Scribd
Upload
1K views27 pages

Shipboard Situation, Informal Social Structures On Board

The document describes the results of a survey on ship crews which found that the most common nationalities represented were Filipino for both officers and other crew members, followed by Finnish for officers and other crew members. The survey also examined tour of duty lengths which varied from 3-12 months depending on the role.

Uploaded by

Christian Felix Guevarra
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
1K views27 pages

Shipboard Situation, Informal Social Structures On Board

The document describes the results of a survey on ship crews which found that the most common nationalities represented were Filipino for both officers and other crew members, followed by Finnish for officers and other crew members. The survey also examined tour of duty lengths which varied from 3-12 months depending on the role.

Uploaded by

Christian Felix Guevarra
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 27

SHIPBOARD SITUATION,

INFORMAL SOCIAL
STRUCTURES ON BOARD
CHAPTER 3
OBJECTIVES
 Describe common informal
structures with multicultural
crews;
 Explain why informal social

structures need to be recognized


and allowed for;
 Describe actions to improve
SKS DELTA
SHIPBOARD SITUATION
SHIPBOARD SITUATION
SOCIAL STRUCTURES –MULTINATIONAL
CREWS
SOCIAL STRUCTURES –MULTINATIONAL
CREWS
SHIPBOARD SITUATION
Why Shipping Worldwide Preferred a Mixed
Crews?

 Crew cost about 20-40% savings


 Recruitment is a problem in

developed countries
 Competency
Common Structures of
Multicultural Crews
 Single national crew
 Full Filipino crew

 Composition of two different nationalities


 Russian Federation and Republic of Korea

 Filipinos and Norwegians

 Filipinos and Danes


 Greeks and Filipinos

 Multinational crew
 Filipino, Polish, Indians, others
Advantages of Multicultural Crew
 Crewmembers use different intellectual processes and
patterns.
 Customers can choose crewmembers with same
culture and linguistic.
 Captain’s authority may challenge
 Excellent staff can be recruited
 Crewmembers knowledge of the world will improved;
 Can influenced to improved safety;
 Support to countries for remittances.
Examples of Advantages of Multicultural crew

 Sampson & Zhao (2003) indicated that working


with persons from different kinds of cultures
increases safety, as it creates a social distance,
tolerance and respect among people from different
nationalities and makes it easier to form especially
professional relationships on board. Some crew
members also stated that a multinational crew
increased cultural understanding and racial
tolerance (Sampson & Zhao 2003).
Problems or Effects of National Culture on
Maritime Safety

 Communication
 Linguistic skills
 Power relations on board
 Discrimination and racism
 Leisure and recreation
 Management skills of senior officers
 Long-term orientation
 Power Distance,
 Collectivism,
 Uncertainty Avoidance,
 Masculinity
Example of Masculinity on Maritime Safety

 Lu et al. (2012) assume that the higher the


masculinity level in a culture, the higher the
probability of human failures. Factors such as
saving one’s face, shame and respect for social
status are seen to have a negative relation to work
safety.
Examples: Long Term Orientation
 if a person’s Long term orientation is high, it weakens the
relationship between collectivism and human failures in
container shipping: high collectivism will lead to fewer
human failures experienced by seafarers,

 Filipinos as an example. They score high degrees in


collectivism, being more group oriented and co-operative,
whereas the Chinese culture relies on a high power distance
and organizational hierarchy and face-saving. Seafarers
from lower power distance cultures participate in
contributing to a safer work environment and risk reporting.
Example of collectivism/individualism on maritime
safety

 When comparing Norwegians and Filipinos, Norwegians see work as a


value and highlight individualism, whereas a Filipino, originating from a
highly collectivistic culture, sees work as a means to support the family and
community, which leads to fewer risks from them compared to their
northern colleagues.

 A stronger social network among the Filipinos also leads to better mental
health. They discovered that Filipinos encounter less occupational accidents
than Danish seafarers. They also found differences in the physical abilities
of the two groups. The Danes, for example, are more often overweight,
which leads to a significant amount of back problems. They draw a
conclusion that a seafarer from the Philippines has a higher risk of losing
his job due to an accident and may for that reason be willing to avoid
potential risk situations to a greater extent than his Danish colleague
Example of Power Distance on Maritime Safety

 Theotokas & Progoulaki (2007) studied showed


that the Greeks, is more difficult to cooperate with
people from cultures with a power distance lower
than their own, such as Russians, since they feel
that they might question their position and
behavior. The Greeks also had problems with
communication, language, customs and religion.
The study indicated that mixed crews can be a risk
if they are not properly supported
Uncertainty Avoidance
 Mårtensson (2006) found out that people from
cultures with higher power distance, high
uncertainty avoidance and high individualism score
positively in terms of safety and are therefore safer
employees. He states that if a seafarer comes from
cultures with high uncertainty avoidance, they are
more likely to follow orders and standard operating
procedure
Actions to Improve Cross-Cultural
Relationship
 Communication – language skill should be
developed both verbal and non-verbal
communication.
 Understanding the key dimensions in cultural

differences
 Learning skills to adapt and understands other

cultures.
 Self-awareness
Nationalities of officers and other crew The survey
included 2530 officers and 3507 other crew members
in 453 ships
 . Seafarers presented 48 different nationalities in total.
 The largest group of officers was Finnish (17 %,),
 second largest group Philippines (15 %) and
 third largest Russians (14 %).
 Ukrainian (9 %),
 Dutch (6 %),
 Estonian (7 %),
 Polish (6 %),
 Swedish (4 %) and
 German (4 %).
 Other nationalities composed each less than 4 %
Nationalities of officers and other crew The survey
included 2530 officers and 3507 other crew members in 453 ships

 The largest group of other crew by nationality was


 Philippines (48 %) and
 second largest group Finnish (14 %).
 According to Galam (2011), in Japanese and Greek ships about 40
% were Filipinos, which is in the order to the results of this survey.
 The third largest group Russian compose only 5 % of other crew
members.

In other words, Philippinos and Finnish dominate other crew


members when looked at the nationalities. Dispersion in
nationalities of other crew members isn’t as wide as it is in officers
Summary of Survey on Ship Crews
 Survey on multinational crews
 Philippines ( major group both officers and other crew)
 Finnish (2nd)
 Russian
 Ukrainian
 India
 Polish
 Estonian
 Others
Survey on Ship Crews (Tour of Duty)

 Ratings ( 9 months, 1 year, 6 months)


 Senior officers (per voyage, 3 – 4 months)
 Others (12 months)
LIST OF NATIONALITIES
 Austrian Czech Indian Myanmar Slovak Belgian
 Danish Indonesian Norwegian Spanish Belorussian
 Dutch Italian Pakistani Swedish British Estonian
Jamaican Peruvian Swiss Bulgarian Finnish
Japanese Philippines Turkish
LIST OF NATIONALITIES
 Canadian French Kiribatian Polish Ukrainian Cape
Verde Georgian Latvian Portuguese Uruguayan
Chilean German Lithuanian Romanian Vietnamese
Chinese Ghanaian Malaysian Russian Croatian
Icelandic Montenegrin Singaporean
ASSESSMENT
 Answer exercise no. 3.1 pages 26

You might also like