safety nets, and minimize risk.
Business networks can also function as instruments for preventing competitors
from getting favorable deals, through for example spreading negative rumors
about a person or a firm and can open or close access to niches. Responsibility
and trust are important in the formation of and maintaining of business
networks. One of the reasons for building good networks is to get in touch
with responsible key figures in the business environment. If this is accomplished
one can get access to useful information about the market and relevant
actors through the network. In order to maintain one's relationship to
contacts within networks, one has to come across as trustworthy and be
able to offer favors, thus showing in practice that one is reliable. Networks
are often informal and much of what goes on in them is not meant for public
consumption. The aspect of trust is thus also important in this respect.
The Norwegian business people in Tallinn
related to at least three different types of networks. The network of
Norwegian business people in Tallinn served as both a place to seek comfort
and share gossip, and as a useful source of business contacts and a place
to get concrete help in business matters. The wider network among Western
business people in Tallinn provided for similar needs, but was in addition
larger and consisted of a more diverse group of people. The arenas for
these two networks were the pub and restaurant scene in Tallinn as well
as more formal business settings. The Norwegian and Western business networks
in Tallinn could, apart from social gatherings, provide informal loans,
job offers, information on reasonable apartments, women, and money laundering.
But the Western network could not offer certain local knowledge and did
not have access to many of the local resources such as local bureaucracy.
The third, and probably the most important network, was the network of
local Estonian contacts. The importance of local contacts was constantly
emphasized by both Norwegian and Estonian business people. Local contacts
also seem to be of crucial importance when «doing business» in Eastern
Europe in general. According to a Norwegian consulting firm operating
in North-West Russia, good contacts with key persons in local firms and
authorities were essential in order to succeed in Russia and many of the
problems experienced by Western firms in Russia, are attributable to lack
of such contacts (Storvik 1997:49). In some cases, like the one presented
below, good Estonian contacts could be the sole key to success. But for
a Norwegian business person it is harder to get access to and maintain
contact with the Estonian business networks, than to Western or Norwegian
networks. One of the reasons is that Estonians are used to making the
most of networks and that they do not trust Western business people easily.
It can also be difficult for Norwegian business people to judge if Estonian
contacts can be trusted off hand.
Two Norwegian businessmen
gave me an example of how business contacts could be established in Tallinn.
«Geir» (the names are fictional) was a Norwegian businessman who had produced
furniture in Tallinn for almost three years. He told me how he three years
ago was invited to «Hallvard's» house one night. Geir described Hallvard
as a successful businessman and a "clever Dick" when it came to doing
business in Eastern Europe. Hallvard had formerly been involved in business
deals in Russia, but eventually settled in Tallinn, where he had made
quite a name for himself in the business environment as an expert at pulling
off seemingly doomed deals. One example was when he visited a museum somewhere
in Russia. After he had seen the exhibitions, he by accident came across
a container filled with broken china. He noticed that the china was decorated
with real gold and asked the management whether he could buy the container
and its contents. The container was very cheap as they were happy to get
rid of it. Hallvard shipped the china to the Netherlands and managed to
extract the gold and make a small profit. Hallvard himself later verified
this story. Geir (and many other Norwegian business people) also believed
that Hallvard had contacts within the Mafia. Hallvard came to Tallinn
in 1989 and was living and successfully running his own business in the
city. He had bought and renovated an apartment close to the Old Town,
which was where Geir met him. The setting was informal and he served cheese,
crackers and wine.
The cheese and cracker event is a
typical example of one way Norwegian business people utilized Norwegian
networks in Tallinn. At the meeting Hallvard and Geir shared experiences
of life in Tallinn, maybe gave each other some tips on how to do business
or how to cope with Tallinn in general, and most definitely discussed
the shortcomings of Estonians. Gossip is a common characteristic of Norwegian
business networks in Tallinn. The Norwegian business environment in Tallinn
was a small, transparent and closely knit social network, where the business
people mostly knew each other or at least knew about each other via the
gossip that ran through the network. The Norwegian businesses in Tallinn
can be described as what Edward T. Hall calls a «high context society»(16)
(Hall 1987). People in a 'high context
society' have extensive knowledge about each other beforehand and communicate
on a different basis than in more specialized 'low context' societies.
If two Norwegian business people in Tallinn meet to negotiate a deal,
part of the information will be made explicit. But the outcome of the
negotiations will to a great extent be dependent on the unsaid information
which the actors have acquired through other channels, such as gossip.
Whether the business partners are personal friends or whether they have
dealt with each other previously are factors which contain important information
which, though not made explicit, influence the negotiations. Hall portrays
members of a 'high context' society as follows:
«...it is their nature to keep themselves
informed about everything having to do with the people who are important
in their lives» (1987:8).
A popular story which almost all of
my informants knew a version of was about the establishment of the first
branch of Statoil in Tallinn and how they bought their first building
plot. Almost every Norwegian business person in Tallinn took credit for
pulling through the deal. Apparently the General Manager of Statoil had
nothing to do with it. The stories which were told about this man were
incredible. He supposedly had his personal supply of drinking water shipped
from Sweden, he was patronizing towards the Estonians and made enemies
with the mayor of Tallinn so the company was initially denied a building
plot. All the stories about his womanizing cannot be retold in this context.
The factual basis of these stories was probably very weak. The point is
rather that this and other stories were frequently mentioned and commented
on among both Estonian and Norwegian business people. When I returned
to Tallinn three months after the end of my fieldwork I was immediately
informed by both Norwegians and Estonians of the current gossip.
Hans Henrik Philipsen has noted that
gossip can provide order in an insecure business situation (Engdal, Enger,
Hambro 1996:12). Similarly, gossip among Norwegians in Tallinn had an
organizing effect. It answered questions such as who had contacts with
the Mafia, who did irresponsible business, who was going bankrupt, who
could be trusted etc. Gossip was an informal discourse, in which discursive
objects such as «the Mafia», «Statoil», «Estonians», and «good» or «bad
business people» were formed. Even though the stories that were told and
retold were often unreliable, their very existence supported the actuality
of the discursive objects; if everybody talks about crime, crime has to
exist and similarly if everybody thinks Estonians do not know how to do
business, there must be some truth to it etc. This local Norwegian discourse
in Tallinn was partly related to and partly independent of the global
discourse on business. Statements such as «Estonians cannot be trusted»
or «He does business with the Mafia» are part of an ongoing negotiation
of how the global ideology of business should be interpreted in this local
setting. In this sense the gossip mirrored and shaped the Norwegian business
people' s articulation of global business ideology in local business practice.
But business people need factual information,
and gossip can be an unreliable source of information for people who are
uncertain of how to interpret the truthfulness of the stories. A good
network can provide access to significant people who know who
and which rumors to trust. Boissevain puts it this way:
«Network specialists, provide important
links in networks viewed as a series of communication channels. They transmit,
direct, filter, receive, code, decode, and interpret messages», (quoted
in Whitten and Wolfe 1973:732).
The Norwegian and the Western networks
can in some instances offer this, and «Hallvard» is one such person, but
contacts within local Estonian business networks can be of even greater
importance in order to attain sound information and useful favors, indeed,
the reliability of Hallvard's information was probably a result of the
good contacts he had established in the Estonian milieu. Estonians have
a long tradition in building and using networks. This tradition characterizes
the way they form relationships even today, as we shall see in the following
example:
An Estonian businessman
told me a story about how he had once visited his Norwegian business partner
and friend in Norway together with some of his Estonian friends. The Norwegian
was painting his house when they arrived. They offered to paint the house
for him for free. The Norwegian refused the offer because he said that
the neighbors might think that he was abusing their friendship by getting
free labor. The Estonians did not understand this. The Estonian man said
that Estonians always offered favors to their friends. This functioned
as a give and take relationship.
"When
you do a favor for someone he owes you something in return. In a way this
means that we take advantage of our friends. But at least we know that
if he is our friend he will return the favor."
This example illustrates different
Estonian and Norwegian ways of viewing friendship. Eric R. Wolf 's contrasting
of emotional and instrumental friendship is similar to the differences
between Norwegian and Estonian attitudes towards friendship (Wolf 1966).
Emotional friendships are characterized by affection in personal relationships
between two friends and is similar to the Norwegian way of regarding
friendship. Instrumental friendships, in contrast, are described as relationships
which in effect reach further than the dyad and connects the
actors to other people: «Each participant is a sponsor for the other»
(Wolf 1966:12). In the example above the Estonian found it natural to
give and receive favors from his friends. The Norwegian, on the other
hand, viewed friendships first and foremost as a personal relation and
not as a relation that could be used to obtain services. He was afraid
that other people and his friend would believe that he abused their friendship
by letting him paint his house, and involving the Estonian's friends would
be even more questionable. But instrumental friendships have a long tradition
in Estonia and the former Soviet Union. Informal contact and extensive
networks were important in order to obtain goods and information during
the Soviet period. These networks ranged from friendly turns, to organized
crime, to «corruption» in the bureaucratic system, and there was a continuity
between the different levels; a family member or your neighbor could know
someone in the local government or be a local politician himself and thus
put you in touch with the people who could help you get a visa to travel
or whatever it was you needed (see e.g. Mars and Altman 1983 and Nielsen
1996). The extended and developed networks from the Soviet period still
exist today and can be of use. Potentially, everything can be done if
networks are utilized properly. The middle-aged Estonian man in Chapter
Three reflected this attitude when he said that the 'Scandinavian Center'
could be organized independently of financial backing. Another aspect
of the networks during the Soviet period was that they often were illegal.
Estonians therefore had learned to keep information about what was going
on within the networks secret and this made it even more difficult for
Norwegians to get access to Estonian networks.
During the cheese and cracker
evening it became clear that «Geir» had problems with his business associates
in Estonia. The cooperation had failed because of what he termed «cooperation
problems» and the production of furniture was terminated. He now needed
a new producer for his products and asked «Hallvard» whether he knew someone
reliable who would be able to help him. Hallvard thought for a moment
and recommended an Estonian man he knew and offered to call him next morning.
He kept his promise and the two men got in touch the next week.
The Estonian business associate
Geir was put in contact with used to work for a factory producing furniture
in Tallinn and was familiar with the «furniture» market in Estonia. The
two men met and discussed the Norwegian's problems. They liked each other
and decided to take a chance, and started to discuss the possibility of
buying a factory together a short while later. The Norwegian went back
to Norway, but he called his new associate almost every day. The Estonian
asked him to be patient. He explained that the bureaucratic system in
Estonia was slow and difficult to understand for an outsider. He told
me that he did not want to expose his Norwegian counterpart to this. He
was used to handling the Estonian system. He eventually found a suitable
factory in Tallinn which they bought together. In the meantime the Estonian
and his family had visited the Norwegian in Norway and they had gotten
to know each other. Although the two men said that their business cooperation
was based on trust they owned forty-eight percent of the shares each.
The remaining four percent were owned by the workers at the factory. They
made this deal in case they were to disagree significantly over an important
issue concerning the business. If this happened the workers could settle
the dispute.
As mentioned above, the business networks
in Tallinn can provide local as well as Norwegian or other Western contacts,
but the recommendation among both Norwegian and Estonian business people
in Tallinn was to get a sound local contact. Business conditions in Tallinn
and Estonia differ from the West in many ways and this makes local knowledge
very important. The Estonians working with Norwegian business people described
Norwegians in Tallinn as very naive and said that they trusted people
too easily. Part of the reason for this was that the Norwegians lacked
local expertise. Partly also, as we have seen above, their problems stemmed
from their commitment to global business ideology as non-locals, which
made them assume like the Norwegian man in the first case in Chapter Three,
that they «knew how» to «do business» and did not need information. One
example of this naiveté was when a woman called a Norwegian businessman
in his hotel room. She wanted to meet him at 10 o'clock that evening and
asked if this was fine with him, and he agreed. Two of his Estonian friends
were with him while the lady called and asked if he really was going to
meet her, since it was obvious to them that she was a prostitute offering
her services. This had never even crossed the Norwegian's mind. One of
the Norwegian companies that recognized the importance of local knowledge
went to great lengths to not fire one of their Estonian employees
who, in their judgment, was doing a very bad job. His only qualification
was that he had a lot of friends in the Estonian government and in the
city administration and was thus considered invaluable by his Western
colleagues.
The Estonian and the Norwegian
had worked together for three years when I met them, and they were both
satisfied with their factory in Tallinn. When I asked them for an interview
I was invited to the Estonian's home. The Norwegian's family was visiting.
The mother of the Estonian was ill and the Norwegian family and the daughter
of the Estonian had just returned from the hospital where they had been
to see her. I asked the two men how they would describe each other as
business people. The Estonian portrayed his Norwegian counterpart as follows:
"I
trusted him almost immediately. We work well together, but he sometimes
moves too fast. He has a lot of ideas that I find too optimistic so I
have to hold him back. I feel that I have to protect him sometimes. [...]
Norwegians trust people too easily. It is enough if someone smiles nicely.
I think Estonians are more skeptical. It is important for Norwegians to
establish a contact in Estonia in order to succeed. This can help them
to move with the Estonian system instead of against it."
The Norwegian agreed that
it was essential to have a good contact in Tallinn like he had - someone
who knew the local system and knew how to handle for example Russian business
partners. The Norwegian elaborated on the importance of trust in their
business relationship:
"We
know each other very well. His daughter is like a daughter to me and my
wife. Our families visit each other and his daughter has even lived with
us in Norway for six months. We often see things differently, but we never
cease to trust one another. Our company's equity is not very high. Our
success is mainly due to our good business contacts and the good cooperation
between the two of us."
The relationship between the Norwegian
and the Estonian is an example of a successful business relationship built
on instrumental friendship, which is accepted by both the Norwegian and
the Estonian, at the same time as they view their relationship differently.
The Norwegian shows a deep and personal commitment to his Estonian partner
and his family. By saying that the Estonian's daughter is «..like a daughter
to me...», he expresses something similar to extended kinship. He implies
that he trusts his partner as his own family, at the same time as he sees
him as a business partner. The Estonian, on the other hand, feels that
he should «protect» his partner. Whereas the Norwegian views their relationship
in an egalitarian way the Estonian describes himself almost as a father
figure or «sponsor» of the Norwegian. His understanding of their friendship
as instrumental is illustrated through his articulation of the Norwegian's
need to have someone who can help him «...move with the Estonian system».
As networking and contacts played
such an important role in the process of «doing business» in Tallinn,
trust was an important issue. The contacts within the Norwegian and Western
networks that were nourished in, for example, restaurants, and were parts
of a discourse on the local way of «doing business», did not form or demand
strong relationships of trust because the participants were global actors
with limited local commitment. What they sought in their relationship
to each other was mainly support (e.g. through gossip), and relations
thus had a fundamental «emotional» character. These business people knew
that local contacts were important, and this was even part of their discourse
on business, but they were often unable to form the right contacts. In
this sense they failed to really «do business» in Tallinn. The
Norwegian and Western environment was in many ways part of a translocal
network, rather than a truly local network, and existed independently
of the Estonian business environment. To the participants in this network,
successful business people like Hallvard became dangerous, and threatened
their business identity, as he represented someone who did business differently
than themselves. Hallvard had managed to penetrate the local Estonian
networks, which were based on «instrumental» relationship, and was «doing
successful business» based on local as well as Western contacts. In the
Norwegian business environment, it was rumored that Hallvard's Estonian
contacts belonged to the Mafia. These rumors contributed to create a discursive
order that explained why the other Norwegians were unable to succeed in
Tallinn. They described themselves as victims of their («emotional») honesty
and Hallvard as successful but scrupulous (i.e. «instrumental»). The Norwegian/Western
networks had also created «the Estonian» as a discursive object, involving
among other things, the Mafia. The Estonian's secretiveness, or ability
to close their networks to outsiders contributed to the creation of a
discursive object «local contact» as something effective, but mystical
and illegal. Westerners who were involved with local business people could
therefore not -by definition- be acting according to global business ideology,
when in fact, it can be argued that they were following the global ideology
by utilizing business networks.
Hallvard's business cooperation within
local Estonian networks committed him to Tallinn in a different way than
the other Norwegians. He was dependent on Estonian business partners and
was obliged to uphold his local connections through relationships built
on mutual trust. Geir was a Norwegian businessman who used his Norwegian
contact, Hallvard, in order to be able to «do business» in cooperation
with Estonian contacts and managed to combine his Norwegian network with
the forming of local contacts. Once Geir had established a business relationship
with an Estonian partner, he nourished the relationship through friendly
turns and personal commitments. But, as we have seen, Norwegians and Estonians
often view favors among friends differently. Geir is however, about to
accept the instrumental aspects of friendship in practice, although he
emically emphasizes the emotional aspects of their friendship. By practicing
instrumental friendship, Geir is adapting to local business habitus. Geir
and Hallvard are examples of the fact that we have often observed, that
business cannot be «done» on a global level only. In order to truly «do
business» one has to articulate a global ideology of business in a local
business setting. Geir and Frank were committed to their local setting
through cooperation with Estonian business contacts and to global business
ideology through an awareness that they were involved in Western business
activity and not e.g. bazaar trade. Thus, they were, each in his own way,
gradually developing a new cross-cultural business identity.
In his article «Soviet Chess/American
Checkers: Gaming the Dialectics» Robert Bathurst, describes differences
in the way ex-Soviets, mainly Russians, and Americans carried out negotiations
(Bathurst n.d.). In the period between 1984 and 1986 Bathurst and his
colleagues gathered groups of six Americans and six Soviet émigrés
(in both cases the groups consisted of highly educated professionals)
to participate in a series of cross-cultural experiments, designed by
American psychologists, in order to demonstrate dynamics of Soviet/American
cultural interaction. One of the first tasks the groups were given was
to transform themselves into a governing body, elect an «ambassador» as
their leader and provide him with authority. The Soviets always quickly
picked the most charismatic man in the group as their leader, whereas
the Americans used a long time campaigning and holding elections. Later,
when it came to negotiation between the groups, they made use of completely
different strategies. The Americans approached the Soviet group by being
honest about their intentions and often revealing their plans and strategies
immediately. The Soviets never trusted or responded to these initial approaches
and never offered any information until strictly necessary. The Americans
were quickly frustrated by this lack of response and, had problems keeping
their group together under pressure. The Soviets, in contrast, were true
to the hierarchy which had been established within their group, they addressed
each other according to rank (as opposed to the American tendency to connect
position and personal opinions), and acted with efficiency and coordination.
Another difference between the groups was the different approaches to
honesty. The Soviets were surprised that the Americans always expected
them to tell the truth as the Soviets tended to think that the truth was
important only in personal relations, not in the public sphere. This allowed
them to keep their real intentions secret, and to fool the Americans in
various ways. A final characteristic that I will mention here, was the
American tendency to assume that their culture and strategies had universal
validity.
These staged experiments of course
differ significantly from the real cross-cultural cooperation between
Estonian and Norwegian business people. But they illustrate convincingly
how groups of people with similar cultural backgrounds behave according
to similar sets of practices or habitus at the same time as the experiments
reveal parts of the actual contents of the habitus of these groups. As
Bourdieu puts it: «It is because subjects do not, strictly speaking, know
what they are doing that what they do has more meaning than they know»
(Bourdieu 1977:79). And, indeed, one of the American participants who
was considered an expert on Soviet affairs and bargaining behaviors, could
not free himself from acting according to traditional American negotiating
strategies during the experiments. Similarly, Norwegian and Estonian business
people could be aware of their different business practices and know that
they were not appropriate in specific business settings, but still be
unable not to act according to their local Norwegian and Estonian business
habitus.
One of the most commonly repeated
claims among the Norwegian and Estonian business people in Tallinn was
that Norwegians were more «naive» than the «calculating» Estonian business
people. In chapters Three and Four we have seen that these claims have
empirical basis, but that Norwegian and Estonian business practices also
differed in many other ways. Like the ex-Soviets in Bathurst's experiment,
the Estonians were good strategists, who took «calculated» risks and withheld
information by being «secretive». They frowned on the «naive» Norwegian
tendency to act on the spur of the moment and without sufficient knowledge
of the situation. Estonians also wanted a more professional and formal
style in their business than their Norwegian counterparts. Like the ex-Soviets
in Bathurst's experiment, they tended to emphasize the importance of rank
and authority. They expected formal and correct behavior from persons
in leading positions, and acted with deference and respect toward them.
The Norwegians, on the other hand, expected and acted according to a «democratic»
and informal management style, and believed that their Estonian counterparts
should be included in the decision-making process of the companies. Both
Estonians and Norwegians acknowledged the importance of cultivating networks
and relationships between business partners. But Estonians practiced instrumental,
extended friendships to a much greater degree than the Norwegians, who
tried to keep business contacts separate from emotional and personal relationships.
These different business practices often caused misunderstandings but
at times also led to successful cooperation and adaptation to the other
party's business habitus, such as the Estonian acceptance of Norwegian
management styles and the Norwegian adaptation to instrumental friendship.
The often striking similarities between
my own account and Bathurts's (which I only read fairly late in the process
of writing this thesis), might lead the reader to conclude that the Estonian-Norwegian
cooperation situation is just another example of the kind of East-West
dichotomy which is often described in the media as well as in scholarly
articles. And of course, there are obvious reasons why former citizens
of the former Soviet Union should share certain attitudes (e.g. towards
leadership and authority) that differ from similar attitudes in «the West».
The democratic policies, liberal economics, individual-centered socialization
and critical media that are common throughout «the West», serve to cultivate
attitudes in Norwegians and Americans that are different from attitudes
that are common among people who have grown up with a single-party political
system and a command economy, who have experienced collective-oriented
education and state-controlled media. Nevertheless, the schematic opposition
of «East» and «West» tends to blind us to the specificity of local life-worlds,
such as Estonia or Norway. Norway and Estonia are in many ways marginal
societies within the Western and Eastern parts of the world. We have seen
how Estonia was a special society with the Soviet Union, which viewed
itself and was viewed throughout the Soviet community as more «liberal»
and Western-oriented than the rest of the Union. Similarly, we have seen
how Norway, with its less metropolitan and more rural-oriented attitudes,
differs from many «Western» countries. Norwegians, in spite of their «democratic»
orientation, do not share the competitive and individualistic ideology
of Americans, but tend to be more collective and consensus-oriented (cf.
Larsen 1993). Estonians have similarly been described as committed to
building a national identity, based on a sense of elegance and style that
differs substantially from what one would expect e.g. of Russians (cf.
Nielsen 1996).
In my study, I have attempted to avoid
the schematizations inherent in the East-West dichotomization by focusing
on the relationship between global ideology and local habitus. Instead
of letting «Estonia» and «Norway» serve as a convenient short-hand for
«East» and «West», I have sought to describe them as specific, local settings
that relate to the same, deterritorialized global ideology in different
ways. This ideology, though it has its historical roots in Western Europe,
cannot today be said to be localized in any specific place. When Norwegians
meet Estonians, they see themselves as representatives and emissaries
of the «West» and of global business ideology as a specifically «Western»
phenomenon. But in fact Norwegians no less than Estonians are local actors.
It is true that the Norwegians are more «deterritorialized» than the Estonians,
in the sense that they are to a greater extent excluded from crucial local
social networks in Tallinn. Nevertheless, they remain local actors, with
a local, Norwegian habitus, and they can only learn to perform adequately
as business people in their new local setting by committing themselves
to it, «becoming locals» there.
The existence of a global ideal of
business and the fact that business people related to its general characteristics
(such as profit, risk, entrepreneurship, responsibility and networking),
created an expectation among the Norwegian and Estonian business people
that business should be the same everywhere. It also made them commit
themselves and try to live up to what they defined as the right way of
«doing business». When they experienced that business does not mean the
same in every setting, because of different local circumstances and differences
between Norwegian and Estonian habitus, the actors sometimes became frustrated.
Erving Goffman describes how actors can feel threatened if an expected
rule of conduct (in this case the expected rules of global business ideology)
is broken:
«When an individual
becomes involved in the maintenance of the rule, he tends also to become
committed to a particular image of self. In this case of his obligations,
he becomes to himself and others the sort of person who follows this particular
rule, the sort of person who would naturally be expected to do so. In
the case of his expectations, he becomes dependent upon the assumption
that others will properly perform such of their obligations as affect
him, for their treatment of him will express a conception of him. In establishing
himself as the sort of person who treats others in a particular way and
is treated by them in a particular way, he must make sure that it will
be possible for him to act and be this kind of person. ... In general
then, when a rule of conduct is broken we find that two individuals run
the risk of becoming discredited: one with an obligation, who should have
governed himself by the rule; the other with an expectation, who should
have been treated in a particular way because of this governance. Both
actor and recipient are threatened» (Goffman 1972:50-51).
The bank meeting, presented in Chapter
Three, serves as an example of how Norwegian and Estonian business people
could feel threatened and discredited when their cooperation failed to
function according to their expectations of ideal business habitus. The
Estonian banker expected the Norwegian President to act with authority
and formality. The Norwegian wanted more than anything to reach a consensus
and was unaware of the Estonian's emphasis on rank. When the Estonian
felt that the Norwegian failed to act with sufficient authority according
to his rank, he started to doubt his business project. The Norwegian tried
to convince the Estonian banker that his project would serve the good
of the collective and that he should feel obliged to support it. He added,
as a mild threat, that the Norwegian Prime Minister would probably appreciate
the project. This was indeed interpreted by the Estonian as a threat,
and he ended the negotiations by suggesting that the Norwegian applied
for a loan in Scandinavia.
Both the Norwegian and the Estonian
were committed to a global ideology of business. The Estonian wanted to
perform according to what he saw as the ideal of a business person and
expected the same from the Norwegian businessman. The Norwegian had similar
intentions, and felt that he knew how to «do business». But both men failed
to live up to the expectations of the other and during the meeting it
became clear that they disagreed on how business should be done. The Estonian's
distrust of the Norwegian threatened the Norwegian's definition of himself
as a business person and similarly the Norwegian's failure to act according
to the Estonian's expectations threatened the Estonian's understanding
of business. The meeting thus became a negotiation of which of the two
definitions of business should apply. In this case the Estonian was able
to discredit the Norwegian completely and prevent his entrepreneurial
initiative, because he had the power to deny him financial support. But
to the Norwegian businessman the meeting also served as yet another example
of how Estonians do not know how to «do business», as the banker failed
to recognize his plans as a sound business project.
Norwegian and Estonian commitment
to their business activity was different, and their attitudes towards
business were affected by this. The Norwegian business people were, in
many ways, deterritorialized as they were «doing business» in a, to them,
foreign business environment. Consequently, they became more dependent
on commitment to the global ideology of business instead of the locality
of their business activities. As the global business ideology is an abstract
set of rules for business habitus, the Norwegians had to transform the
ideology into concrete and specific terms. This was done by an implicit
«Norwegianization» of the business ideology. They defined business according
to their local Norwegian standards, and claimed these standards to be
«Western» and global standards of business. The Estonians, on the other
hand, were much more committed to the locality in which they were «doing
business». They viewed their business activity as an important part of
the rebuilding of the Estonians nation. Business was considered to represent
the opposite of the Soviet system. Consequently, Estonian business people
termed their local practices and interpretations of business as «Western»
and global.
There were, as we have seen, also
examples of Norwegian business people who became more committed to Tallinn
as a locality. Chapter Four showed an example of how a Norwegian businessman
adapted parts of local habitus through the forming of extended friendship
ties with his Estonian business contact. Parts of the entrepreneurial
activity of the Norwegian business people can also be seen as commitment
to Tallinn and Estonia. Some of the projects can be characterized as ideal
projects meant for example to promote Estonian culture in Norway (the
choir project) or to transfer Norwegian know-how to Estonia (the Scandinavian
Center project). Such projects would however not necessarily lead to an
adaptation of Estonian business habitus.
In chapters Three and Four I have
described and contrasted parts of the local Norwegian and Estonian business
habitus. To summarize, Norwegian business people in Tallinn can be described
as «personal, affective, idealistic stunt-artists» whereas the Estonian
business people can be termed «instrumental, calculating, professional
ritualists». Norwegian business people were committed to personal initiative
and leadership, but were irresponsible and sometimes naive in their business
practice. The Estonians, on the other hand, seemed committed to systematic,
rational strategies at the same time as they were secretive and suspicious
when «doing business». Both parties claimed that their way of «doing business»
corresponded with the global ideology of business. These simplified descriptions
of the different local business habitus serve to highlight some of the
distinctive features of Estonian-Norwegian business cooperation. When
«personal, affective, idealistic stunt-artists» encounter «instrumental,
calculating, professional ritualists», it is clear that the «business»
they do together will be more complex and specific than the global business
ideology. In some areas as we have seen, the two habitus seem almost by
necessity to conflict. Thus, the Norwegians ' tendency to act on the spur
of the moment and spread their risk-taking seem unavoidably to conflict
with the Estonians' methodical, long-term commitment. On the other hand,
the personal Norwegian leadership styles and affective loyalty in relations,
seemed to have the potential to «loosen up» the rather formal and constrained
Estonian approach to interpersonal communities and to calm some of their
suspicions. In the meeting between these two habitus, there is constant
adaptation and learning taking place, and in the cases above we have seen
several examples of how mutual accommodation may be worked out. As global
business ideology is articulated in the local setting Tallinn, it forces
such an «orchestration of habitus» to take place (Bourdieu 1977) under
the disguise of global business ideology.
The most difficult part of writing
a thesis is in many ways accounting for the methodological aspects of
the project. Even though it has been two years since I returned from Tallinn,
when I am writing this, the fieldwork experiences still have the power
to overwhelm me. The fieldwork in itself was intense because of a tight
time schedule and a large workload, but also very demanding emotionally.
The sum of these factors intensified everything that happened during my
stay in Tallinn. It is thus difficult to distance myself from the six
months the fieldwork lasted and try to retell the story as it really was.
It is hard to be completely honest
about personal experiences in a thesis, and it feels personal to present
events which I was unable to share with anyone during fieldwork itself.
Doing fieldwork was often a lonely and somewhat egocentric process (not
necessarily in a negative sense), where you had few chances to share things
that were happening. As a fieldworker one naturally finds oneself listening
to everybody else, and not the opposite. I have received feedback on my
analyses of the data, but no one but myself has ever read what I base
my analyses on, namely my field diaries and the notes from the interviews.
Yet another thing which makes it difficult to write about fieldwork experiences,
is the fact that in many ways I changed into a different person during
my stay in Tallinn. One example is that I became much more outgoing than
I normally am. I had no social networks to lean on and had to establish
new networks from scratch. At the same time as I became more outgoing,
I disregarded parts of my personality in order to fit in with new settings
and during the process of writing this epilogue, I often had a feeling
that I was telling somebody else's story. The last difficulty I will mention
is how hard it is to present this in a structured and organized way. The
fieldwork was a complex experience, where data appeared in a confused
order that never would fit the format of a thesis. But, on the other hand,
I adapted my daily routines, and it is almost equally hard to be coherent
about the obvious.
I met my first informant on the plane
from Oslo to Tallinn. This was a Norwegian businessman who was on his
way to Tallinn in order to inspect his Estonian printing press. From that
time on, I had very few indifferent conversations just to kill time, at
least from my perspective. I focused my concentration in order to absorb
every word the businessman uttered. The fieldwork had started and everything
was dependent on my ability or disability to attain data. I believed that
if I managed to get the right data (and, more importantly enough data),
I would acquire a thorough understanding. This was when I first noticed
the intensity of doing fieldwork. Everything I saw or experienced became
important and was transformed into data. I later realized that I sometimes
lost the ability to see things in perspective and I am sure that it is
important to be more relaxed than I was, and just let things happen without
trying to analyze everything immediately. After a few months I slowed
down, but a field break was out of the question. I tried going on a break
by taking the ferry from Tallinn to Helsinki and spend the weekend in
Helsinki with friends. But the boat was filled with Estonians and Finns,
and I was unable to read one word of my book out of fear of missing anything
of what was happening around me. Even the stay in Helsinki was hectic.
I was suddenly in the West and tried to understand how everything could
be so different from Tallinn, after a ferry ride of just three or four
hours.
The official language in Estonia is
Estonian which is a Finno-Ugric language and has twelve cases, and is
closely related to Finnish. Even though I studied Estonian on my own before
I came to Estonia, took private lessons in Estonian in Tallinn, and tagged
every item in my very sparsely furnished room with its Estonian name,
I never really learned to speak Estonian. My limited language skills were,
however, never my main concern after arriving in Tallinn. The business
language among the Norwegian and Estonian parties was English or Norwegian,
if the Norwegians had hired some of the numerous Estonians who actually
spoke Norwegian. Estonians came across as extremely skilled in languages,
especially those who were oriented towards the Western influences in Estonia,
and this was the case for most of the people I socialized with. It was
not uncommon for young Estonians to speak four foreign languages fluently;
Finnish, English, Russian and either French, German, Norwegian, or Swedish.
Most people did, however, not have many chances to practice their foreign
language skills and I was never allowed to stutter in Estonian if Estonians
knew that they could practice their English on me.
One of the first things I noticed
when I arrived in Tallinn was the new smells. It feels disrespectful to
mention the smell of Tallinn, but my room, apart from the lack of comfort,
smelled terrible and I spent the first days scrubbing the ceiling and
walls. Every morning a Russian cleaning lady came to clean the halls outside
my room, and I had trouble eating in her presence because of the strong
stench of sweat from her armpits. The corridors at The University, where
I enjoyed the luxury of an office, were packed with tall teenagers who
gave off a strong odor of cheap after-shave, perfume, and sweat. One time
when I was riding a crowded troll (electric buss) to the city center the
smells from the other people on the bus became too much for me and I got
sick and had to leave the bus. But Tallinn also offered sweet smells from
the numerous bakeries and cafés in the Old Town. These stories
about my reactions to different smells might seem meaningless, but after
two months I received a visitor from Norway. When my friend complained
about the smells in Tallinn I had no idea what he was talking about. By
then I had adjusted to the smells, something I did not believe possible
during the first months of my stay. It was surprising to realize that
I had become used to aspects of Tallinn without even noticing it myself.
I no longer questioned some of the things which I reacted strongly to
in the beginning.
Apart from having some difficulties
with smells, everyday things such as buying bus tickets, finding a place
to do my laundry, and shopping, seemed like crucial tasks during the first
weeks. It felt like a personal victory every time I understood and managed
something new, however insignificant. Even though many things appeared
to be different and foreign in Estonia, I was surprised by the similarities
to what I was used to from Norway. I started viewing my surroundings as
a puzzle where I had the role as a detective who tried to fit all the
pieces together into a coherent picture. Everyday tasks became important
pieces of the puzzle. The fact that I made new discoveries and break-throughs
every day made the stay exciting.
One example of how my knowledge developed
was my view of the Estonians. At first I thought they seemed open-minded
and happy. Even though the people I observed in the streets did not smile
much, I assumed that they were generally satisfied with their situation.
But as time passed, and I became closer to people and they started to
trust me, my initial impressions were altered. I realized that Estonians
often behaved differently in the presence of people from the West. They
cracked jokes, greeted people loudly and seemed happy and optimistic.
However, if there were only Estonians in a room the atmosphere changed
and people talked and smiled less. At first I interpreted this as a Nordic
temperament similar to how Norwegians will not utter a word to each other
on a bus. Then I stumbled on a well-known Estonian proverb (see Chapter
Two): «The favorite food of an Estonian is another Estonian». I started
to view Tallinn as a competitive society. In many ways the «Estonian national
philosophy» seemed to fit capitalistic ideologies much better than the
Norwegian Jante Law(17)according to which
you should never believe that you are better than your neighbor. Estonians
described themselves as jealous of each other. An Estonian friend told
me that «There are no satisfied Estonians, we always want more». He explained
that if your neighbor owns a Mercedes and you only have an Audi, you will
try to make more money in order to buy a better car than your neighbor.
In more than one way it can be said that solidarity was lacking among
Estonians. Estonia and especially Tallinn was a very insecure place when
it came to both crime and future possibilities, even though the first
impression was a post-communist society which had experienced an economic
and social miracle in only a few years. The Estonian youth who seemed
ambitious and successful often had to provide for their parents who made
less than their children. Young people in their mid-twenties often worked
full time and studied part time. At TTÜ, the university where I had
an office, many classes were held in the evenings after the students had
finished their jobs. It was not uncommon to meet students in the corridors
with mobile phones and suits which often indicated that they were involved
in commercial business, commonly their own. One example was a nineteen
year old friend of mine who just had struck a profitable deal and now
owned his own company and drove a brand new Mercedes. He had earned enough
to pay for his own business education in the West and provide for his
parents. Even teachers needed an extra job because of low salaries at
the universities. This could result in situations where students and teachers
were involved in business relationships with each other. Taking an exam
on your business card, was a familiar expression among students at TTÜ.
It meant that if a student was representing a firm that the teacher's
company wanted to strike a deal with, it would not hurt your grades to
show your teacher your business card while handing in the exam.
Towards the end of my stay in Tallinn
I was asked in an interview with the school paper at TTÜ if I missed
anything in Tallinn. I answered without hesitation that I missed smiles
in the streets and satisfied and secure people. The Estonian interviewer
agreed. In contrast to the smells, which I noticed immediately and forgot
soon, it took longer to see Tallinn as a place where smiles were few and
the daily grind was difficult to cope with for many people, because the
surface seemed without problems.
As mentioned above, I became much
more outgoing during my fieldwork. My greatest fears were of not becoming
friends with any Estonians or of being unable to get in touch with the
business environment. I was lucky and made friends quickly and in the
beginning I was thrilled with the situation. Prior to my fieldwork I had
thought about and discussed with my fellow anthropology students how I
would treat friends during my stay in Tallinn. I was determined not only
to be the one who received help and information, but to give something
in return as well. I was used to viewing anthropologists as strategists
who took advantage of their informants in order to attain valuable information
for their academic work. It had never occurred to me that I would be the
one who would be giving without receiving. My English skills made me popular.
Apart from the discussion classes I organized together with a visiting
American professor at the university, there were several Estonians who
spent time with me just to practice their English (the missionaries in
Tallinn used this demand for foreign language practice, by announcing
services in English instead of in Estonian). Some people also saw me as
their ticket out of Estonia. An Estonian friend invited me home for dinner.
Over dessert she had told me that her daughter was very interested in
studying dance abroad and that she wanted me to check the possibilities
in Norway. Another friend frequently borrowed money. She never asked for
large amounts, but it happened repeatedly and she rarely paid me back.
After I left Tallinn, I received an inquiry about selling containers of
Estonian fish to the Norwegian market from a woman I considered my close
friend during fieldwork. The incidents where I did people favors, did
not bother me the most. The worst part was when I needed someone to confide
in and turned to someone I had previously listened to, and they merely
responded that I was from Norway where everything was fine so what could
possibly be troubling me (Estonians even have a proverb «Korras nagu norras»,
which means «good as in Norway»). Comments like this always shut me up.
But I needed someone to talk to at times, as the intensity of the fieldwork
experience, often lead to hypersensitivity. My feelings resembled a roller
coaster (maybe it was a good thing that I did not share them with too
many people). My day was perfect if I managed to get a new contact with
someone within the business milieu or figured out details about how to
buy buss passes. The day was ruined if the commandant (the female janitor
at the dormitory) failed to greet me in the morning. I would spend the
entire morning wondering where I had gone wrong for her not to greet me.
Concerning my contacts with the business environment, I was the one who
felt pushy and demanding. In most cases I nursed the contacts and at times
it became tiring to be the one who constantly took initiatives. I did,
however, also make friends within the business world in Tallinn.
Since my friends and informants belonged
to different groups, I had to switch between different social networks.
One of these was the group of Estonians with minimal contact with Western
parts of Tallinn. The most extreme example was a girl who had only been
in a car twice before when I met her. I took her to a café and
to McDonald's for the first time in her life. I behaved differently among
people such as her, than in a more Western oriented social setting. I
must admit that I used the Western spaces in Tallinn, which also included
Estonians, as get-away-places from the former environments, but it also
worked the other way around. I also made a few Russian friends, a fact
which I often concealed from my Estonian friends and especially from Western-oriented
Estonians. Estonians with less contact with the Western parts of Tallinn
seemed to be more friendly towards Russians. My switching between different
groups of people was similar to what Estonians experienced. They had to
relate to Russians, to people from the West, and to an increasing variation
of categories of Estonians. There were parts of the Estonian population
who knew very little about each other. A friend of mine commented that
she had to read glossy magazines or newspapers in order to know how some
Estonians lived. The same friend was unfamiliar with the routines in a
bank when I first met her. The internal differences among Estonians were
increasing and this was particularly noticeable, since social differentiation
used to be invisible before 1991.
As I have mentioned, I often visited
the Western parts of Tallinn in order to take a break from my Estonian
friends. What I often felt a need to get away from, was the Estonian skepticism,
and sometimes even hate, towards people who were not just like them (one
would think I was used to this from Norway!). Estonians did not like Russians
(at least the ones who lived in Estonia), or Finns, they only approved
of certain categories of Western Europeans (Finns were not even seen as
Europeans and were nicknamed «reindeer» (põdrat) or «EU moose»
after they joined the EU, due to their allegedly uncultured behavior),
only a few Americans were accepted, and returning children of Estonians
who had emigrated to America, were called Mickey Mouse because they were
seen as advocates for Americanization. There were also many groups to
dislike internally among the Estonians; the noveaux rich were stupid,
a residential area with luxurious villas was called «idiot town», the
elderly were lagging behind etc. One explanation of this apparent dislike
might have been that Estonia is a young nation, which has not concluded
the formation of a national identity and thus feels threatened by anything
that seems «different».
The rules of behavior in business
environments were initially unknown to me and I had to learn some of them
in order to acquire information from business people. As a student of
social anthropology I knew almost nothing about business. I could hardly
understand accounts and I had never seen a business plan prior to my fieldwork.
Some of the first things I noticed was the business cards. When business
people met, the exchange of business cards was an important ritual. I
often got the feeling that I was somewhat strange because I did not have
my personal business card. If I were to do fieldwork among business people
again, I would definitively have my business cards printed, as phone numbers
written down on a piece of paper were easily lost. Business cards, on
the other hand, were organized in folders in alphabetical order or according
to business type. A popular souvenir to buy in Tallinn was a handmade
folder for business cards, in local design (I bought one myself).
The business people expected me to
be well prepared and to know exactly what I wanted to ask about, when
I came to see them. I therefore made an interview guide (see Appendix
Two), which I changed a number of times during my fieldwork, and I conducted
37 formal and informal interviews. I was not sufficiently prepared, or
even qualified to conduct ethnographic interviews, although I had made
a rudimentary interview guide before I left Norway. I found formal interviewing
very difficult. It was a part of my fieldwork which I was not prepared
for, I did not even suspect that I would be conducting such interviews.
I had gained the mistaken impression that anthropologists rely on data
collected from participant observation alone. So I was forced
to learn interview techniques in the course of my fieldwork, and I am
certain that many of my initial mistakes could have been avoided if I
had been familiar with a few basic techniques beforehand. The interviews
themselves were often a peculiar experience, where I tried to persuade
the informants to talk as much as possible, whereas they believed that
I had thoroughly considered questions which they tried to answer to the
best of their ability. I would ideally have avoided posing any questions
at all. I sometimes felt that I was presented with answers to things I
had decided were significant beforehand, and thus missed important information.
One way of avoiding too much focus on the questions, was to pose descriptive
questions, such as what does your job consist of? As most people enjoy
talking about what they are doing, and most people generally are not interested,
this would normally keep the business people busy for a while. Some of
my best information came from the business people's job descriptions.
A different misunderstanding was that the business people were very conscious
of when the official part of our meeting was over, i.e. when I stopped
taking notes. The business people did not expect me to use any of the
information they provided after the interviews were finished. I, on the
other hand, often viewed interviews as the beginning of a relationship
with an informant. It was a way of setting up a meeting and thus establishing
the initial contact. As Hall points out, everything that takes place prior
to and after an interview is an important source of information (Hall
1987). I would of course treat sensitive information carefully and never
use it in the thesis or share it with other people, but I felt that I
had to know as much as possible in order to form a thorough understanding
of the whole situation. I never concealed that I was a student of social
anthropology and I tried to explain anthropological methods, but in spite
of my efforts, I do not think they fully understood what I meant.
I interviewed both Norwegian and Estonian
business people, but made more friends among the Estonians. I was surprised
that so many of them opened up to me, considering that I shared nationality
with their Norwegian bosses, or maybe this was the reason. They seemed
grateful to be able to present their side of the story to a Norwegian.
I was often embarrassed by the way some Norwegians treated their Estonian
employees and partners. I was aware of too many incidents where Norwegians
broke their promises or even the law, by for example failing to pay salaries.
When I was asked by an Estonian friend whether or not I would recommend
him to apply for a job in a particular Norwegian firm in Tallinn, my answer
was no. I knew that the Norwegian manager of the company had lost his
former job because he was suspected of fraud, and in my mind he was not
trustworthy. The right thing to do might have been to refuse to answer
the Estonian's questions about the company, but, in that case, I felt
that it was more important to treat a friend right, than to protect my
data and integrity as a fieldworker. Another reason for helping my friend
was that I sometimes felt personal dislike for some of my Norwegian informants.
Anthropologists often consider themselves as spokespersons for their informants
who should defend their rights etc. This was not how it turned out in
my case, especially not with the Norwegian business people. Despite this,
I tried to see things from their perspective, as I consider that to be
the main task of an anthropologist. One of the reasons why I disliked
some of the Norwegian business people, may have been that they represented
a group which possessed many resources. People who receive high salaries
and have a fairly long education are not considered a threatened social
group. I might have reacted differently if I had witnessed similar events
among a tribe in the Amazons, whom I would not have judged by my own standards.
In the relationship between me and
the Norwegian business people, I was not the only one who wanted information.
The Norwegian business people sometimes tried to make me tell them things
their partners had told me. One man said that he refused to answer my
questions until I told him what his Estonian partner had said about the
working relations within the firm. He gave up when he understood that
I was not interested in the deal. If I could have provided him with the
information he needed, I would have told him that they needed a weekly
meeting for the administration. This was the only complaint the Estonian
had made. The fact that the Norwegian boss was unaware of this simple,
but important fact proved to me that my study was needed and that I was
acquiring valuable information. It also made me aware that I was a person
who could be used and abused by both my Estonian and Norwegian informants.
The process of doing fieldwork was
one of personal satisfaction. Prior to my stay in Tallinn I had produced
a project proposal and applied for financial support. The project was
my idea and I established my own contacts and prepared every detail myself.
During fieldwork I had a strong sense of carrying out something which
I had planned, and thus of living up to my own expectations. During fieldwork,
it felt as if I was learning something new every day, as both Estonia
and the business environments were new and exciting. But I was unprepared
for my return to Norway. It was a disappointment to learn that my fieldnotes
and interviews, which had demanded such hard work, did not immediately
provide the means to retell what I had experienced, to my supervisor,
friends, or in a thesis. The understanding, which I believed to have acquired
on the plane home from Tallinn, was soon reduced to a feeling that the
only thing I could truly say about my fieldwork, was: «I don't know what
it was, but something smelled funny».
This list presents actual information
about the Norwegian-Estonian companies in Tallinn at the time of my fieldwork.
In the main text the companies are kept anonymous. In the list
the company names are omitted, except in the case of the two largest companies
with Norwegian involvement, because they are easily recognizable and because
I do not base my arguments on information from these companies.
Company 1:
A joint venture between a Norwegian
and Estonian company. They mediated production of hosiery, lingerie etc.
in Estonia and Lithuania for Norwegian producers. Their Tallinn office
consisted of two Estonian women in their forties: the Director and the
Project Manager. The Norwegian Chairman of the Board and the Managing
Director of the Norwegian branch visited Tallinn and the production sites
regularly and worked closely with their Estonian partners. Company 1 was
established in the early 1990s. The establishing of the company in Estonia
was not a coincidence. The father of the Norwegian Chairman of the Board
was the first Norwegian counsel to Estonia between the two World Wars,
and this created an initial interest for the country.
Company 2:
This company was run by a Norwegian
woman who designed knitted clothes for the Norwegian market. Part of her
production was produced by Estonian knitters. She came to Estonia on a
holiday with a friend in 1994. She noticed the quality of the Estonian
knitting sold by women in the streets. This gave her the idea to start
her own production in Estonia. Twenty-five women were knitting her designs
in their homes. In addition to this she was also involved in a project
to start a large scale production with machine knitting. The designer
had an Estonian partner who organized the business in Estonian and functioned
as the contact between the Norwegian and the knitters. In July 1996 the
production had terminated.
Company 3:
Company 3 was established in Estonia
in 1993. The establishing of a Norwegian chain of grocery stores in Estonia
was done by this Norwegian company through a franchise agreement. The
company was also involved in the organizing of the distribution of facilities
for disabled in Estonia. This project was financed through the Norwegian
Action Program. Company 3 had two Norwegian representatives in Tallinn.
The company had an Estonian Financial Manager and an Estonian Managing
Director. The company had plans to establish stores in the rest of the
Baltic states and in some parts of Russia.
Company 4:
A joint venture project between a
Norwegian travel agency and an Estonian counterpart. Company 4 was established
in 1993 by a Norwegian man who runs a travel agency in Norway. Norway
and Estonia were the company's main travel destinations. The company had
a Norwegian Chairman of the Board and an Estonian Managing Director who
was also a member of the board. An Estonian woman worked in sales and
was also the Project Manager. There were two other Estonian sales persons
hired in the company. The Norwegian Chairman of the Board had contacts
in Estonia through cooperation between Norwegian and Estonian choirs and
scout organizations prior to starting his own business in Tallinn. Company
4 was terminated during the fall of 1996.
Company 5:
The company was established by its
Norwegian President in 1991, who came to Tallinn in 1989. He came to Tallinn
by chance as he was challenged by a friend. Company number 5 was a consulting
firm which specialized on mediating business deals between Novgorod, Tallinn
and Bergen. In addition, the company was involved in several other projects.
An Estonian woman was hired as the Managing Director. The company' s secretary
was an Estonian woman. Towards the end of my fieldwork the company took
over the managing of a Tallinn based company producing containers. The
secretary followed the company.
Company 6:
An Estonian company with a Norwegian
Director. The company was established by the Norwegian Director in 1992.
They broke up old ships and sold the scrap metal to Europe, but they would
also engage themselves in other projects they found interesting. The company
obtained a profitable agreement with the City of Tallinn to remove old
ships from the ports of Tallinn and Paldiski. In return they could keep
the scrap metal they treasured. An Estonian woman worked as the Vice Director
and an Estonian man was the translator and the Personnel Manager of the
company. The Vice Director had been working with the Norwegian Director
since he first established the company in Estonia. The Norwegian Director
came to Tallinn in 1989 together with one of the other Norwegian business
people. The company moved to Kaliningrad after having finished their assignment
in Estonia.
Company 7:
The company was registered in Estonia
in 1992 by its Norwegian Director. The Director visited Estonia for the
first time in 1991 in connection with the establishment of Junior Chambers
in Estonia. Through these visits he created future business contacts.
Company 7 owned 50% of the Estonian shares in a Norwegian chain store.
They were also involved in the establishing of the Norwegian chain store
in the Baltic states. The company's main office was in a small village
outside of Tallinn, where it had been involved in the building of a shopping
center where both the Norwegian chain store and another Norwegian company
had stores. Company 7 also provided consulting cervices and was involved
in a number of other projects like the planning of a Scandinavian hotel
in Tallinn. 12 Estonians worked on the managing level of the company.
Company 8:
The Norwegian Chairman of the Board,
came to Tallinn in 1989. He started the production of yarn in a factory
outside Tallinn in 1991 in cooperation with Estonian partners. The Estonian
part owned 60% of the shares. The production was terminated in 1993. Company
8 returned to the factory in 1994. The company also owned a diaper factory,
a studio of sun beds, shares in a consulting firm and provided business
consulting services on an individual basis. Three Estonian women were
employed in the main office of company 8. Their job was to sell the knitted
products. The Chairman of the Board also had a Norwegian partner who lived
permanently in Tallinn.
Company 9:
Was the largest processor of fish
in Estonia. After several difficulties the company invited a Norwegian
man with experience from the Norwegian fish industry to administrate a
process of restructuring in 1995. He worked closely together with the
Estonian administration of the company. Some of the main new changes were
the upgrading of the sales department, the restructuring of the administrative
routines and an orientation towards new markets for their products. Company
9 was bought by a Norwegian company after my fieldwork period.
Company 10:
The Norwegian Manager of the company
came to Estonia prior to Estonian independence from the Soviet Union.
He used to work as the Estonian consul to Norway. Company 10 started as
consultants in 1992-93. They coordinated business projects between Norway
and Estonia and owned two wholesale stores in Tartu and Tallinn. They
have also translated a book of economics into Estonian. Company 10 gave
themselves (in 1996) one more year in Estonia. If they were unable to
succeed within the year they would end their business connections with
Estonia.
Company 11:
This was an Estonian registered company
with Scandinavian owners. It was established in 1991 in order to produce
containers for sale in the Western part of Europe. They hired a Norwegian
Managing Director and an Estonian/ Russian Vice Director. An Estonian
woman worked as translator and language teacher for the Russian workers
and a Russian woman was hired as secretary. When company 11 bought the
company they started a restructuring process which involved a new management
structure and the firing of workers. The company got a new management
in November 1996.
Company 12:
Number 12 ran a printing press in
Tallinn. It was a joint venture project between a Norwegian and an Estonian
which was established in 1993. They each owned 48% of the shares in the
company. The remaining shares were divided among the workers. The Norwegian
owner of the company runs his own printing press in Norway and the Estonian
owner used to work for a state owned printing press in Soviet Estonia.
The two men met in Norway when the Estonian owner visited Norway to see
how printing presses were run in Europe. The Norwegian owner of the company
had connections in Estonia as he had been involved in the shipment of
humanitarian aid to Estonia. The Estonian owner bought a printing press
in Tallinn and invited his Norwegian friend to join him.
Statoil:
Statoil was first established in Estonia
on the 27th of March in 1991. It was the first company in the Soviet Union
which was entirely owned by foreigners. Eesti Statoil was initially run
by the Swedish branch of Statoil. It was, in 1996, under Norwegian supervision.
They planned to have an Estonian management within two years. The Managing
Director in 1996 was a forty year old Swede. The company had previously
had two Managing Directors: the first was Swedish and the other was Estonian.
The company had gas stations in all of the three Baltic states. Statoil,
and Coca Cola to a lesser extent, functioned as locomotives for the smaller
Norwegian firms in Tallinn. Statoil had a very good reputation in Tallinn.
It was common to hear people say, like one of my Estonian friends: «I
will only buy gas at Statoil, because then I know that I'll get good gas».
Some of the other gas stations in Estonia have been known
to sell gas meant for heating up houses as fuel for cars. Norwegian business
was given a positive image through Statoil 's activities.
Coca Cola:
Coca Cola took over an old bottling
plant in Tallinn in 1990. They produced soft drinks for sale in Estonia.
Its main office for the Baltic States and Russia was situated in Oslo.
That was one of the reasons why two Norwegian men in their late twenties
were hired to assist through the initial process on the newly restructured
bottling plant in Tallinn. The long term plan for Coca Cola was that the
whole organization would be run by local labor and expertise. One of the
Norwegian men worked as sales and marketing administrator and the other
was responsible for the reorganizing of the computer systems. In the computer
department two Estonians worked closely with the Norwegian. One was in
his forties and used to work at the old bottling plant with computer systems,
and was about to leave the company in 1996. The other Estonian was in
his early thirties.
INTERVIEW GUIDE (for
Norwegians)
-How will you describe your workplace/the
firm and your tasks in the firm?
-In your opinion, is the firm based
on Norwegian/Western European principals of organization? (a Western concept,
Western working environment etc.)
-Is it necessary to adjust your organization
/firm to the Estonian context?
-If so how is this done?
-In what ways -if at all- do you cooperate
with Estonians/Eastern Europeans?
-How would you describe this cooperation?
-Is there any difference from employing
or cooperating with Estonians (Eastern Europeans) as opposed to Norwegians/Western
Europeans?
-If yes will you please describe the
differences?
-If no will you please describe the
similarities?
-Or both?
-Can you describe your Eastern European
employees'/partners' relationship to their workplace/the company?
-How will you describe your own values
concerning work ethics, business etc.?
-In your opinion, how do your values
differ from the values of Estonians/Eastern Europeans - if they differ
at all?
-Is it often necessary to guide or
advice your Estonian counterparts?
-Do you have any language problems?
-When you do business with Eastern
Europeans, how would you describe their negotiating strategies?
-Have you experienced any unexpected
(positive or negative) situations?
-If yes will you please describe these?
-What are your motivations for doing
business in Estonia?
-Why did you establish your business
in Estonia?
-For how long have you been doing
business in Estonia?
-In your opinion, how does the future
look for your company in Estonia?
-Why do you judge the future prospects
to be good or negative?
-Is it your impression that Norwegian
businesses established in Estonia are stable?
-Did you have any contacts prior to
your investment in the Baltic States?
-If so how and when were they established?
-What do you connect with the terms
Western and Eastern?
-I have heard Tallinn described as
"Europe's Chicago", what are your reactions to this description?
-Do you consider your business as
part of a development process - creating progress for Estonia?
INTERVIEW GUIDE ( for
Estonians)
-How will you describe your working
place/the firm and your tasks in the company?
-What did you do before you started
to work for this company?
-How would you describe the cooperation
with Norwegians/Western Europeans?
-Is there any difference from being
employed by/cooperating with Norwegians/ Western Europeans as opposed
to Eastern Europeans?
-If yes will you please describe the
differences?
-If no will you please describe the
similarities?
-Or both?
-I have often had Norwegians described
as naive, what are your comments?
-How will you describe your values
concerning work ethics, business etc.?
-In your opinion, how do your values
differ from the values of Norwegians/Western Europeans - if they differ
at all?
-Can you please describe your Norwegian/Western
European employers'/partners' relationship to their workplace/the firm?
-Do you experience any language problems?
-Is it different to go to work now
than it was before independence - have working conditions or the expected
behavior changed in any way? Please explain how?
-Have you experienced any unexpected
situations (positive or negative) in working with Western Europeans?
-If yes will you please describe these?
-What do you connect with the term
Western and Eastern?
-I have heard Tallinn described as
"Europe's Chicago", what are your reactions to this description?
Aasbø, Hege (1997).
Fortid og samtid. Diskurser omkring kulturminnevern, kultur og modernisering
på Zanzibar, hovedfagsoppgave i sosialantropologi, Tromsø:
Seksjon for sosialantropologi/samiske studier, Institutt for samfunnsvitenskap,
Universitetet i Tromsø.
Anderson, Benedict (1991 [1983]).
Imagined Communities, London: Verso.
Appadurai, Arjun (1990).
«Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy» in Global
Culture. Nationalism, Globalization and Modernity, Mike Featherstone
(ed.), London: SAGE Publications.
Bach, Torstein (forthcoming).
Songs and Revolutions. Rebuilding the Estonian Nation, hovedoppgave
i sosialantropologi, Oslo: Institutt og Museum for Antropologi, Universitetet
i Oslo.
Barth, Fredrik (1972).
«Introduction» in The Role of the Entrepreneur in Social Change
in Northern Norway, Fredrik Barth (ed.), Bergen, Oslo, Tromsø:
Universitetsforlaget.
Barth, Fredrik (1981).
«Economic Spheres in Darfur» in Process and form in social life.
Selected essays of Fredrik Barth, Volume 1, London: Routledge &
Kegan Paul.
Bathurst, Robert (manuscript).
«Soviet Chess/American Checkers: Gaming the Dialectics».
Boissevain, Jeremy (1974).
«Networks. Interaction and Structure» in Friends of Friends. Networks,
Manipulators and Coalitions, New York: St. Martin's Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre (1990).
The Logic of Practice, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre (1977).
Outline of a Theory of Practice, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Bugjerde, Per Ståle and Engdal,
Eskil (1996).
«Baltikum Bonanza» in Dagens Næringsliv, February 24th
,1996.
Bukovsky, Vladimir (1979).
To Build a Castle - My Life as a Dissenter, New York: The Viking
Press.
Cannon, Ilvi Joe and Hough, William
(1995).
Guide to Estonia, Bucks: Bradt Publications.
Connerton, Paul (1989 [1992]).
How Societies Remember, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cox, Kevin R. (1997).
«Introduction. Globalization and its Politics in Question» in Spaces
of Globalization. Reasserting the Power of the Local, Kevin R.
Cox (ed.), New York, London: The Guilford Press.
Cvetkovich, Ann og Kellner, Douglas
(1997).
«Introduction: Thinking Global and Local» in Articulating the Global
and the Local. Globalization and Cultural Studies. Politics and Culture,
Ann Cvetkovich and Douglas Kellner (eds.), Boulder, Oxford: Westview
Press.
Dagens Næringsliv
(1996).
«Rossnor granskes» in Dagens Næringsliv, February 19th,
1996.
Det Kongelige Norske Utenriksdepartement
(1994-5).
Stortingsmelding nr. 47, 1994-95, Om Handlingsprogrammet for Øst-Europa,
Oslo: Det Kongelige Norske Utenriksdepartement.
Det Kongelige Norske Utenriksdepartement
(1994).
1994 Årsrapport Handlingsprogrammet for Øst-Europa,
Oslo: Det Kongelige Norske Utenriksdepartement.
Døving, Runar and Hylland
Eriksen, Thomas (1992).
«In Limbo: Notes on the Culture of Airports», presented at the workshop
The Consequences of Globalisation for Social Anthropology 2nd EASA
Conference, Prague .
Engdal, Eskil (1996).
«Vrir verdier av vrak» in Dagens Næringsliv, April 12th,
1996.
Engdal, Eskil, Enger, Cecilie and
Hambro, Sarah (1996).
«Sladder - bedre enn sitt rykte» in Dagens Næringsliv,
February 3rd, 1996.
Eriksen, Thomas Hylland (1991).
«En krympende verden» in Veien til et mer eksotisk Norge. En bok
om nordmenn og andre underlige folkeslag, Oslo: Ad Notam.
Eriksen, Thomas Hylland (1991).
«Verden er blitt ett sted» in Sydsvenska Dagbladet, http://www.uio.no/~geirthe/Globsydsv.html.
Featherstone, Mike (1990).
«Global Culture: An Introduction» in Global Culture. Nationalism,
Globalization and Modernity, Mike Featherstone (ed.), London: SAGE
Publications Ltd.
Foucault, Michel (1972).
The Archaeology of Knowledge, London: Routledge.
Friedman, Jonathan (1990).
«Being in the World: Globalization and Localization» in Global Culture.
Nationalism, Globalization and Modernity, Mike Featherstone (ed.),
London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Geertz, Clifford (1963).
Peddlers and Princes. Social Change and Economic Modernization in Two
Indonesian Towns, Chicago and London: The University of Chicago
Press.
Gertler, Meric S. (1997).
«Between the Global and the Local: The Spatial Limits to Productive
Capital» in Spaces of Globalization. Reasserting the Power of the
Local, Kevin R. Cox (ed.), New York, London: The Guilford Press.
Goffman, Erving (1971 [1959]).
The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, New York: Penguin Books.
Goffman, Erving (1972 [1967]).
Interaction Ritual, Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Grøgaard, Jens B. (ed.) (1996).
Estonia in the Grip of Change. The NORBALT Living Conditions Project,
Forskningsstiftelsen Fafo.
Habermas, (1962).
Borgerlig offentlighet, Oslo: Gyldendal Norsk Forlag.
Hall, Edward T. (1984).
The Dance of Life. The Other Dimension of Time, New York: Anchor
Press/Doubleday & Company.
Hall, Edward T. and Hall, Mildred
Reed (1987).
Hidden Differences. Doing Business with the Japanese, New York:
Doubleday.
Hall, Edward T. and Hall, Mildred
Reed (1990).
Understanding Cultural Differences. Germans, French and Americans,
Yarmouth, Maine: Intercultural Press Inc.
Haugland, Sven A. (1996).
Samarbeid, allianser og nettverk, LOS senteret: Tano Aschehoug.
Hervig, Niels Christian (1998).
«Det nødvendige nettverket» in SAS magasinet, Number
8, 1997-98 December-February.
Hill, Richard (1993).
Vi europeere, Libretto forlag.
Hill, Richard (1994).
EuroManagers & Martians, Brussels: Europublications.
Howell, Dr. John M. (1994).
Understanding Eastern Europe - The Context of Change, London: Kogan
Page Limited.
Jackson, Michael (1991).
«Black or White» on Dangerous, Sony Music, MJ Productions.
Kapferer, Bruce (1988).
Legends of People, Myths of State. Violence, Intolerance and Political
Culture in Sri Lanka and Australia, Washington DC: Smithsonian
Institute Press.
Kross, Jaan (1991).
The Conspiracy and Other Stories, London: The Harvill Press.
Larsen, Kjetil Fladmark (1998).
«Knowledge Management»: Et markedsorientert perspektiv» in Magma.
Tidsskrift for økonomi og ledelse, Årgang 1, Nr. 1,
Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.
Larsen, Tord (1993).
«Bønder i byen - på jakt etter den norske konfigurasjonen»
in Den norske væremåten, (ed.) Arne Martin Klausen,
J.W. Cappelens Forlag AS.
Letnes, Odd (1995).
«Ublodig revolusjon på lokalplan» in
Forskning, 3. årgang, September, Nr. 5, 1995.
Lindström, Pär (1994).
Att resa i Estland. Historia, sevärdheter och resetips, Stockholm:
Norstedts Förlag AB.
Luik, Viivi (1994).
Skremmande vakkert (the original title: Ajaloo ilu), Oslo:
Det Norske Samlaget.
Lund, Thure Erik (1998).
«Den globale kultur» in Samtiden, 2/3 1998, Aschehoug: Oslo.
Mailand-Hansen, Chr. (1988).
«Baltikum - de vestlige lande midt i Østeuropa» in Informationen,
February 28th, 1988.
Mars, Gerald and Altman, Yochanan
(1983).
«The Cultural Bases of Soviet Georgia's Second Economy» in Soviet
Studies vol. XXXV, no. 4, October 1983.
Marx, Karl (1998 [1867]).
Capital. Part VII, The Accumulation of Capital. Section Three. Separation
of Surplus-value into Capital and Revenue. The Abstinence Theory,
http://csf.colorado.edu/psn/marx/Archive.
Maurseth, Per Botolf (1996).
«Norsk møte med mafiaen» in Dagbladet, Tuesday, July
23rd, 1996.
McEvedy, Colin (1961).
The Penguin Atlas of Medieval History, Baltimore: Penguin Books
Inc.
Miller, Daniel (1997).
Capitalism. An Ethnographic Approach, Oxford: Berg.
Nader, Laura (1969).
«Up the Anthropologist-Perspectives Gained from Studying Up» in Reinventing
Anthropology, New York: Pantheon Books.
Nielsen, Finn Sivert (1996).
The Eye of the Whirlwind -Russian Identity and Soviet Nation-Building-
Quests for Meaning in a Soviet Metropolis, Universitetet i Oslo.
Nove, Alec (1977 [1984]).
The Soviet Economic System, London: George Allen and Unwin.
NRK, Tekst TV, October 10th, 1998.
Palmer, R.R. and Colton, Joel (1965).
A History of the Modern World, New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Rande, Kristin (1996).
Overgang eller undergang. Nasjon og person i endring; Litauen etter
Sovjetunionens fall, hovedoppgave i sosialantropologi, Oslo: Institutt
og Museum for Antropologi, Universitetet i Oslo.
Richardson, Heidi (1993).
«Norway the Northern Playground». Et kulturanalytisk blikk på
fjell-friluftsliv» in Dugnad 4, Volume 19.
Robertson, Roland (1990).
«Mapping the Global Condition: Globalization as the Central Concept»
in Global Culture. Nationalism, Globalization and Modernity,
(ed.) Mike Featherstone, London: SAGE Publications.
Sandemose, Aksel (1966).
En flyktning krydser sitt spor, København: Vintens forlag.
Scott, William Baron (1745-1836).
Quoted in Bloomsbury Dictionary of Quotation (2nd edition,
1996), Bloomsbury Publishing Company in Infopedia, UK, CD ROM edition.
Skonhoft, Anders (1998).
«Den store omfordelingen» in Klassekampen, October 10th, 1998.
Sperling, Vibeke (1988).
«Østeuropa har gaver til vesten» in Informationen, February
5th, 1988.
Stalsberg, Linn and Harry, Jørn
(1996).
«Balt-Balt-Baltikum. Fra kuleramme til kule kafeer i post-kommunistiske
Tallinn» in VG, Friday, August 23rd, 1996.
Storper, Michael (1997).
«Territories, Flows, and Hierarchies in the Global Economy» in Spaces
of Globalization. Reasserting the Power of the Local, Kevin R.
Cox (ed.), New York, London: The Guilford Press.
Storvik, Kåre (1997).
«Kort om hvordan ikke komme til kort i Russland» in Rapport fra
temadagen 4. mars 1997. Næringslivets kunnskapsbehov i russiske
nordområder, Oslo: Fritjof Nansens Institutt.
Sørhaug, Tian (1996).
Om ledelse. Makt og tillit i moderne organisering, Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
Tammsaare, Anton Hansen (1926-33).
Tõde ja Õigus, Tallinn: Eesti Raamat.
Tenno, Ann (1996).
Eestimaa Pildid. Pictures of Estonia. Landschaften in Estland,
Oy: GrafRak.
Thorheim, Martin A. (1995).
«Norsk næringsliv har tatt utfordringen i øst» in På
Norske Vinger, 19th årgang, Nr. 5, 1995.
Thorheim, Martin A. (1995).
«Sentral-Europa frister som aldri før» in På Norske
Vinger, 19th årgang Nr. 5. 1995.
Tikkanen, Henrik (1987).
Brändövägen Bävervägen Mariegatan -en selvbiografi,
Oslo: Gyldendal.
Turner, Frederick Jackson (1966).
«Statement of the Frontier Thesis» in The Frontier Thesis. Valid
Interpretation of American History?, Ray Allen Billington (ed.),
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
UPI, Moscow (1990).
«Soviets Issue Dismal Report on Economy for '89» in San Francisco
Chronicle, January 29th, 1990.
U.S. Bureau of Census (1989).
http://www.lib.utexas.edu./Libs/PCL/Map_collection/commonwealth/Comp_Eth
nic_Soviet.jpg
Weber, Max (1981 [1922]).
«The Evolution of the Capitalistic Spirit» in General Economic History,
New Brunswick: Transaction Books.
Webster's Encyclopedic Unabridged
Dictionary of the English Language (1989).
New York/Avenel: Gramercy Books.
Whitten, Norman E. and Wolfe, Alvin
W. (1973).
«Network Analysis» in Handbook of Social and Cultural Anthropology,
John J. Honigman (ed.), Chicago: Rand McNally.
Wolf, Eric R. (1966).
«Kinship, Friendship, and Patron-Client Relations in Complex Societies»
in The Social Anthropology of Complex Societies, M. Banton
(ed.), London: Tavistock.
1. Some of the
chief spheres of Norwegian investment in these areas were industry, energy,
farming and fishery (Det Kgl. Utenriksdepartement 1994:15). The main geographical
areas of interest were North-West Russia, Poland and the Baltic states.
2. The Labor Party
has governed Norway continuously since the Second World War, with several
brief, but unnoteworthy, interludes. A coalition government led by the
Christian Democrats (Kristelig Folkeparti) came to power in 1997. The
new government does not however break with the Norwegian Social-Democratic
tradition of high official spendings on welfare, protection of national
industries and commerce, subsidies to the farming industry etc.
3. The fact that
their common language in daily communication was English - which both
Norwegians and Estonians speak as foreigners - may further have strengthened
this notion.
4. The word business
will be used in its emic and ambiguous sense - as my informants used it.
When business is referred to in its general meaning or as business ideology
it will be written without quotation marks. «Business» will be written
with quotation marks when it refers to the practical act of «doing business».
5. Statoil and
Coca Cola are the only companies which are mentioned by name. This is
done because they are easily recognizable in any case, and because I have
very little first hand information on the two companies. They are important
for my argument as points of reference for my main informants, which are
the business people involved with the remaining smaller firms. Because
of the size, image, and considerable financial resources, Coca Cola and
Statoil experience different business situations than the smaller Norwegian
firms.
6. Coca Cola's
regional office for Eastern and Central Europe was situated in Oslo, Norway,
consequently the Estonian branch of Coca Cola was administered from Oslo.
7. The interview
guides I used were revised constantly during fieldwork. They functioned
as guides and was never followed rigorously.
8. The Action Program
was completed in 1996 and is continued through The Cooperation Program.
9. The Hanseatic
League (an alliance of towns of Northern Germany and neighboring countries
for the production and advance of trade and commerce) was yet to be formally
defined during the first German period (1227-1238), but the association
already existed. It is thus common to call the German towns of that time
for Hanse (McEvedy 1961:72).
10. Reported and
discussed in Soviet media since the early 1980s, and subject to constant
(futile) reform efforts such as campaigns against alcoholism.
11. This account
of the events taking place during the Singing Revolution is based on Pär
Lindströms book Att resa i Estland. Historia, sevärdheter
och restips.
12. The proverb
is part of newer Estonian folklore, and probably originates from the Soviet
Period.
13. This only
partly reflected historical facts. There were mostly foreigners who held
privileges in Estonia during these historical epochs. One example is that
only foreigners were allowed to study at the University of Tartu during
Swedish rule.
14. It used to
be hard to find baggage carts at the airport in Tallinn.
15. Estonia experienced
a major bank crisis a few years earlier. A strict reform of the bank system,
involving no financial help from the state, followed the crisis and left
the surviving Estonian banks in a relatively healthy situation. The economic
and social crisis in Russia, fall 1998, did however lead to insecurity
in Estonian banks yet again.
16. Hall uses
the term 'high context society' to distinguish between cultural differences
on a national level, this can easily be criticized by anthropologists.
I am on the other hand using his terms on a small and local environment.
17. From the Danish/Norwegian
book: En flyktning krysser sitt spor, by Aksel Sandemose. The
Jante Law refers to moral laws for the fictive village Jante and is widely
known in Norway and Denmark. The Law states in various ways, that a person
never should believe, or at least not show, that he or she is better than
anyone else.
|