During a recent conversation with Karoli Hindriks, CEO of globe trotting job website Jobbatical we discussed Theresa May's famous 'citizens of the world are citizens of nowhere' remark. It brought to mind the famous work of Geert Hofstede, who when he analyzed cultures around the world found not only considerable divergence within nations, but considerable convergence between nations. In other words, a citizen of Paris is more likely to have a common outlook with a citizen of London or Tallinn than they are a citizen of Arras, in France or Lincolnshire, in Britain, both of whom voted strongly for Marine Le Pen and Brexit respectively.
Jobbatical is interesting because it caters for just this market, the people who are globally confident and who identify as citizens of the world. The image of such folk is that they value autonomy and mobility above all else, and especially over local attachments, but is that really the case? This is the first of a two part post exploring this fascinating group, with the second piece examining the impact of mobility on innovation. First though, who are 'citizens of nowhere'?
Who are the citizens of nowhere?
A recent study from researchers at Anglia Ruskin University and Copenhagen Business School set out to examine these cosmopolitans, with participants from 14 different countries who were living and working in Amsterdam at the time of the study.
The study finds that these people, as Hofstede suggests, do have a shared identity, but it is with each other rather than with their nation of origin, or even their cultural background. That isn't to say that they denounce their upbringing, for most continue to maintain their national and ethnic cultures, but it's a part of their identity rather than their entire identity. Indeed, for most, their global identity is a badge of honor, with many revealing difficulties identifying both with their countrymen, and indeed their hosts, unless they are similarly global in outlook.
That isn't to say that the participants were not proud of their city however, and all revealed themselves to be proud 'Amsterdammers' who do very much consider it home. In that sense they are very much 'local', albeit in a slightly new way, with many having Dutch partners and with friendships with others from around the world that endure regardless of their physical location.
It's a sense of community that was very clear through my conversation with Hindriks, with Jobbatical 'alumni' a strong and robust community that look out for one another and form ties wherever they happen to be in the world.
This can undoubtedly create an 'us and them' divide within a country however, with monocultured peers looked down upon as unsophisticated and narrow-minded. In such a context, it's evident the demographic Theresa May was speaking to in her own attempt at 'in-group/out-group' representation.
International communities
Whilst cities such as London and New York have long had reputations as being 'global cities' with huge, diverse communities, the experience of Jobbatical suggests that such diversity is increasingly available in smaller cities, from Tallinn to Lisbon. It's something that the 'citizens of nowhere' strive for, with most respondents in the study framing life in monocultural environments in distinctly negative terms. Indeed, many reported enormous difficulties fitting into these communities.
This has intensified in the wake of populist movements such as Brexit, with surveys revealing that large numbers of global EU nationals are considering leaving the country due to the perceived shift in attitude. Such freedom of movement has become a clear way of life, especially among EU nationals that have grown up with such possibilities, but nationalist politics have made free movement increasingly difficult.
It suggests the lives of global citizens will be getting somewhat trickier in the coming years, and whilst politicians have derided this group as bloodsuckers with no affection for their host country, my next post will look at the implications of this reduction in migration for the innovative capabilities of society.
