The Swiss Bank Dress Code
Annoyed by that swath of skin every time your boss crosses his legs in a meeting and his slacks suddenly vault above his sock line? Bothered by the blond hair and dark roots of your co-worker down the hall? Irked by the all-too-hip five-day stubble on the twenty-something hot-shot at the next cubicle? Fear not, thee of well coiffed and charcoal colored suit wearing masses, UBS feels your pain! The Swiss bank is so exacting about its retail employees’ image and grooming habits that it released a “43-page code dispensing advice on how to impress customers with a polished appearance.”
The Swiss culture, known for its love of clocks, is not only precise in terms of its perspective on time, but it is one of the most direct cultures in terms of communication. Hence, the dress code that leaves nothing to misinterpretation. Law abiding, rule-oriented Swiss citizens may be more comfortable with an extensive guide, such as the one UBS has written, but from a cross-cultural perspective, it’s quickly construed as an overly detailed, if not intrusive, attempt to control some very private aspects of its employees’ lives. According to the code, for example, underwear must be flesh-colored.
That stubble has got to go, says UBS. Also, the tie may be a bit too wide for the morphology of his face.
So, speaking from your own cultural background, how would you react to the code? Tell us, as you assess the personal grooming habits and style of your co-workers and office, what rules might you wish to add to UBS’s opus? And, from a cross-cultural standpoint, what UBS rules might you (secretly) wish to enforce when you’re working abroad?
Adam
RW3 CultureWizard
if bank provides uniforms, such as ties, overcoat,that would be more formal. pleasant looking. If we have to spend money on clothings in order to meet bank requirements,give us burdens. we have to update our dress code all the time. ( e.g. too much washing, colour fades>> right!!
If anybody do not wear undergarments at-all, does this rule still implies? If yes how will you identify if any person wear any undergarments or not? Any rules which can not be verified, should not impose. As fer as cultural perspective concern, it depends on individual country’s social system and constitutional rule. In India no company has given such a rights to interfere any employee’s personal life.
Does bank customer comes to bank to view employees inner garments or to do business?
As a large multinational bank, UBS probably only gets a small share of its revenue from banking in Switzerland. Their Swiss execs would probably be wise to consult with some of their colleagues in other parts of Western Europe, the States, or Asia before promulgating a code like this, even if it’s intended only for staff in Switzerland.
From an intercultural perspective, this ‘rulebook’ is a good example of how a ‘low context’ society (see ET Hall for more info on high/low context, if necessary) handles information. Societies with low content tendencies, like Switzerland, often have many explicit rules and feel that much of common knowledge needs to be public, external, universally accessible, and outlined in exacting terms. Even what might seem obvious like bankers wearing dark, conservative suits or not eating a large amount of garlic before coming to work are set out as explicit rules that everyone knows to follow.
From an absurdity point of view, why mandate flesh-colored underwear (does that mean pinkish tones for whites and darker brown for blacks?) if another rule is that the underwear cannot be seen? That’s where I can see ‘undercover’ protests in the form of unseen bright orange underwear!
From a personal perspective, I enjoy polished appearances (definitely not the rule where I work in the US), and if dressing well and engaging in common courtesies is making a comeback – so much the better.
I appreciate my banker being properly dressed in business casual. Men-any color ironed khakis and a long sleeve dress shirt or bank logo polo or logo dress shirt. The other stuff is just good taste. I like black nails but would never wear black. I like long socks but do not judge the wearer by the length of his socks. Hair color should match the skin tone and facial features but how do you make it part of the dress code? If anyone knows the color of my underwear, I am dressed wrong.
Why not? If offers uniformity for frontline bankers and lady staff don’t need to worry what to wear each day.
The dress code is a fantastic idea. For starters, Swiss Banks tend to pay their employees well, as such, the employees should dress to suit that pay. A well dressed banking employee instills confidence and trust. Look at the language of the dress code, much of it is written in the way of suggestion rather than requirement. The dress codes is suggesting ways to dress with a myriad of requirements that make sense, such as clothing that isn’t too tight and fits well. That is a good rule and other financial institutions should follow the example. Other suggestions such as underwear type might seem silly but they are suggestions, and if they were requirements, how would the bank enforce it? It may not seem silly if you consider (for example) a women wearing white thin blouse and a black bra underneath. It would be incredibly tacky and unprofessional to see such a sight. As far as I’m concerned the Swiss Bank has made a move in the right direction.
Funny thing about UBS dress code handbook, is that in all my travels to Switzerland, I’ve never seen a poorly dressed banker. Come to think of it, I don’t think I’ve ever walked into a bank and thought, ‘Hey, that banker needs a shave and a better shirt.’
it is kinda ridiculous. it should be just a guideline. as personally i think, how you dress should be up to you, as long as it is formal and pleasant looking.
The dress code is an intriguing mixture of common sense and nagging, over-the-top prescriptions. As to sartorial style per se, the male dress code would be considered fitting for branch managers or mid-level accountants in the UK, not senior bankers. Any City banker worth his bonus can’t live without three-button suits, coloured shirts, cufflinks or pocket handkerchiefs. Most would avoid white T-shirts as the plague. Americans wouldn’t give up their tasseled loafers. It’s also somewhat surprising that for all its attempts at comprehensiveness the code doesn’t touch upon vexing questions like turn-ups or straight trouser bottoms, single vent or double vent jackets, double or single breasted suits. Finally, a nice sexist touch: women need approval from their manager before taking off their jacket in hot weather, but not men…
Excellent point, Tintin. I didn’t catch that bit about women needing approval until you brought it to light. Sadly, sexism still exists.