Canterbury’s dairy industry and migration to the region have been intertwined since the industry’s expansion in 1992. Today, migrant workers occupy a significant proportion of Canterbury’s dairy industry – but what is this proportion? What kind of teams are operating in Canterbury? What are the realities of working in or leading multicultural teams?
This research took two stages; analysis of secondary census data (2013 – 2023) and semi-structured interviews with 32 participants from 14 countries working in Canterbury’s dairy industry. This research primarily views experiences through a migrant lens.
Canterbury’s Cultural Composition
This research finds that Canterbury is the most ethnically diverse region in New Zealand’s dairy industry, and that multicultural teams are now the norm rather than the exception. At 36% of the workforce from overseas, against the Waikato’s 18% and Taranaki’s 8%, Canterbury is structurally different to other regions. This does not account for who occupies worker roles compared to farm ownership and management roles. As such, training and support should be adapted specifically for this workforce.
The shift has been rapid. Between 2013 and 2023, New Zealand European representation fell from 74% to 57%, while 20 other ethnic groups grew to fill the gap. The Filipino workforce grew the fastest, from 6% to nearly 16%, to become the second largest group in Canterbury’s dairy workforce.
Culture
Cultural differences are embedded in daily life in Canterbury’s dairy industry. All participants could identify possible cultural differences, though few could identify why they occurred. Despite the range of nationalities in the workforce, most differences raised related to Filipino workers. Given the growth of the Filipino population in NZ dairy farming and differing cultural values and norms compared to other ethnicities, this might not be surprising.
Personality, culture, language, visa insecurity and structural foundations all shaped how the migrant workforce behaved. Which was at play was rarely clear to someone observing through their own cultural frame alone. What looks like a personality trait, such as being shy, a lack of initiative or a reluctance to speak up, may be a different cultural frame, shaped by hierarchy, values such as hiya, language confidence, or visa insecurity. Understood properly, these are simply a different starting point a manager can look to bridge – an extension of current industry advice on “knowing your people”.
Functioning multicultural teams were the norm in this research, though varying levels of friction were present. Whether those teams were functioning or thriving, however, was a different story. Thriving teams were underpinned by an environment where people were retained, worked safely, spoke up, understood each other, and found ways to adapt around cultural and language barriers. What set those teams apart was that cultural and language differences were acknowledged, and adaption was present on both sides – not simply the migrant workforce alone.
Literature defines this as “cultural intelligence”, which many in Canterbury’s dairy industry have subconsciously developed through managing or working within multicultural teams.
Yet, cultural intelligence has many forms, and the more we can adopt, the better we can work in and manage our teams:
- Drive – do I want to learn about my team’s cultures?
- Knowledge – do I understand the baselines I work from and what my team works from?
- Strategy – can I read a situation and plan how to adjust how I communicate or behave for the best outcome?
- Action – do I change how I speak or behave towards different colleagues?
Language
Language carries power. Findings from this study aligned closely to global findings on non-native speakers working in multicultural teams, including how it impacts the development of interpersonal relationships and how it can make team members feel. A vital and widely used tool used to bridge different language proficiencies was WhatsApp and translation apps. This neutral strategy enables effective communication regardless of ethnicity, however, where relied upon too heavily, can negatively influence non-native speakers from improving their English: hindering the development of relationships on farm, integration into New Zealand, contributing to sub-groups forming and limiting the development of safe environments which enable speaking up. Small changes from a leader or others on the team can positively support non-native speakers; encouraging use of English in a safe and empathetic way, slowing down, saying it another way, checking understanding rather than rely on a “yes”, or actively encouraging and facilitating learning English.
Team Composition
Composition shapes what played out within a team. No two teams interviewed were the same, from monocultural teams built through networks, to multicultural teams built on values and personality. Every manager with influence over recruitment was shaping their team’s composition. Some did so in ways that aligned with proven strategies for managing multicultural teams: composing the team so a shared working language held across it, setting expectation early, or recruiting for personality over culture.
Motivators
Sacrifice, saving and hard work underpin how many people enter into Canterbury’s dairy industry. Their why? “The opportunity”. The opportunities of NZ’s dairy industry are significant enough to justify the friction of working outside someone’s native language and away from their own culture, and that trade-off shaped how people behaved in their teams.
The “Enabler”
This research identifies, and names, a role the dairy industry has so far overlooked: the “enabler”. Enablers showed up in three ways: those who translate culture and language, those who create a safe environment for people to speak up, and those whose empathy helps newcomers settle in. This is vital on teams with newcomers to the industry and New Zealand. It is less prevalent in well-established teams, where team members are well integrated or have lived in NZ for many years.
Working without title or recognition, they bridge a worker’s culture and what the farm needs, so the migrants who fill our labour gap can thrive. What unites them is cultural intelligence: the ability to read across cultures and respond to what people need. This report argues the “enabler” should be recognised, looked for in recruitment with teams of newly arrived migrants, and their traits adopted more widely. If the last decade of demographic change is any guide, the role will only become more essential.
Diversity in Canterbury’s dairy industry is now the baseline. The question is no longer whether our teams are diverse, but what more we can do to support and lead them. The more of us who can read across cultures and bridge them, the better we will lead.
Kate Tomlinson
