|
In the summer of 2001, I decided to work at a restaurant as a line
chef. After I was interviewed for the position, Mark Hayes, an American
born chef with a full resume of culinary accomplishments, hired me.
After receiving the position, I attended the first day with an
understanding that the other line cooks would be like Mark. But I was
blind to the world as I realized that I would be working directly with
Mexican immigrants. Growing up in a predominately English-speaking
neighborhood, I was unsure of how to react. Here comes a seventeen
year-old kid, with little to no experience, about to work with six
other Spanish-speaking men from Mexico. I was incredibly intimidated as
my boss Mark introduced me to Luis. Luis spoke very little English. I
struggled with what he said and we were really mostly communicating
through gestures. I felt very out of place, as it was difficult for me
to fit in with these other guys. I talked with my boss, Mark about the
situation and he explained some things. He reassured me that everything
was going to be ok and that I would just have to hang in there and do
my best to fit in.
As the night progressed, I tried to pick up as much
as I could (learning the plate settings and dressings) in silence. We
closed early because it was slow and I was home by eleven o'clock. I
saw my native Spanish-speaking father at home and told him how
everything went. He was discouraged to hear that things had not gone
well. I explained to him the situation that I was in, being intimidated
by these Mexican men. He told me to use my Spanish, which I had been
studying for the past four years in high school. I do not know why I
did not think of that earlier. I thought that if I would have used my
Spanish with them that it would be insulting.
I went to work the next day with an open mind. As I walked in and
got dressed, I made it a point to talk to Mark about the concerns I
had. Mark was more than willing to help me in my situation. I made it a
point to mention my Spanish experience and willingness to practice and
interact with the other line cooks in Spanish. Mark was ecstatic to
hear about my speaking ability. He encouraged and supported this new
idea. I too was finally encouraged and able to interact with my
coworkers. I began to speak in Spanish with Mariano, another line cook
who was bilingual. I explained to him in both English and Spanish my
situation and the intimidation I was experiencing and he laughed and
told me not to worry. Mariano became my mentor and I began to rely on
him to answer questions that arose as time went on.
Looking back, I realize that it was foolish of me not to have used
my Spanish from the start. I was being hard headed by not practicing my
Spanish from the start. As a result of my experience with the other
workers, I have learned to never hesitate to use Spanish.
Looking at my social behavior from a behavioral theoretical
perspective, it evident that my behavior was largely determined by the
possible consequences of the situation. Ignoring what I could have been
thinking in this instance would put focus on the behavior based on
stimuli and response. The stimuli of my environment at work were the
Mexican immigrant workers I was surrounded by as well as the pressures
of my first day on the job with my boss watching over me. In response
to this environment, I was reluctant to use my Spanish skills and
attempted to get by working in silence. The reinforcement that
encouraged me to open up and actually speak to the other workers came
from talking the problem over with my boss. My boss supported and
encouraged me communicating with the workers, which strengthened my
confidence and willingness to speak Spanish in the future at work.
Later on, speaking Spanish to my coworkers became an operant behavior.
I was able to interact with them at work and better my skills in the
kitchen with their help. Through observational learning experiences, I
learned how to interact by watching others. However, this theoretical
perspective views people as being very passive. I was not passive in
this situation because I demonstrated a desire to learn and communicate
with the workers. Behaviorists also believe that stimuli and responses
can be connected without 'reference to inner mental considerations' yet
a weakness of this is the fact that they do not explain how or why
people react to particular stimuli and not others. I disagree with the
behaviorists that a person's own account of their mental processes do
not help us understand that person's behavior.
An opposing theoretical perspective, the cognitive perspective,
focuses on what people are thinking and how they are actively
interpreting stimuli. Seeing my situation from a cognitive theoretical
perspective would emphasize that one could not understand my behavior
without understanding my mental processes. Cognitive theorists do not
think that people respond automatically to their environment, so my
behavior would have depended on how I perceived and thought about my
working environment. My coworkers could have perceived me with the same
schema as that of a typical seventeen year-old in today's society. They
may have taken one look at me and had thoughts of inexperience,
immaturity, and ignorance come to mind. While I could have been
thinking that they were uneducated or unmotivated upon first glance as
schemas that people may hold as pertaining to immigrants. And my
cognitions could have led me to believe that I should not attempt to
speak Spanish to these workers because they were fluent and had
experience working together. However, cognitive theorists believe that
the objective and external environment is not enough to understand
social behavior. Therefore I actively received and processed sensory
input and was able to engage in decision-making and problem solving
that helped me become able to work with and speak to my coworkers. I
had to see past the schemas that can lead to stereotypical thinking.
Another weakness of the cognitive perspective is that there is no real
or exact way to measure thoughts. People may be unreliable reporters of
their own mental processes.
Finally, the structural theoretical perspective offers an approach
to interpreting how active individuals can be in shaping social
interaction. The role theory looks at the behavioral expectations
placed on certain positions of everyone in my situation. The socially
defined roles affect not just behavior, but also beliefs and attitudes.
I, as a new worker at the restaurant, felt that the other workers had
authority over me in that they had been previously trained and had more
experience working in the kitchen. I thought that I would need to learn
from my boss and my coworkers about how the place operated before I
could be of any service to them. In my role as a new worker, I was
intimidated to speak up and was working in fear or making mistakes. I
could not speak the Spanish I had been taught in school initially
because I did not see myself on the same level as the native
Spanish-speakers, I did not feel confident or capable enough in my
position to do so. According to this perspective I would be seen as
very passive as it often sees people in fulfilling their roles. Yet,
this perspective cannot explain those who do not fulfill the
expectations society holds with particular roles. Another weakness of
this perspective is that it can claim roles to be 'static' or not
subject to change, when in fact, roles can and often do change over
time. Also there are often conflicts between roles that are problematic
to this perspective.
I feel that the structural theoretical perspective best explains
my social behavior. It showed how my social behavior and views were
shaped by the roles designated by society. The role each person had in
my situation impacted my behavior as well as thoughts, attitudes, and
beliefs. My nonaggressive behavior on the first day of work was a
result of my particular social position (an inexperienced, new teenage
worker who did not have the same background as my coworkers). After
coming to terms with the fact that I had a solid background in speaking
Spanish, I learned that its one thing to complain about a difficult
situation but a completely different one to make a positive experience
out of that situation.
|
|
|
(0 vote)