Rumi once wrote: “Be a lamp, or a lifeboat, or a ladder. Help someone’s soul heal. Walk out of your house like a shepherd.” His words remind us that hospitality is never a one-way act but a practice of reciprocity.
Imagine a guest arriving at a home. The host prepares tea, offering it with warmth. The guest accepts it with gratitude, showing care for the gesture. Without both acts, the giving and the receiving, the moment of hospitality would lose its meaning. Migration works in much the same way. True integration requires generosity from the host and responsibility from the guest. (Grabowska et al., 2025).
For decades, integration policy has focused on what host societies should provide: housing, jobs, language classes, and access to services. These remain vital. Yet, far less attention has been given to the responsibilities of migrants themselves as to how they engage with, respect, and participate in the culture of their new home.
Integration is not about assimilation or erasing heritage. It is about learning to share social space with mutual respect. When cultural orientation is overlooked, migrants risk remaining on the margins, and host societies risk resentment. Both sides lose (Grzymala-Kazlowska, 2018).
Everyday miscommunication often lies at the heart of tension between migrant and host communities. A gesture that signals respect in one culture may look evasive in another. A silence intended as politeness may be heard as arrogance. Small misunderstandings whether around body language, forms of address, workplace expectations, or social norms can easily be misread as disrespect (Bhatti, 2023; ResearchGate, 2025).
Recent studies confirm that these missteps matter. Agyeiwaah (2025) finds that migrant workers often struggle with inclusion in workplaces not because of ability, but because of mismatched expectations and communication styles, leading to poorer well-being. Chatrath and Hack-Polay (2024) show that tensions can even arise between longer-settled immigrant groups and newcomers in the UK, with misunderstandings over rights, norms, and responsibilities sparking workplace conflict.
Nonverbal cues are especially fraught. A study on cultural differences in nonverbal communication shows how eye contact, personal space, or gestures can carry opposite meanings across cultures (ResearchGate, 2025). What one migrant considers respectful may be interpreted by colleagues as aloofness or disinterest. Without cultural orientation, these innocent differences harden into mistrust.
The Migration Observatory (2024) reports that discrimination against migrants in the UK is often triggered by accent, foreign qualifications, or behaviour perceived as “out of place.” These are not always signs of hostility, but of communication breakdowns. Better-designed integration policies, combining language with cultural training and dialogue, could reduce these triggers before they escalate into lasting mistrust.
Case evidence shows that such outcomes are avoidable. Norway’s Introduction Programme gives cultural orientation equal status to language training, offering up to two years of combined courses in civic education, norms, and everyday practices. Evaluations reveal that participants not only gain employment faster but also report smoother relationships with neighbours, schools, and local services. The programme also funds municipalities to foster interaction, showing that integration is most successful when it is reciprocal.
Classic and contemporary research reinforces the case for cultural orientation.
Berry’s acculturation model identifies four pathways for migrants’ assimilation, separation, marginalisation, and integration. Of these, integration, where heritage is maintained while migrants actively engage with the host culture, consistently produces the best outcomes for mental health and belonging (Berry, 1997).
This duality is echoed in Phinney’s work on ethnic identity, which finds that bicultural identity (balancing heritage and host cultures) strengthens self-esteem and reduces conflict. Without exposure to host culture, however, identity formation can stall (Phinney, 1990; Phinney, 2001).
More recently, Huang (2025) demonstrates that migrants who feel able to adopt host culture while preserving their own report lower stress and stronger belonging. Importantly, this effect depends on the perception of choice; when orientation feels imposed, resistance is more likely.
Governments are beginning to respond. The OECD (2024) notes that many countries are embedding cultural and civic orientation courses into integration pathways, often making them compulsory. Early evaluations show that these programmes improve employment prospects and participation in society.
At the same time, research warns against treating integration as a one-sided duty. Grabowska et al. (2025) call for “reciprocal integration,” emphasising that migrants and host societies must both adapt for cohesion to emerge. This resonates with Allport’s (1954) contact hypothesis, which shows that structured interaction under equal conditions reduces prejudice. Without cultural knowledge, however, contact can fuel mistrust instead.
Drawing on this evidence, a forward-looking integration policy should:
- Embed cultural orientation alongside language training
OECD (2024) evidence shows that civic and cultural courses improve employment and participation. Language without culture leaves migrants unable to fully navigate institutions and communities. - Balance obligation with choice
Huang (2025) demonstrates that cultural adoption is most beneficial when migrants feel it is voluntary. Programmes should encourage participation without coercion. - Co-design with migrant communities
Grabowska et al. (2025) emphasise reciprocal integration. Involving migrants in design ensures programmes reflect real needs and avoid assimilationist perceptions. - Foster dialogue with host communities
Allport (1954) and Bhatti (2023) show that prejudice declines when groups interact on equal terms. Orientation should include opportunities for exchange so learning flows both ways. - Monitor and adapt policies
Scholten and van Breugel (2018) show integration works best when adapted locally and regularly evaluated. Success should be measured not only by employment, but also by belonging and trust.
Belonging is built when generosity from the host meets responsibility from the guest. Miscommunication should not be allowed to harden into mistrust. The evidence is clear: cultural orientation is not symbolic but practical, reducing everyday friction and building stronger communities.
Embedding cultural learning alongside language, ensuring flexibility, involving migrants in design, fostering dialogue, and evaluating outcomes can transform settlement into genuine community.
In an age of growing diversity, cultural orientation is the missing half of integration and the bridge to true belonging.
References
Agyeiwaah, E. (2025) ‘Struggles of migrant workers in achieving workplace inclusion and implications for psychological well-being’, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 33(4), pp. 756–774. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09669582.2025.2491695 (Accessed: 14 September 2025).
Allport, G.W. (1954) The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Available at: https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1954-06736-000 (Accessed: 14 September 2025).
Berry, J.W. (1997) ‘Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation’, Applied Psychology, 46(1), pp. 5–34. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.1997.tb01087.x (Accessed: 14 September 2025).
Bhatti, A. (2023) ‘Communication and miscommunication in multilingual contexts’, Journal of Research and Reflections in Education, 17(1), pp. 1–14. Available at: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1414598.pdf (Accessed: 14 September 2025).
Chatrath, A. and Hack-Polay, D. (2024) ‘Intra-migrant group conflict in UK workplaces: between established immigrants and newer arrivals’, Journal of Migration and Integration Studies, 22(3), pp. 411–432. Available at: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44282-024-00064-6 (Accessed: 14 September 2025).
Grabowska, I., Christodoulou, D., Hedberg, C., Ivanova, O., Janta, B., Koikkalainen, S., Manahl, C. and Rydgren, J. (2025) ‘Young migrants, “integration” and the local: critical reflections from European stakeholders’, Comparative Migration Studies, 13(5). Available at: https://comparativemigrationstudies.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40878-025-00454-y (Accessed: 14 September 2025).
Grzymala-Kazlowska, A. (2018) ‘From connecting to anchoring: Adaptation and “settlement” of Polish migrants in the UK’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 44(2), pp. 252–269. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2017.1341713 (Accessed: 14 September 2025).
Huang, Y. (2025) ‘Finding the link of acculturation: the impact of perceived cultural adoption on perceived stress’, Frontiers in Psychology. Available at: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12273036/ (Accessed: 14 September 2025).
Migration Observatory (2024) Migrants and discrimination in the UK. University of Oxford. Available at: https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/migrants-and-discrimination-in-the-uk/ (Accessed: 14 September 2025).
OECD (2024) International Migration Outlook 2024. Paris: OECD Publishing. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/2024/11/international-migration-outlook-2024_c6f3e803/ (Accessed: 14 September 2025).
Phinney, J.S. (1990) ‘Ethnic identity in adolescents and adults: Review of research’, Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), pp. 499–514. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.499 (Accessed: 14 September 2025).
Phinney, J.S. (2001) ‘Ethnic identity, immigration, and well-being: An interactional perspective’, Journal of Social Issues, 57(3), pp. 493–510. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00225 (Accessed: 14 September 2025).
ResearchGate (2025) Cultural differences in nonverbal communication. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/391050068_Cultural_Differences_in_Nonverbal_Communication (Accessed: 14 September 2025).
Scholten, P. and van Breugel, I. (2018) Mainstreaming integration governance: New trends in migrant integration policies in Europe. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77991-1 (Accessed: 14 September 2025).
