The partners at the city's largest law firm were concerned over how to deal with a cultural issue that had emerged between a client and the firm. Lois Rich, the CEO of a mid-sized business which was retaining a law firm for the first time, was concerned about the person the firm assigned to represent her case. It was delegated to a young woman lawyer who wore a hijab, a flowing scarf which covered her head and shoulders. She was the first in her family to be native-born in her new home country, yet she proudly carried on the family's cultural tradition of wearing the hijab. She valued wearing the hijab and wore it every day, all day. CEO Rich made it clear she was opposed to having a lawyer representing her while dressed in this attire, partly because the attire could attest to the individual's religious beliefs. Even though the case was about intellectual property rights and patent infringement, the client felt that a jury could be affected by seeing the clothing. In order to please the client, a law firm representative offered to reassign the case, but the lawyer originally assigned took issue with this solution from a professional point of view and threatened her own litigation against the firm should such action be taken. Others within the firm observed the dynamics of this cultural difference signified by the apparel. Some were witnessing this type of communication conflict for the first time. Reactions were wide ranging and included support for the client, neutrality, disgust with the firm for putting business ahead of cultural biases, surprise that the firm was not standing behind the lawyer/employee, and a recommendation to decline this client's business. 1. In terms of global business communication, what does this case help teach us? 2. Did each party have an open mind and work through any differences? 3. An individual's general appearance is a strong nonverbal communicator, both within a culture and across cultures. Numerous researchers have shown that an individual's overall appearance in the workplace has an impact on how others evaluate that person's work-related behavior. The choices people make regarding how they clothe and groom themselves communicates powerfully on a nonverbal level." From a communication point of view, what pre-existing ideas were evident in the situation with the lawyer? What communication process could have helped the parties recover from a situation of cultural intolerance? 4. Why did this pre-existing cultural stereotype hurt rather than help communication situations? 5. What could the law firm do in general to reduce such situations in the future? What can be done when cultural differences are identified?