Purdue University
Purdue e-Pubs
Purdue CIBER Working Papers
Krannert Graduate School of Management
1-1-2003
Expatriate Assignments: Understanding the Skill,
Ability, Personality, and Behavioral Requirements
of Working Abroad
Shung J. Shin
Texas A&M University
Frederick P. Morgeson
Michigan State University
Michael A. Campion
Purdue University
Follow this and additional works at: http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/ciberwp
Shin, Shung J.; Morgeson, Frederick P.; and Campion, Michael A., "Expatriate Assignments: Understanding the Skill, Ability,
Personality, and Behavioral Requirements of Working Abroad" (2003). Purdue CIBER Working Papers. Paper 20.
http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/ciberwp/20
This document has been made available through Purdue e-Pubs, a service of the Purdue University Libraries. Please contact [email protected] for
additional information.
PURDUE-
CIBER
a
Center for Tnrernarional
· Businesses Education and Research
·--~-
ExpatriateAsslgnments: pnderstanding th~'Sldll, J\lfllity, Per:sti'riality,.~' ·
· and. Behavioral Requirements,of.·'wor,~ng A:bto·~a"·· · '·' · "'
·
--r'
---
:_'-;
ShungJlie Shin,,/ ·
A~ Univfirsity
Texas
_,,.
..
.
';;'·,,._,-.~:-;-~·
-~_/_:~~~-" -~-- ~
\
--;-
_
Frederl~k P .1\i~rgeson
Mic~iganStapi University
:-~-
-_
1\fichadA. Campion
. ' J'tm!~f ·l)JJ,iversity, ..·.
•,
.
2003-002
.
';,:_.:.--
-. ·• ..,__
.. -.. -:.-.---
•
:..:..·- -.·
Purdue Cniversin·
Kr~tnncrr Building
. ~0.1 \\7. St~lte Street
\\-'est Ltbyerte,-1?\ 4!907-205<-)
(76)) ·i96-Cl779
fax {765) "i94-l)(1-'1N
Expatriate Assignments
Running Head: EXPATRIATE WORKER AND BEHAVIORAL REQUIREMENTS
Expatriate Assignments:
Understanding the Skill, Ability, Personality, and Behavioral Requirements of Working Abroad
Shung Jae Shin
Department of Management
Lowry Mays College and Graduate School of Business
Texas A&M University
College Station, TX 77843-4221
Tel: (979) 845-0926
Fax: (979) 845-9641
e-mail: [email protected]
Frederick P. Morgeson
The Eli Broad Graduate School of Management
Michigan State University
N475 North Business Complex
East Lansing, Ml 48824-1122
Tel: (517) 432-3520
Fax: (517) 432-1111
e-mail: [email protected]
Michael A. Campion
Purdue University
Krannert Graduate School of Management
West Lafayette, IN 4 7907-1310
Tel: (765) 494-5909
Fax: (765) 494-9658
e-mail: [email protected]
Expatriate Assignments
2
Expatriate Assignments:
Understanding the Skill, Ability, Personality, and Behavioral Requirements of Working Abroad
It is often assumed that adjustment to the local working environment is essential for
expatriate assignments. As such, it is surprising there is little empirical research identifying how
skill, ability, and personality requirements might differ between expatriate and domestic jobs and
how cultural values are related to expatriate behaviors. In a large sample of professionals (N =
1,312) working in comparable jobs in 156 different countries, we found higher social and
perceptual skill requirements in expatriate jobs. In two sub-samples (n
=
420 and 468), we found
that expatriate jobs also have higher reasoning ability and adjustment and achievement
orientation personality requirements than domestic jobs. We also found that expatriate behavioral
requirements vary in theoretically meaningful ways with the host country's culture.
Expatriate Assignments
3
Expatriate Assignments:
Understanding the Skill, Ability, Personality, and Behavioral Requirements of Working Abroad
Economic globalization and the need to operate in locations around the world has become
a fact of organizational life. Typically, international operations of U.S. organizations are staffed
by a mix of employees from the host country and expatriates from the U.S. Such expatriate
assignments pose unique challenges for U.S. workers because of differences in such things as
language, cultural values, and expectations. These differences likely influence the manner in
which work is done and the underlying capabilities needed for success. Although scholars have
implicitly recognized these differences and the importance of preparing U.S. workers for foreign
assignments (Black & Mendenhall, 1990; Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985; Tung, 1981), there is still
a high failure rate for expatriate assignments (Black, Gregersen, Mendenhall, & Stroh, 1999;
Swaak, 1995; Tung, 1982). This is particularly problematic given the costs of expatriate failure,
both in terms of individual career outcomes as well as direct fmancial costs to the organization
(Adler, 1983; Black et al., 1999; Tung, 1987).
Expatriate failure usually results from failure to adapt to the new and unfamiliar working
environment (Aycan & Kanungo, 1997). There are at least three explanations for expatriates'
adaptation failures (Aycan, 1997). First, in the pre-departure stage, organizations prepare their
assignees for expatriate work. If expatriate jobs have a different profile of skill, ability, and
personality requirements than domestic jobs due to the differences in working context and
attention is not given to the differences, expatriates are likely to have unsuccessful assignments.
Unfortunately, there is little systematic empirical research that describes how these requirements
may differ between domestic and international assignments.
Second, in the post-arrival stage, when expatriate workers interact with host country
nationals (HCNs), some behaviors may be more culturally appropriate than others. That is, to
Expatriate Assignments
4
adjust to and perform expatriate work, expatriates have to engage in culturally appropriate
behaviors. If an expatriate fails to behave in culturally appropriate ways, his or her effectiveness
is likely to be reduced. By engaging in culturally appropriate behaviors, expatriates better adapt
to the new working environments. Third, organizations have a tendency to emphasize the
technical requirements of work to the exclusion of the social requirements when conducting
expatriate training. This may result in a focus on performing the work itself when adapting to the
social and cultural aspects of the work environment may be essential to successful expatriate
assignments (Dunbar, 1992; Tung, 1987). This is particularly critical in cultures that place great
importance on the social and interpersonal elements of the workplace.
To begin to examine these issues, we first investigate how skill, ability, and personality
requirements differ between domestic and international work. Second, we explore behavioral
requirements in expatriate assignments by describing and examining the relationship between
behavioral requirements and host nations' culture. By systematically examining how skill, ability,
and personality requirements differ between domestic and international assignments and how
cultural values relate to expatriate behavioral requirements, we extend the expatriate literature in
two important ways.
First, this research represents the first attempt to empirically describe how requirements
differ between domestic and international work. Although some have suggested that crosscultural skills, abilities, and personality characteristics are important for expatriate adjustment
(e.g., Black, 1990; Black & Mendenhall, 1990; Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985; Tung, 1987), few
studies actually measure these worker requirements and then match them to a comparable
domestic sample. Second, by examining whether expatriate behavioral requirements are related
to the host nation's cultural values, this study empirically tests one of the basic hypotheses of
expatriate adjustment. That is, the bulk of the expatriate literature has assumed that expatriates
Expatriate Assignments
5
are required to adjust their behaviors to be congruent with the host culture (Brewster, 1995).
However, there have been no empirical studies that actually test whether behavioral requirements
systematically vary with cultural values. We provide an empirical test of the relationship
between work behavior and culture.
How Expatriate Worker Requirements Might Differ from Domestic Worker Requirements
Researchers have argued that inadequate adjustment to the new culture is a primary cause
of high expatriate failure rates and low work performance (Kraimer, Wayne, & Jaworski, 2001;
McEvoy & Parker, 1995). Toward that end, much of the expatriate literature has focused on the
factors that impact adjustment, such as expatriates' personality (Caligiuri, 2000; Ones &
Viswesvaran, 1997, 1999), previous overseas experience (Black, 1988), pre-departure training
(Black & Mendenhall, 1990), and non-work factors (Black & Stephens, 1989; Takeuchi, Yun, &
Tesluk., 2002). Yet there have been few empirical studies examining the underlying skill, ability,
and personality requirements needed in expatriate work in order to adjust to culturally different
situations (Hechanova, Beehr, & Christiansen, 2003).
Scholars have suggested that expatriate work has different skill, ability, and personality
requirements than domestic work because of the need to adapt to differences in culture. In
particular, in reviewing the cross-culture adjustment literature, Black and Mendenhall (1990) and
Mendenhall and Oddou (1985) suggest there are three critical dimensions for expatriate
adjustment: (I) the relationship dimension, (2) the perceptual dimension, and (3) the selfdimension. The relationship dimension refers to skills related to the fostering of relationships
with host nationals. For successful expatriate adjustment, developing good relationships with
HCNs is essential (Abe & Wiseman, 1983; Hechanova et al., 2003). By maintaining proper
relatiunships with HCNs, expatriate workers are able to interact with them appropriately, to
overcome their problems, and to perform assignments effectively. Abe and Wiseman (1983)
Expatriate Assignments
6
provided evidence for the importance of establishing close relationships with HCNs in successful
expatriate adjustment. In addition, Cui, van den Berg, and Jiang (1998) found significant
relationships between communication competence, cultural empathy, social interaction, and
cross-cultural adaptation. Arvey, Bhagat, and Salas ( 1991) suggested that relationship
dimensions such as cultural empathy and interpersonal skills become important when dealing
with cultural differences. Finally, in a meta-analytic review, Hechanova et al. (2003) found that
better interpersonal skills were associated with greater adjustment to the general environment.
Although these studies do not compare skill requirements between expatriate and
domestic workers, they do imply that expatriates need to have strong social skills so they can
successfully adapt to the local culture and work through any cultural differences. This facilitates
their adjustment to the new culture and promotes positive relationships with HCNs. Given the
importance of social interaction and relationship development for cross-cultural adjustment,
expatriate work will have higher social skill requirements than domestic work.
Hypothesis 1: Expatriate work will have higher social skill requirements than U.S.
domestic work.
Mendenhall and Oddou's (1985) perception dimension refers to skills related to the
correct attribution and interpretation of host nationals' behaviors. Difficulties may arise when·
expatriates interact with HCNs who have different culturally based behaviors and beliefs.
Because expatriates' interpretations ofHCNs' behavior are based on their own cultural beliefs,
incorrect attributions or interpretations are likely to be made about HCNs' behaviors (Bochner,
1982). Furthermore, to reduce uncertainty in interpersonal relationships in an intercultural
context, it is very important for expatriates to properly interpret HCNs' behaviors (Oddou &
Mendenhall, 1984). For instance, Speitzer, McCall, and Mahoney (1997) showed that sensitivity
to cultural differences was significantly related to job performance. Also, Yiu and Saner (2000)
suggested that perceptual characteristics of expatriate managers might influence their adaptation
Expatriate Assignments
7
to new settings. In sum, perceptual skill is a basic skill that enables individuals to better
understand and interpret HCNs' behavior and cultural differences. Although this does not imply
any direct understanding of cultural differences, it does provide the basis for learning about those
cultural differences once in an international setting. In other words, expatriate workers need
perceptual skills to correctly interpret HCNs' behavior so they can reduce uncertainty in
interpersonal relations, interact efficiently with HCNs, and perform their jobs effectively. Thus,
expatriate work will have higher perceptual skill requirements than domestic work because of
culturally different contexts of international work.
Hypothesis 2: Expatriate work will have higher perceptual skill requirements than U.S.
domestic work.
Mendenhall and Oddou's (1985) self-dimension refers to the characteristics related to
self-confidence and tolerance of stress, which are closely related to individuals' ability and
personality. This includes confidence in one's ability to deal effectively with foreigners and new
surroundings (Black et al., 1999) as well as resistance to stress that results from uncertainty and
anxiety about unfamiliar situations (Chao & Sun, 1997; Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985). For
example, using a longitudinal design, Anderzen and Arnetz ( 1999) showed that expatriates
experienced increased psychosocial stress as compared with controls.
The stress literature has identified cognitive abilities as particularly important in the stress
coping process (Payne, 1994). For example, a number of studies have found a positive
relationship between cognitive failure (failures of memory, reasoning, and perception in
everyday life) and stress vulnerability (Mahoney, Dalby, & King, 1998; Matthews & Wells,
1988). In addition, it has been shown that problem-solving ability is negatively related to stress
level (Fraser & Tucker, 1997; Priester & Clum, 1993). In a similar vein, uncertainty can be
caused by an individual's inability to adequately structure or categorize information (Bunder,
1962). In turn, such perceived uncertainty may lead to intolerance of anomalies and incongruities
Expatriate Assignments
8
and a strong need for explanation of cause-and-effect-relationships (Bonaiuto, Biasi, Giannini,
Bonaiuto, & Bartoli, 1992). Thus, these kinds of reasoning abilities would be a particularly
important set of cognitive abilities for expatriate work. This suggests that expatriate work will
have higher reasoning ability requirements than domestic work because of the stress, uncertainty,
and anxiety associated with unfamiliar situations.
Hypothesis 3: Expatriate work will have higher reasoning ability requirements than U.S.
domestic work.
In terms of personality, Caligiuri (2000) found that extroversion, agreeableness, and
emotional stability were negatively related to the expatriates' desire to terminate their
assignments. Ones and Viswesvaran (1999) found that conscientiousness was perceived as the
most important personality factor for expatriate success. In addition to these broad personality
factors, Harrison, Chadwick, and Scales (1996) found that expatriates high in self-efficacy and
self-monitoring displayed greater adjustment. Arthur and Bennett ( 1995) found that flexibility
and motivation ranked second and third in importance for expatriate success after family
situation. Finally, Aycan (1997) argued that such things as willingness and commitment might
make the adjustment less difficult.
This personality research suggests that successful expatriates need to be well adjusted and
highly motivated individuals. Given the higher levels of stress and uncertainty associated with
working abroad, expatriate work involves greater adjustment-related personality requirements
than domestic work. This would include such things as self-control, stress tolerance, and
flexibility. In addition, to overcome the temptation ofleaving their expatriate assignment early
due to the difficulties associated with working in an unfamiliar and stressful environment,
expatriate work has higher achievement-orientation personality requirements. Otherwise, they
might simply give up when faced with adjusting to a difficult work environment. Thus, because
Expatriate Assignments
9
of the degree of persistence needed when working abroad, expatriate work has more achievement
orientation requirements, such as effort, persistence in the face of obstacles, and initiative.
Hypothesis 4: Expatriate work will have greater adjustment and achievement orientation
personality requirements than U.S. domestic work.
Relationships between Cultural Values and Behavioral Requirements
In addition to differences in skill, ability, and personality requirements, expatriate work is
also likely to have different behavioral requirements. This is due to the fact that cultural values
are likely to influence the appropriateness of different work behaviors. For example, Vance and
Paik (2002) found that workforces from different countries had different perceptions of
behaviors positively and negatively affecting work performance.
A variety of cross-cultural leadership studies have investigated the interaction between
managerial behavior and cultural values (Bass, 1997; Dorfman, 1996; Dorfman et al., 1997; Jung
& Avolio, 1999; Smith, Peterson, Misumi, and Bond, 1992). This research has tended to examine
the generalizability ofleadership behaviors across cultures, however, rather than focusing on the
relationship between expatriate behavior and cultural values. Put another way, this research has
focused on the consistency of managerial behaviors across cultural contexts, whereas the focus
of the present research is on how expatriate behaviors might vary along with the cultural context.
Another body of research has examined how cultural differences influence leadership
prototypes (Den Hartog et al., 1999; Gerstner & Day, 1994). For example, Gerstner and Day
(1994) asked international and American students enrolled in graduate programs to rate 59
attributes relevant to leadership. They found considerable differences in perceptions of business
leader characteristics among members of the 8 countries sampled, thus supporting the idea that
there are relationships between culture and leader traits. Den Hartog et al. ( 1999) tested whether
there are culture-specific or generalizable implicit leadership theories. With data from middlelevel managers from 60 countries, they found that perceptions of several leadership attributes
Expatriate Assignments
I0
were different among the countries. Although these studies focused on leadership prototypes and
not actual behavior, it does suggest that different behaviors would be expected to occur naturally
in societies that have different cultural values because these values reflect how the society
operates (Hofstede, 1993).
The mechanisms through which expatriate workers are influenced by cultural values can
be explained from both value/belief theory of culture (Hofstede, 1980; House, Wright, & Aditya,
1997) and social learning theory (Bandura, 1977) perspectives. According to the value theory of
culture (Hofstede, 1980, 1993), cultural values impact individual values, and individuals'
behaviors depend on the cultural values to which they are exposed. To fit in and perform their
assignment effectively, expatriates will need to behave in ways that are consistent with
prevailing cultural values. This is particularly important because expatriates typically work with
a large number ofHCNs (such as supervising a large group of employees) and working well with
these HCNs is often essential to job success (Black, 1988; Gregersen & Black, 1990).
In addition, social learning theory suggests that individuals learn from experience, and
future behaviors are guided by the consequences of past behavior (Bandura, 1977). For example,
Weiss (1977) showed how other people in the social context conditioned, in part, first-level
supervisors' work behavior. This suggests that expatriates could learn culturally appropriate and
inappropriate behaviors by observing HCNs' culturally successful behaviors. In fact, this may be
one of the most important influences on behavior given the oftentimes-extensive interaction
between expatriates and HCNs. This experience can serve to shape behavior over time, thereby
altering work behavior to be congruent with the prevailing cultural values. In other words, as
they socially learn and develop cognitive maps appropriate to the local cultural values, expatriate
behaviors will tend to follow the values emphasized by the HCNs.
Expatriate Assignments
II
Given the potential influence of culture on expatriate behavior, it is important to outline
exactly how specific values affect work behavior. Perhaps the most commonly investigated
cultural value is individualism-collectivism (Earley, 1989, 1993; Triandis, Bontempo, Villareal,
Asai, & Lucca, 1988). Individualism-collectivism is the degree to which people define
themselves as individuals or as members of groups (Hofstede, 1980; Triandis eta!., 1988).
Individualist cultures assume the importance of 'personal and family life' and the unimportance
of 'cooperative colleagues' and 'good working relations' (Singh, 1990). Cultures high in
individualism tend to emphasize calculative involvement with companies, loose ties between coworkers, self-orientation, autonomy, individual initiative, and achievement (Hofstede, 1980). On
the other hand, collectivist cultures emphasize interdependence, group embeddedness, in-group
harmony, and personalized relationships (Clugston, Howell, & Dorfman, 2000). This suggests
that individualistic cultures will emphasize more self-oriented behaviors, whereas collectivistic
cultures will focus on behaviors centered on interpersonal relationships. Consequently,
expatriates working in countries high in collectivism will focus more on relationship
development with others, and show more relationship-oriented behaviors such as coordinating
team members, encouraging and building mutual trust, respect, and cooperation among team
members, and coaching and developing others.
Hypothesis 5: Expatriates working in countries high in collectivism will focus more on
relationship-oriented behaviors than those in countries high in individualism.
Another cultural dimension likely to impact expatriate behavioral requirements is
masculinity-femininity (Hofstede, 1980). Femininity emphasizes affiliation and social
relationships and concerns for people and quality oflife, whereas masculinity assumes the
dominant values in society are assertiveness, acquisition, advancement, recognition, and less
caring for others or people. That is, masculine society's dominant values are performance,
material success, and assertiveness, whereas the dominant values in feminine societies are
Expatriate Assignments
12
quality of environment, interpersonal relationships, and concern for others (Hofstede, 1984;
Peterson et al., 1995). In particular, people in high-femininity cultures tend to be much more
concerned about working environments and caring for coworkers. This suggests that expatriates
working in countries high in femininity will engage in more communication and interactions
with others and perform more interaction-related activities.
Hypothesis 6: Expatriates working in countries high in femininity will focus more on
interaction-related behaviors than those working in countries high in masculinity.
Another cultural dimension likely to be related to expatriate behavioral requirements is
power distance. Power distance is "the extent to which the less powerful members of
organizations and institutions accept and expect that power is distributed unequally" (Hofstede,
1988, p. 10). Power inequality is more accepted in countries high in power distance than those
low in power distance (Hofstede, 200 I). With 180 managers in 5 countries, Pavett and Morris
(1995) found a negative relationship between power distance and worker participation. In
addition, Nasierowski and Mikula (1998) suggest that close supervision is more accepted (or
tolerated) by subordinates in countries high in power distance than those low in power distance.
This suggests that HCNs in cultures high in power distance would expect greater administrative
behavior, which would include managing and directing activities, general administrative
activities, and monitoring and controlling resources. Therefore, in countries high in power
distance, expatriates are likely to engage in more administrative behavior.
Hypothesis 7: Expatriates working in countries high in power distance will focus more on
administrative behaviors than those working in countries low in power distance.
Method
Sample
The sample consisted of I ,312 mid-career professional employees in an international
agency of the United States Government. The respondents had all been on at least one expatriate
Expatriate Assignments
13
assignment, as well as working domestically. Many of the respondents have been on multiple
expatriate assignments, with the majority of the sample having a similar amount of expatriate
experience (given their similar career stage). These employees were generalists who were
working in five different career specialties in 156 different countries, including the United States.
These specialties involve working with the U.S. and foreign public, government officials, and
members of the business community to fulfill the mission of the U.S. government. These five
specialties can be thought of as five distinctly different jobs, with unique tasks and duties (one of
the career specialties is a generalist combination of the other four). The distribution of
individuals in the different career specialties was similar across domestic and international jobs.
Employees received questionnaires asking about the skill, ability, personality and
behavioral requirements of work. All respondents received skill and behavioral requirement
surveys (as described below). Because of survey length concerns, a subset of this group also
received either the ability or personality requirements surveys. Useable surveys were returned by
64% of the employees. Although some aspects of these jobs might vary from location to location,
they have common job descriptions in the agency's operations manual. As such, the jobs held by
these individuals (within a career specialty) are functionally equivalent.
Measures
Two different measurement sources were used. For the measurement of expatriate skill,
ability, and personality, and behavioral requirements we used survey data collected from the
employees. For the survey, job analysis consultants along with organizational representatives and
subject matter experts chose to use skill, ability, work style, and generalized work activity
surveys from the Occupational Information Network (O*NET). O*NET was developed for the
Department of Labor as a comprehensive job analysis system designed to replace the Dictionary
of Occupational Titles (Peterson et al., 200 I). It contains a variety of domains that describe the
Expatriate Assignments
14
world of work and were designed to be applicable to all jobs. The scales used in the present
research were selected from O*NET because they appropriately operationalize the hypotheses
developed earlier. The scales used were identical to the scales outlined in Peterson, Mumford,
Borman, Jeanneret, and Fleishman (1999) except where noted. For the measurement of cultural
values, we used Hofstede's (1988) 47 national and 3 regional cultures' relative indexes. Three of
the original 53 national indexes had no sample and were excluded.
Tasks Performed. In order to determine whether domestic and international jobs were the
same, information on the tasks performed was collected for each career specialty. This resulted
in five distinct career specialty task surveys. These surveys have to be considered separately
because the tasks across career specialties are different. A task level comparison enables a direct
assessment of the similarity of domestic and international jobs. Each survey contained between
42-52 different task dimensions, with between 3-26 tasks per dimension. This resulted in surveys
that ranged from between 246-319 individual ratings on the time spent performing the tasks.
Incumbents were instructed to rate the time spent performing the tasks in his or her current
position on a 5-point response scale, where I = much less time than most tasks and 5 = much
more time than most duties. The reliability estimate averages for the five career specialties
ranged from .84 to .91.
Skill Requirements. The I ,312 mid-career workers rated the level of skills required in the
job on 7-point Likert-type scales. Behavioral anchors were provided for the high, medium, and
low points of the scale. For example, the anchors for active listening are, "presiding as judge in a
comvlex legal disagreement" (high), "answering inquiries regarding credit references" (medium),
and "taking customers' orders" (low). Social skills are defined as the skills needed for
developing and maintaining good interpersonal relationship;. The social skill measure was
comprised of five related skills: Coordination (adjusting actions in relation to others' actions),
Expatriate Assignments
15
persuasion (persuading others to approach things differently), negotiation (bringing others
together and trying to reconcile differences), instructing (teaching others how to do something),
and service orientation (actively looking for ways to help people). Internal consistency reliability
was .77. Perceptual skills are defined as the skills for correctly perceiving reasons and causes of
other's behavior in order to make correct attributions. The perceptual skill measure was
comprised of three related skills: Active listening (listening to what other people are saying and
asking questions as appropriate), monitoring (assessing how well one is doing when learning or
doing something), and social perceptiveness (being aware of others' reactions and understanding
why they react the way they do). This measure was created by taking the social perceptiveness
item from the social skills domain, and the active listening and monitoring items from the
process skills domain. Internal consistency reliability was .69.
Ability Requirements. The level of reasoning abilities required in the job was rated by 420
employees on 7-point Likert-type scales. Behavioral anchors were provided for the high and low
points of the scale. For example, anchors for inductive reasoning are, "diagnosing a disease using
the results of many different lab tests" (high), and "determining clothing to wear on the basis of
the weather report" (low). Reasoning ability is defined as an individual capability for making
assumptions, interpreting, and making sense of situations or causal relationships. The reasoning
ability measure was composed of seven related abilities: fluency of ideas (coming up with a
number of ideas about a given topic), originality (coming up with unusual and clever ideas),
problem sensitivity (recognizing there is a problem), deductive reasoning (applying general rules
to specific problems to come up with logical answers), inductive reasoning (combining separate
pieces of information to form general conclusion), information ordering (following a given rule
in order to arrange things in a certain order), and categol) flexibility (the ability to generate rules
Expatriate Assignments
16
so that each rule tells how to group a set ofthings in a different way). Internal consistency
reliability was .85.
Personality Requirements. The level of personality characteristics required in the job was
rated by 468 employees on?,point Likert,type scales. Behavioral anchors were provided for the
high, medium, and low points of the scale. For example, anchors for stress tolerance are, "the job
requires being extremely calm and tolerant of stress imposed by other people or by
circumstances" (high), "the job requires being moderately calm and tolerant of stress imposed by
other people or by circumstances" (medium), and "this job does not involve much stress" (low).
Adjustment is defined as being calm, composed, and rational even when confronted with
unfamiliar and stressful situations (Borman, Kubisiak, & Schneider, 1999). The adjustment
measure consisted of three related personality requirements: self,control (maintaining
composure, keeping emotion, controlling anger, and avoiding aggressive behavior), stress
tolerance (dealing with high stress situations), and flexibility (being open to change). Internal
consistency reliability was .78. Achievement orientation is defmed as valuing working hard,
persisting in the face of obstacles, and wanting to get ahead (Borman et al., 1999). The
achievement orientation measure was composed of three related characteristics:
achievement/effort (maintaining challenging goals and exerting effort), persistence (persistence
in the face of obstacles on the job), and initiative (wiiiing to take on job responsibilities and
challenges). Internal consistency reliability' was .82.
Behavioral Requirements. The 1,312 employees rated the frequency of their work
behaviors on a ?"point scale that asks, "How often is this activity performed on this job?" Scale
anchors ranged from "hourly or more often" to "once per year or less." The frequency of work
behavior reflects the kinds of behaviors required in the job. The relationship,oriented behavior
measure was comprised of five related items: coordinating teams (coordinating members of a
Expatriate Assignments
I7
work group to accomplish tasks), developing and building teams (encouraging and building
mutual trust, respect, and cooperation among team members), teaching others (identifying
educational needs and teaching others), coaching and developing others (identifying
development needs of others and coaching or otherwise helping others to improve their
knowledge or skills), and providing consultation and advice to others. Internal consistency
reliability was .80.
The interaction-related behavior measure was comprised of eight related activities:
Interpreting the meaning of information for others, communicating with supervisors, peers, or
subordinates, communicating with persons outside the organization, establishing and maintaining
interpersonal relationships, assisting .and caring for others, selling or influencing others,
resolving conflicts and negotiating with others, and performing for or working directly with the
public. Internal consistency reliability was .82. The administrative behavior measure was
composed of three activities: managing (providing guidance, direction and motivation to
subordinates), performing administrative activities, and monitoring and controlling resources.
The administrative behavior measure was the same as reported in Peterson et a!. (I 999), except
for the addition of "managing" and the exclusion of "staffing organizational units." We included
the managing item from the relationship-oriented behavior measure because it concerned
providing instructions and monitoring the behavior of subordinates. We did not include the
staffmg behavior item because this is not something that most respondents in this sample
perform and it is not a day-to-day administrative activity as the other items in this scale are.
Internal consistency reliability was .66.
Confirmatory Factor Analyses. Given the intercorrelations among the skill, personality,
and behavioral requirement measures (see Tublt I), a series of confirmatory factor analyses
(CFAs) were conducted to examine discriminant validity. These analyses were conducted
Expatriate Assignments
18
separately for each type of measure (e.g., skill, personality, and work behavior) because different
subsets of respondents provided the measures. We developed a series of !-factor, 2-factor, and 3factor models standing in nested sequence (depending on the hypothesized factor structure of the
measures) and conducted chi-square difference tests to test which model better fit the data
(Kelloway, 1998; Netemeyer, Johnston, & Burton, 1990).
We found that the hypothesized factor structures provided a better fit to the data than any
reduced model. For example, a 2-factor (social and perceptual) model of skill requirements
provided a better fit than a !-factor model (X2d;ffeconce0) = 105.03). A 2-factor (achievement
orientation and adjustment) personality requirements model provided better fit than a !-factor
model (ld;ffmnce(l) = 36.05). Finally, a 3-factor (relationship-oriented, interaction-related, and
administrative) work behavior model provided a better fit than a 2-factor model (combining
relationship-oriented behavior and interaction-related behavior; x' d;m,ronce( I) = 181.51) and a !factor model (after constraining all interfactor correlations to equali.O; lMreconce(3)
=
210.27).
Notwithstanding the intercorrelations among the measures, these CFAs indicate that the
measures should not be combined. The full results of the CFAs are available on request.
Cultural Values. Hofstede's (1980, 1988) dimensions for work values are probably the
most frequently used in cross-cultural studies (Dorfman et al., 1997; Gerstner & Day, 1994;
Ron en & Shenkar, 1985). Although there has been a great deal of debate about these measures
(see Hofstede, 2002; Spector & Cooper, 2002), they have shown acceptable validity and have
been empirically supported and widely used (Dorfman & Howell, 1988; Elangovan, 1995;
Hofstede, 1980; Peterson et al., 1995; Shackleton & Ali, 1990). Furthermore, several previous
studies have supported the use of Hofstede's cultural index (Merritt, 2000; Smith, Dugan,
Peterson, & Leung, 1998). We employed national scores for Hofstede's (1988) cultural
dimensions as proxies for cultural influence on expatriate behaviors. Each dimension indicates
Expatriate Assignments
19
the extent to which certain values characterize a culture. If a nation is high in individualism,
masculinity, or power distance, the national scores for individualism-collectivism, masculinityfemininity, or power distance are high.
Analysis Strategy. To test Hypothesis I, 2, 3, and 4, we conducted analyses of covariance
(ANCOVAs) to examine mean differences between domestic and intemationaljobs. These
hypotheses are tested at the individual level. Because the work requirements might depend on
career specialty (and there are five different career specialties in this organization), we included
career specialty as a covariate. As mentioned, all jobs were at the same level (mid-career
workers). To test the relationships between cultural values and expatriate behavior, we examined
the correlations of national cultures' index with scores of the three behavior scales. To get the
scale measures, we aggregated the measures of the respondents to the nation level, and then to
Hofstede's index level. The measures of national averages in the region of East Africa, West
Africa, and Arab countries were aggregated into each region to be matched to Hofstede's
regional indexes (Hofstede, 1988).
Because the work behaviors were aggregated, it is necessary to provide empirical
justification for the aggregation (Morgeson & Hofmann, 1999). To do so, we estimated both
interrater reliability (via the intraclass correlation; JCC(2); Shrout & Fleiss, 1979) and interrater
agreement (rwg; James, Demaree, & Wolf, 1984). The interrater reliability estimates represent the
reliability of the mean rating of the work behaviors within a given nation compared to other
nations. The interrater reliabilities were as follows: Relationship-oriented behavior, .60;
interaction-related behavior, .32; and administrative behavior, .65. All the interrater reliability
estimates were statistically significant at the p < .05 level (within a one-way analysis of variance
with nation as the grouping variable).
Expatriate Assignments
20
Interrater agreement reflects the absolute level of agreement across raters and thus
assesses the extent to which raters within a given nation make similar mean-level ratings. This
differs from interrater reliability estimates in that it does not depend upon the amount of between
nation variance. The median interrater agreement estimates were as follows (similar results were
obtained with mean estimates): Relationship-oriented behavior, .90; Interaction-related
behavior, .93; and administrative behavior, .77.
Although the interrater reliability of interaction-related behavior was lower than we
would have preferred, this measure evidenced good interrater agreement. In fact, as a group these
levels of interrater reliability and agreement meet or exceed the levels of reliability and
agreement found in previous research that has dealt with aggregation issues (Campion, Medsker,
& Higgs, 1993). In addition, it is consistent with common rules of thumb about the levels of
interrater reliability needed to justifY aggregation (Ostroff & Schmitt, 1993).
In the ANCOVAs at the individual level (n's range from 420 to 1,312), statistical power
was more than 99% to detect an eta2 = .04 (medium effect size) and 66% to 97% for an eti =.OJ
(small effect size;p < .01, two-tail; Cohen, 1977). In the correlational analyses at the culture
level (n
an r
=
=
50), statistical power was 81% to detect an r
=
.30 (medium effect size) and 55% for
.20 (p < .I 0, one-tail; Cohen, 1977). Because of the modest power to detect correlations in
the .20-.30 range and to balance Type I and Type II errors in the correlational analyses, we
interpreted significance levels up top< .I 0.
Results
Preliminary Analyses
Potential Differences in Domestic and International Jobs. Even though the domestic and
international jobs shared commor, job descriptions, it is still possible that the tasks performed in
the United States differed from those performed in international jobs. Because some of our
Expatriate Assignments
21
hypotheses involve comparing domestic to international jobs, it is necessary to show that the jobs
are largely the same. This is essential because if the tasks performed in the job are the same, any
observed differences could be attributed to differences in cultural context. Using the task survey
data described earlier, we examined differences in tasks between domestic and international jobs.
To do this, we conducted a number of analyses on this task data to determine whether
there were differences in time-spent ratings across the different tasks. It should be noted that
examining differences at the task level represents the strongest possible test for differences
because it occurs at the finest-grained level of analysis possible (i.e., the task level). To
summarize these analyses, an average of only 13% of the task scales were significantly different
across the 5 different career specialties. The fact that, on average, 87% of the tasks are the same
suggests the jobs are more similar than different. Another way to examine the magnitude of the
difference is to examine the mean differences of those found to be significantly different. The
average mean difference was .24. Thus, even when differences are found, they tend to be
relatively small in magnitude, especially when compared to the average standard deviation of the
task measures, which was .83.
Finally, we examined whether the tasks found to differ between domestic and
international jobs are actually related to skill, ability, and personality requirement ratings. If the
task ratings are unrelated to these requirement ratings, then differences in tasks are not
responsible for differences in requirements. Only 22% of the possible correlations between tasks
and worker requirements were significant (p < .05). Thus, of the 13% of the tasks that showed a
significant difference, only 22% of them are significantly correlated with the worker
requirements. In addition, the average correlation of the task scales that were significantly
different between the domestic and the international jobs with the job requirements is just .14.
Expatriate Assignments
22
In total, these results suggest that, (I) there were relatively few task differences, (2) when
found, differences were small in magnitude, (3) most of the tasks that were different were
umelated to the worker requirements, and (4) the relationships between the tasks and the worker
requirements were small in magnitude. This suggests that differences in tasks are not responsible
for differences in skill, ability, and personality requirements.
Descriptive Statistics
Descriptive statistics and correlations between all the variables are reported in Table I.
Means for the worker and behavioral requirements range between 4.05 and 5.86 (on a 7-point
scale). Standard deviations range between .81 and 1.12. The skills and the abilities are highly
related, and relationship-oriented behavior and interaction-related behavior are also highly
related. Finally, adjustment, and achievement orientation are moderately related to the skills and
abilities, but less related to the behavioral requirements. The strong relationship between
individualism-collectivism and power distance is a spurious one. Hofstede's research (1984) has
shown this is due to the relationship of both dimensions to national wealth.
Differences in Worker Requirements between Expatriate and Domestic Jobs
The first four hypotheses concern whether expatriate jobs have higher social and
perceptual skill, reasoning ability, adjustment, and achievement orientation requirements than
domestic jobs. Table 2 shows means, standard deviations and the results of AN CO VAs for these
requirements by job location (domestic vs. international job), controlling for career specialty.
Hypothesis I suggested that expatriates have higher social skill requirements than
domestic workers because their social skills are important for cross-cultural adjustment. We
found that international jobs had significantly higher social skill requirements than domestic jobs
(mean difference= .30). Closer inspection of the individual skills indicated that service
orientation (mean difference= .51) and instructing (mean difference= .41) evidenced the largest
Expatriate Assignments
23
differences. The other social skills showed smaller differences (although still significant)
between international and domestic jobs. These results support the hypothesis that expatriate
work has higher social skill requirements than domestic work.
Hypothesis 2 proposed that expatriate work requires higher perceptual skill requirements
so expatriates can better understand HCNs' behaviors. We found that expatriate work had
significantly higher perceptual skill requirements than domestic work (mean difference= .37).
An examination of the individual skill items indicates that the largest differences were in social
perceptiveness (mean difference= .49), with active listening and monitoring showing smaller,
but still significant, differences. These results support the hypothesis that expatriate work has
higher perceptual skill requirements than domestic work.
Hypothesis 3 suggested that expatriate work requires higher levels of reasoning ability
than domestic work because expatriate work entails more uncertainty due to cultural
unfamiliarity. We found that expatriate work had significantly higher reasoning ability
requirements than domestic work (mean difference= .30). Among the individual items,
originality showed the largest differences (mean difference= .39), with problem sensitivity,
inductive reasoning, information ordering, and fluency of ideas showing smaller, but still
significant, differences. These results support the hypothesis that expatriate work has higher
reasoning ability requirements than domestic work.
Hypothesis 4 suggested that expatriate work has a higher level of adjustment and
achievement orientation personality requirements than domestic work because it facilitates
adaptation to foreign assignments. We found that expatriate work had significantly higher
adjustment personality requirements than domestic work (mean difference= .36). An
examination of the individual scale items indicates that the largest difference was in self-control
(mean difference= .52). In addition, we found that expatriate work required significantly higher
Expatriate Assignments
24
achievement orientation than domestic work (mean difference= .35). As expected, the three
individual items showed significant differences between international and domestic work (mean
differences between .27 - .40). These results support the hypothesis that expatriate work has
higher adjustment and achievement orientation personality requirements than domestic work.
Supplemental Analyses. In making comparisons between domestic and international work,
we have dichotomized the nation-level data. In so doing, it is possible that some important
information about differences between nations has been lost. This would serve to reduce the
amount of variance explained by the dichotomized variable. Because of this, we have conducted
several supplemental analyses to examine nation- and region-level differences. These analyses
were conducted on the social and perceptual skills only, because this was the only worker
requirement data available across the entire sample.
The first supplemental analysis examines the amount of variance explained by nationlevel differences. This is the most fme-grained analysis of culture differences in skill
requirements, and will yield an upper estimate on the amount of variance attributable to national
culture. The regression analyses showed that when examining social and perceptual skills at the
nation level of analysis (utilizing a series of dummy variable codes for nation; Cohen & Cohen,
1983), significantly more variance was explained than was explained in the domestic and
international analyses previously conducted (L'l.R2 = .15,p < .05, and !J.R2 = .17,p < .OJ). The
change in R-squared reflects the increase in R-squared when dummy variables for nations were
entered after the career specialty dummy variables. Although virtually every country showed
higher skill requirements than the U.S., some countries were particularly high. For example, the
mean difference for social and perceptual skill requirements between Kuwait and the U.S. was
.92 and .79, re.;pectively. The mean difference was even higher between Bulgaria and the U.S.,
with differences of 1.24 and 1.19 for social and perceptual skill requirements, respectively.
Expatriate Assignments
25
These differences are much greater than those found with the domestic versus international
dichotomy (cf. Table 2).
One of the problems with the nation-level analyses, however, is the sheer number of
comparisons that must be made. This complexity makes it difficult to interpret any differences
that are found. As such, it may be useful to investigate an intermediate level of analysis.
Fortunately, Ronen and Shenkar (1985) have grouped nations into relatively homogeneous
regions. In addition to those regions, we added several regions (e.g., Africa, Eastern Europe,
Russia, China, an Caribbean) that were not included at their study. Using these region codes, we
conducted another set of regression analyses. As expected, the amount of variance explained by
region was smaller than that explained by nation (L1R2 = .05,p <.OJ, and L1R2 = .06,p <.OJ for
social and perceptual skills, respectively), but it was greater than that explained by the domestic
versus international dichotomy (cf. Table 2). In particular, working in Eastern Europe (Bulgaria,
Hungary, and Poland) and Nordic (Denmark, Netherlands, and Sweden) regions required much
higher levels of social and perceptual skills than working in U.S. The mean difference for social
and perceptual skill requirements between Eastern Europe and the U.S. was .58 and .59, and
between Nordic and the U.S. was .61 and .58, respectively.
Relationships between Cultural Values and Expatriate Behavioral Requirements
Hypotheses 5, 6, and 7 concern the relationship between cultural values and expatriate
behavioral requirements. Table 3 reports the number of respondents in each nation or region
(using Hofstede's (1988) groupings). The average number of respondents per nation was 19 if
the U.S. is included, II if the U.S. is not included. Table 4 provides correlations between the
cultural and work behavior measures.
Hypothesis 5 suggested that expatriates working in nations high in collectivism would
focus more on behaviors related to relationship development because collectivism emphasizes
Expatriate Assignments
26
interpersonal relationships. In the individualism-collectivism scale, lower scale values indicate a
more collectivistic culture, and negative correlations indicate support for the hypothesis. We
found a significant negative correlation between individualism-collectivism and relationshiporiented behavior (r = -.36,p < .OJ). Except for one individual item (providing consultation and
advice to others), all items were significantly related, with correlations ranging from -.25 to -.39.
Based on these findings, it appears that expatriates working in countries high in collectivism
engage in more relationship-oriented behaviors.
Hypothesis 6 suggested that host nations' masculine cultures would be negatively related
to expatriates' interacting with others. The correlation between interaction-related behavior scale
and masculinity-femininity was not significant (r = -.12). However, the sign of correlation was
negative, as expected, and two of the individual items (communicating with persons outside the
organization, and performing for or working directly with the public) were significant (r = -.20, p
< .I 0). Overall, the hypothesis regarding masculinity-femininity received little support.
Hypothesis 7 suggested that host nations' cultures high in power distance would be
positively related to expatriates' administrative behavior. We found a significant positive
correlation between the administrative scale and power distance (r = .22, p < .I 0). Both
performing administrative activities (r = .26,p < .05) and monitoring and controlling resources (r
=
.24,p < .05) were significant. Managing was not significant (r = .14). Therefore, Hypothesis 7
was largely supported.
Discussion
The results for comparisons between domestic and expatriate work reveal that expatriate
work had higher social and perceptual skill, reasoning ability, and adjustment and achievement
orientation personality requirements than domestic work. In addition, expatriates working in
countries high in collectivism tended to engage in more relationship-oriented behaviors than
Expatriate Assignments
27
those working in countries high in individualism and that expatriates working in countries high
in power distance were more likely to engage in various administrative behaviors.
Several methodological strengths increase our confidence in these findings. First, the
study was conducted in one large, multi-national organization. This eliminates the potentially
confounding effects that organizational factors might have on the results (Hofstede, 1980).
Second, common method variance cannot be responsible for the results because two different
sources of data were used: A survey for the measure of worker requirements and Hofstede's
indexes for the measures of cultural values. Finally, the data set is large (N= I ,312) and
comprehensive (156 countries), therebyproviding adequate variance in study measures.
There are a number of implications for the literature. Several studies have argued for the
relationship between various worker requirements and expatriate adjustment (Abe & Wiseman,
1983; Arthur & Bennett, 1995; Arvey eta!., 1991; Black & Mendenhall, 1990; Caligiuri, 2000;
Cui eta!., 1998; Harrison eta!., 1996; Mendenhall and Oddou, 1985; Ones & Viswesvaran,
1999). Few studies have actually measured these requirements and then matched them to a
comparable group working domestically. In other words, although previous research has found
relationships between skill, ability, and personality characteristics and expatriates' adjustment or
performance, it has not been able to establish whether those characteristics are more important
for expatriate workers, in part, because these characteristics are likely to be important for
domestic workers as well. By empirically testing differences in requirements between domestic
and international work of the same type in the same organization, we can conclude these skill,
ability, and personality requirements are greater for expatriate than domestic workers. Thus, our
findings imply that expatriate jobs have higher worker requirements to better adapt to (or adjust
themselves to) the new and unfamiliar cultural settings.
Expatriate Assignments
28
Also, drawing from both value/belief theory of culture and social learning theory, this
study suggests that expatriates may adjust their behavior to the host culture (Brewster, 1995;
Hofstede, 1993). In other words, by showing that expatriate behavioral requirements vary with
the host nations' cultural values, this study encourages future research to investigate the process
through which expatriates adjust themselves to the host nation's culture. This study, with the
measures defined at a broad level and the large number of respondents working in !56 different
countries, provides some evidence on the influence of cultural differences on expatriates'
requirements and behaviors.
The results of this study have several practical implications for both pre-departure and
post-departure stages of expatriation. U.S. multinational companies have been criticized for
neglecting the role of cultural adjustment in selection and training (Black, Mendenhall, &
Oddou, 1991). This may be due to a lack of knowledge of what skills, abilities and personality
traits to emphasize in expatriate selection and training (Arthur & Bennett, 1995; Oddou, 1991).
For example, if an expatriate has high levels of social and perceptual skills then he or she will
better adjust to the culturally unfamiliar working environment because of skill in building social
relationships and correctly perceiving and attributing the causes of HCN behavior. With a high
level of reasoning ability, expatriates will be better able to deal with uncertainties and stress
caused by cultm:al unfamiliarity. Furthermore, expatriates high on adjustment or achievement
orientation will be more tolerant of or motivated to tolerate the uncertainty or discomfort
produced by being in unfamiliar cultures. By recognizing the skill, ability, and personality
requirements of expatriate work, multi-national organizations can design and implement better
selection and training tools for expatriates in the pre-departure stage.
In addition, by considering the relationships between cultural values and work behaviors
in the post-departure stage, organizations may be able to select or train expatriates so they can
Expatriate Assignments
29
adjust themselves to the host culture more quickly, have closer relationships with HCNs, and
perform more effectively. For example, if an organization needs to send expatriates to Eastern
Asian countries where HCNs emphasize interpersonal relationships, it should consider sending
individuals who are prone to engage in relationship-oriented behaviors, or, at the very least,
emphasize the importance of these behaviors when interacting with HCNs. Furthermore, the idea
that certain sets of behaviors should be learned for a certain cultural value may be very useful for
post-arrival training, which is often behaviorally-based (Selmer, Torbiom, & de Leon, 1998;
Selmer, 2001). Thus, by studying the relationships between cultural values and desirable
expatriate behaviors, organizations can select and train expatriates more appropriately for
different cultures.
Limitations and Future Directions
The current study used Hofstede's measures of cultural values, which are the most
comprehensive, publicly available measures. Notwithstanding the strengths noted earlier,
legitimate concerns have been raised about Hofstede's measures, including a lack of
exhaustiveness, adequacy of the sample of nations, generalizability, possible historical changes,
and some validity problems (Schwartz, 1994; Spector, Cooper, & Sparks, 2001).
Notwithstanding these concerns, there have been several studies indicating that Hofstede's
cultural index has an acceptable level of predictive validity (Hofstede, 200 I; Smith et al., I 998).
Future research should directly measure cultural values held by HCNs, which may provide more
accurate information about cultural dimensions. This is likely to produce stronger relationships
than those obtained in our study.
It should also be acknowledged that we had relatively modest effect sizes, particularly in
terms of differences in domestic and international jobs. As we noted, in dichotomizing tht
nation-level data, we likely Jose some information about differences between the nations. Future
Expatriate Assignments
30
research can take a more fine-grained approach by investigating other potential factors (e.g.,
specific differences in religion, social, and political systems) that may be responsible for
differences in expatriate work. It is also important to keep in mind that one of the primary
purposes of this research is to empirically test whether differences in skill, ability, and
personality requirements exist between domestic and international assignments due to the
general unfamiliarity with foreign working environments, which would include cultural values,
language and religion differences, and a host of other differences. We view our study as an initial
attempt to demonstrate that these differences exist, given that no existing research has
empirically compared domestic/international differences with comparable groups. Clearly,
additional research directly examining more proximal reasons for the differences will help us
better understand why certain countries have higher skill, ability, and personality requirements.
In addition, because these data were cross-sectional in nature, it is impossible to
determine whether expatriate behavior is influenced by culture, or whether certain types of
individuals are assigned to countries with a certain set of cultural values that suit their behavioral
style. The fact that the organization studied does not have an assessment and placement system
centered on behavioral style suggests that this latter explanation is unlikely. It might be possible,
however, that certain types of individuals self-select into expatriate roles. Research is clearly
needed on this issue.
Finally, we did not examine the process by which host nations' culture influences
expatriates' behavior. Although the present study does not allow us to directly investigate the
adjustment process, our findings do suggest some of the worker requirements needed for
expatriates' adaptive job performance. To better understand how the host culture influences
expatriates' behavior, it would be important to examine the interaction process between
expatriates and HCNs and how cultural values are enacted (Dubin, 1978).
Expatriate Assignments
References
Abe, H., & Wiseman, R. L. (1983). A cross-cultural confirmation of the dimensions of
intercultural effectiveness. International Journal ofIntercultural Relations, 7, 53-68.
Adler, N.J. (1983). Cross-cultural management research: The ostrich and the trend.
Academy ofManagement Review, 8, 226-232.
Anderzen, I., & Arnetz, B. B. ( 1999). Psychophysiological reactions to international
adjustment: Results from a controlled, longitudinal study. Psychotherapy & Psychosomatics,
68(2), 67-75.
Arthur, Jr., W., & Bennett, Jr., W. (1995). The international assignee: The relative
importance of factors perceived to contribute to success. Personnel Psychology, 48. 99-114.
Arvey, R. D., Bhagat, R. S., & Salas, E. (1991). Cross-cultural and cross-national issues
in personnel and human resource management: Where do we go from here? Research in
Personnel and Human Resource Management, 9, 367-407.
Aycan, Z. (1997). Acculturation of expatriate managers: A process model of adjustment
and performance. In A. Aycan (Ed.), New approaches to employee management (Vol. 4, pp. 140). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Aycan, Z., & Kanungo, R.N. (1997). Current issues and future challenges in expatriate
management and performance. In A. Aycan (Ed.), New approaches to employee management
(Vol. 4, pp. 245-260). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social/earning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bass, B. M. (1997). Does the transactional-transformationalleadership paradigrn
transcend organizational and national boundaries? American Psychologist, 52, 130-139.
Black, J. S. (1988). Work role transitions: A study of American expatriate managers in
Japan. Journal ofInternational Business Studies. 19. 277-294.
31
Expatriate Assignments
32
Black, J. S. (1990). The relationship of personal characteristics with the adjustment of
Japanese expatriate managers. Management international Review, 30, 119-134.
Black, J. S., Gregersen, H. B., Mendenhall, M. E., & Stroh, L. K. (1999). Globalizing
people through international assignment. Addison-Wesley.
Black, J. S., & Mendenhall, M. E. ( 1990). Cross-cultural training effectiveness: A review
and a theoretical framework for future research. Academy ofManagement Review, 15, 113-136.
Black, J. S., Mendenhall, M. E., & Oddou, G. (1991). Toward a comprehensive model of
international adjustment: An integration of multiple theoretical perspectives. Academy of
Management Review, 16,291-317.
Black, J. S., & Stephens, G. K. (1989). The influence of the spouse on American
expatriate adjustroent in Pacific Rim overseas assignments. Journal ofManagement, 15, 529544.
Bochner, S. (1982). Cultures in contact: Studies in cross-cultural interaction. New York:
Pergamon Press.
Bonaiuto, P., Biasi, V., Giannini, A.M., Bonaiuto, M., & Bartoli, G. (1992). Stress,
comfort, and self-appraisal: A panoramic investigation of the dynamics of cognitive processes. In
D. G. Forgays, T. Sosnowski, et al. (Eds.), Anxiety: Recent developments in cognitive,
psychophysiological, and health research (pp. 75-1 07). Washington, DC: Hemisphere
Publishing Corp.
Borman, W. C., Kubisiak, U. C., & Schneider, R. J. (1999). Work styles. InN. G.
Peterson, M.D. Mnmford, W. C. Borman, P.R. Jeanneret, & A. F. Edwin (Eds.), An
oc:cupational information system for the 21st century: The development of O*NET (pp. 213-226).
Washington, DC: APA.
Expatriate Assignments
33
Brewster, C. (1995). Effective expatriate training. In J. Selmer (Ed.), Expatriate
Management: New ideas for international business (pp. 57-72). Westport, CT: Quorum Books.
Bunder, S. (1962). Intolerance of ambiguity as a personality variable. Journal of
Personality, 30, 29-51.
Caligiuri, P. M. (2000). The big five personality characteristics as predictors of
expatriate's desire to terminate the assignment and supervisor-rated performance. Personnel
Psychology, 53, 67-88.
Campion, M.A., Medsker, G. J., & Higgs, A. C. (1993). Relations between work group
characteristics and effectiveness: Implications for designing effective work groups. Personnel
Psychology, 46, 823-850.
Chao, G. T., & Sun, Y. J. (1997). Training needs for expatriate adjustment in the People's
Republic of China. In A. Aycan (Ed.), New approaches to employee management (Vol. 4, pp.
207-226). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Clugston, M., Howell, J.P., & Dorfman, P. W. (2000). Does cultural socialization predict
multiple bases and foci of commitment? Journal ofManagement, 26, 5-30.
Cohen, J. ( 1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral science (Rev. ed. ). New
York: Academic Press.
Cohen, J. & Cohen, P.(l983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the
behavioral sciences (2nd ed. ). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Cui, G., van den Berg, S., & Jiang, Y. (1998). Cross-cultural adaptation and ethnic
communication: Two structural equation models. Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis, 9, 69-85.
Den Hartog, D. N., & GLOBE members. (1999). Culture specific and cross-culturally
generalizable implicit leadership theories: Are attributes of charismatic/transformational
leadership universally endorsed? Leadership Quarterly, 10, 219-256.
Expatriate Assignments
34
Dorfman, P. (1996). International and cross-cultural leadership. In J. Punnitt & 0.
Shenkar (Eds.), Handbook for international management research (pp. 267-349). Cambridge,
MA: Blackwell.
Dorfman, P. W., & Howell, J.P. (1988). Dimensions of national cultures and effective
leadership patterns. Advances in International Comparative Management, 3, 127-150.
Dorfman, P. W., Howell, J.P., Hibino, S., Lee, J. K., Tate, U., & Bautista, A. (1997).
Leadership in Western and Asian countries: Commonalities and differences in effective
leadership process across cultures. Leadership Quarterly, 8, 233-274.
Dunbar, E. (1992). Adjustment and satisfaction of expatriate U.S. International Journal
ofIntercultural Relations, 16, 1-16.
Dubin, R. (1978). Theory building. New York: The Free Press.
Earley, P. C. (1989). Social loafing and collectivism: A comparison of the United States
and the People's Republic of China. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34, 565-581.
Earley, P. C. (1993). East meets West meets Mideast: Further explorations of
collectivistic and individualistic work groups. Academy ofManagement Journal, 3 6, 319-348.
Elangovan, A. R. (1995). Managerial conflict intervention in organizations: Traversing
the cultural mosaic. International Journal of Conflict Management, 6, 124-146.
Fraser, K. P., & Tucker, C. M. (1997). Individuation, stress, and problem-solving abilities
of college students. Journal of College Student Development, 38, 461-467.
Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V. (1994). Cross-cultural comparison ofleadership prototypes.
Leadership Quarterly, 5, 121-134.
Gregersen, H. B., & Black, J. S. (1990). A multifaceted approach to expatriate retention
in international assignments. Group & Organization Studies, 15, 461-485.
Expatriate Assignments
35
Harrison, J. K., Chadwick, M., & Scales, M. (1996). The relationship between crosscultural adjustment and the personality variables of self-efficacy and self-monitoring.
International Journal ofintercultural Relations, 20, 167-188.
Hechanova, R., Beehr, T. A., & Christiansen, N.D. (2003). Antecedents and
consequences of employees' adjustment to overseas assignment: A meta-analytic review.
Applied Psychology: An International Review, 52,213-236.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's consequences: International differences in work related
beliefs. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Hofstede, G. (1984). The cultural relativity of the quality of life concept. Academy of
Management Review, 9, 389-398.
Hofstede, G. (1988). The Confucius connection: From cultural roots to economic growth.
Organizational Dynamics, 16(4), 4-21.
Hofstede, G. (1993). Cultural constraints on management theories. Academy of
Management Executive, 7, 81-94.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions,
and organizations across nations (2nd ed. ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hofstede, G. (2002). The pitfalls of cross-national survey research: A reply to the article
by Spector et al. on the psychometric properties of the Hofstede Values Survey Module 1994.
Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51, 170-173.
House, R. J., Wright, N. S., & Aditya, R.N. (1997). Cross-culture research on
organizational leadership. In P. C. Earley & M. Erez (Eds.), New Perspectives in International
Industrial Organizational Psychology (pp. 535-625). San Francisco: New Lexington.
James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. (1984). Estimating within-group interrater
reliability with and without response bias. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 69, 85-98.
Expatriate Assignments
36
Jung, D. 1., & Avolio, B. J. (1999). Effects ofleadership style and followers' cultural
orientation on performance in group and individual task conditions. Academy ofManagement
Journal, 42. 208-218.
Kelloway, E. K. (1998). Using LJSRELfor structural equation modeling. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Kraimer, M., Wayne, S. J., & Jaworski, R. A. (2001). Sources of support and expatriate
performance: The mediating role of expatriate adjustment. Personnel Psychology, 54, 71-99.
Mahoney, A.M., Dalhy, J. T., & King, M. C. (1998). Cognitive failure and stress.
Psychological Reports, 82, 1432-1434.
Matthews, G., & Wells, A. (1988). Relationships between anxiety, self-consciousness,
and cognitive failure. Cognition and Emotion, 2(2), 123-132.
McEvoy, G. M., & Parker, B. (1995). Expatriate adjustment: Causes and consequences.
In J. Selmer (Ed.), Expatriate management: New ideas for international business (pp. 97-114).
Westport, CT: Quorum Books.
Mendenhall, M. E., & Oddou, G. (1985). The dimensions of expatriate acculturation: A
review. Academy ofManagement Review, 10, 39-4 7.
Merritt, A. (2000). Culture in the cockpit: Do Hofstede's dimensions replicate? Journal of
Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 283-301.
Morgeson, F. P., & Hofmann, D. A. (1999). The structure and function of collective constructs:
Implications for multilevel research and theory development. Academy of Management Review, 24,
249-265.
Nasierowski, W., & Mikula, B. (1998). Culture dimensions of Polish managers:
Hofstede's indices. Organization Studies, 19, 495-509.
Expatriate Assignments
37
Netemeyer, R., Johnston, M., &Burton, S. (1990). Analysis of role conflict and role
ambiguity in a structural equations framework. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 75, 148-157.
Oddou, G. (1991). Managing your expatriates: What successful firms do. Human
Resource Planning, 14, 301-308.
Oddou, G., & Mendenhall, M. E. (1984). Person perception in cross-cultural settings: A
review of cross-cultural and related literature. International Journal ofIntercultural Relations, 8,
77-96.
Ones, D. S., & Viswesvaran, C. (1997). Personality determinants in the prediction of
aspects of expatriate job success. In A. Aycan (Ed.), New approaches to employee management
(Vol. 4, pp. 63-92). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Ones, D. S., & Viswesvaran, C. (1999). Relative importance of personality dimensions
for expatriate selection: Apolicy capturing study. Human Performance, 12, 275-294.
Ostroff, C., & Schmitt, N. (1993). Configurations of organizational effectiveness and
efficiency. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 36, 1345-1361.
Pavett, C., & Morris, T. (1995). Management styles within a multinational corporation: A
five-country comparative study. Human Relations, 48, 1171-1191.
Payne, R. (1994). Individual differences in the study of occupational stress. In C. L.
Cooper & R. Payne (Eds.), Causes, coping, and consequences ofstress at work (pp. 209-232).
New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Peterson, N. G., Mumford, M.D., Borman, W. C., Jeanneret, P.R., & Edwin, A. F.
(1999). An occupational information system for the 21st century: The development of O*NET.
Washington, DC: APA.
Peterson, N. G., Mumford, M.D., Borman, W. C., Jeanneret, P.R., Fleishman, E. A.,
Campion, M.A., Levin, K. Y., Mayfield, M.S., Morgeson, F. P., Pearlman, K., Gowing, M. K.,
Expatriate Assignments
38
Lancaster, A., & Dye, D. (2001). Understanding work using the occupational information
network (O*NET): Implications for practice and research. Personnel Psychology, 54, 451-492.
Peterson, M. F., Smith, P. B., Akande, A., Ayestaran, S., Bochner, S., Callan, V., Cho, N.
G., Jesuino, J. C., D'Amorim, M., Francois, P. H., Hofinann, K., Koopman, P. L., Leung, K.,
Lim, T. K., Mortazavi, S., Munene, J., Radford, M., Ropo, A., Savage, G., Setiadi, B., Sinha, T.
N., Sorenson, R., Viedge, C. {1995). Role conflict, ambiguity, and overload: A 21-nation study.
Academy ofManagement Journal, 38, 429-452.
Priester, M. J., & Clum, G. A. (1993). Perceived problem-solving ability as a predictor of
depression, hopelessness, and suicide ideation in a college population. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 40, 79-85.
Ronen, S., & Shenkar, 0. (1985). Clustering countries on attitudinal dimensions: A
review and synthesis. Academy ofManagement Review, I 0, 435-454.
Schwartz, S. J. (1994). Beyond individualism/collectivism: New cultural dimensions of
values. In U. Kim, H. C. Triandis, eta!. Individualism and collectivism: Theory, method, and
applications. Cross-cultural research and methodology series (Vol. 18, pp. 85-119). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Selmer, J. (200 I). The preference for predeparture or postarrival cross-cultural training:
An exploratory approach. Journal ofManagerial Psychology, 16, 50-58.
Selmer, J., Torbiom, I., de Leon, C. T. (1998). Sequential cross-cultural training for
expatriate business managers: Predeparture and post-arrival. international Journal ofHuman
Resource Management, 9, 831-840.
Shackleton, V. J., & Ali, A. H. (1990). Work-related values of managers: A test of
Hofstede model. Journal of Cross-cultural Psy-.::hology, 21, 109-118.
Expatriate Assignments
39
Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater
reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420-428.
Singh, J.P. (1990). Managerial culture and work-related values in India. Organization
Studies, 11, 75-101.
Smith, P. B., Dugan, S., Peterson, M. F., & Leung, K. (1998). Individualism:
Collectivism and the handling of disagreement. A 23 country study.International Journal of
Intercultural Relations, 22, 351-367.
Smith, P. B., Peterson, M., Misumi, J., & Bond, M. (1992). A cross-cultural test of the
Japanese PM leadership theory. Applied Psychology, 41, 5-19.
Spector, P. E., Cooper, C. L. (2002). The pitfalls of poor psychometric properties: A
rejoinder to Hofstede's reply to us. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51, 174-178.
Spector, P. E., Cooper, C. L., Sparks, K., Bernin, P., Bussing, A., Dewe, P. et al. (2001).
An international study of the psychometric properties of the Hofstede Values Survey Module
1994: A comparison of individual and country/province level results. Applied Psychology: An
International Review, 50, 269-281.
Speitzer, G. M., McCall, M. W., & Mahoney, J.D. (1997). Early identification of
international executive potential. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 82, 6-29.
Swaak, R. A. 1995. Expatriate failure: Too many, too much cost, too little planning.
Compensation and Benefits Review, 27, 47-55.
Takeuchi, R., Yun, S., & Tesluk, P. E. (2002). An examination of crossover and spillover
effects of spousal and expatriate cross-cultural adjustment on expatriate outcomes. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 87, 655-666.
Expatriate Assignments
40
Triandis, H. C., Bontempo, R., Villareal, M. J., Asai, M., & Lucca, N. (1988).
Individualism and collectivism: Cross-cultural perspectives on self-ingroup relationships.
Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 54, 323-338.
Tung, R. L. (1981). Selection and training of personnel of overseas assignments.
Columbia Journal of World Business, 15, 68-78.
Tung, R. L. (1982). Selection and training procedures of U.S., European, and Japanese
multinationals. California Management Review, 25, 57-71.
Tung, R. L. (1987). Expatriate assignments: Enhancing success and minimizing failure.
Academy of Management Executive, 1, 117-126.
Vance, C. M., & Paik, Y. (2002). One size fits all in expatriate pre-departure training?
Comparing the host country voices of Mexican, Indonesian and US workers. Journal of
Management Development, 21, 557-571.
Yiu, L., & Saner, R. (2000). Determining the impact of cognitive styles on the
effectiveness of global managers: Propositions for further research. Human Resource
Development Quarterly, 11, 319-324.
Weiss, H. M. (1977). Subordinate imitation of supervisor behavior: The role of modeling
in organizational socialization. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 19, 89105.
Expatriate Assignments
41
Table I
Descriptive Statistics and Correlations for Worker Requirements, Behavioral Requirements, and Cultural Values
I. Social skills
Meana SDa
N
1,310 4.97 .91
2. Perceptual skills
1,312
5.40
3. Reasoning ability
420
4. Adjustment
5. Achievement orientation
Meanb SDb
5.11
.33
-
9
.05
10
-.11
II
-.05
.85
.72**
.03
-.12
-.07
5.54
.30
4.89
.88
.69** .67**
-
-.11
-.19
-.04
4.99
.39
468
5.86
1.00 .46** .43**
-
-
.00
.08
-.01
5.97
.59
468
5.84
1.01 .57** .54**
.61 **
-.09
-.01
.04
6.03
.52
6. Relationship-oriented behavior
1,301
4.05
.94
.43** .33** .32** .36** .31 **
-.36** -.17
.24*
4.26
.38
7. Interaction-related behavior
1,310
4.63
.81
.27** .28** .22** .26** .24** .59**
8. Administrative behavior
1,290
4.51
1.12 .27**
9. Individualism-collectivism
50
-
-
I 0. Masculinity-femininity
50
-
-
11. Power distance
50
-
Variable
1
2
.18*
3
4
5
6
7
8
-
.16** .21** .14** .56** .37**
'Individual-level.
Nation-level.
* p < .05 (one-tailed).** p < .01 (one-tailed).
b
Note. Individual-level correlations below the diagonal. Nation-level correlations above the diagonal.
-.17
-.12
.09
4.77
.32
-.18
.II
.22
4.75
.51
.05 -.68** 43.98 25.78
-
.07
49.44 18.57
-
56.50 22.41
Expatriate Assignments
42
Table 2
Mean Differences and Standard Deviations for Domestic and International Jobs Controlling for
Career Specialty
Variable
Social Skills
Coordination
Persuasion
Negotiation
Instructing
Service Orientation
1,310
1,297
1,301
1,294
1,240
1,244
Domestic International
Mean (SD} Mean (SD}
4.76 (0.94) 5.06 (0.88)
5.09 (1.24) 5.37 (1.16)
5.27 (1.25) 5.48 (1.13)
4.99 (1.29) 5.17 (1.21)
3.91 (1.20) 4.32 (1.07)
4.50 (1.36) 5.01 (1.30)
Perceptual Skills
Active Listening
Monitoring
Social Perceptiveness
1,312
1,307
1,289
1,301
5.14 (0.91)
5.75 (0.95)
4.62 (1.09)
5.06 (1.22)
5.51 (0.79)
6.03 (0.87)
4.97 (1.08)
5.55 (1.08)
61.48**
31.63**
32.95**
57.80**
1,
1,
1,
I,
1,309
1,304
1,286
1,298
.045
.024
.025
.043
Reasoning Ability
Fluency ofldeas
Originality
Problem Sensitivity
Deductive Reasoning
Inductive Reasoning
Information Ordering
Category Flexibility
420
410
420
419
417
418
400
352
4.70 (0.92)
4.76 (1.28)
4.54 (1.30)
5.04 (1.25)
5.10 (1.08)
4.99 (1.29)
4.29 (1.29)
4.19 (1.38)
5.00 (0.85)
5.05 (1.21)
4.92 (1.10)
5.43 (1.09)
5.35 (0.98)
5.35 (1.10)
4.60 (1.23)
4.29 (1.21)
8.74**
4.36*
7.81**
7.26**
3.63
6.59*
4.78*
0.43
I,
1,
I,
I,
I,
I,
I,
I,
417
407
417
416
414
415
397
349
.021
.Oll
.019
.017
.009
.016
.012
.001
Adjustment
Self-control
Stress Tolerance
Flexibility
468
466
468
467
5.61 (1.04)
5.44 (1.38)
5.66 (1.15)
5.75 (1.25)
5.97 (0.96)
5.96 (1.18)
6.01 (1.11)
5.95 (1.12)
16.15**
21.18**
12.52**
3.61
I,
1,
I,
I,
465
463
465
464
.034
.044
.025
.008
Achievement orientation
Achievement/effort
Persistence
Initiative
468
466
468
468
5.59 (1.13)
5.42 (1.28)
5.74 (1.14)
5.65 (1.45)
5.94 (0.94)
5.76 (1.15)
6.01 (0.99)
6.05 (1.12)
16.22**
15.16**
9.60**
11.66**
1,
I,
I,
I,
465
463
465
465
.034
.032
.020
.025
N
* p < .05. ** p < .01. (two-tailed).
F
df
37.39**
21.99**
20.51 **
18.16**
26.34**
31.15**
I,
I,
1,
1,
1,
1,
1,307
1,294
1,298
1,291
1,237
1,241
Eta
Sguared
.028
.017
.016
.014
.021
.025
Expatriate Assignments
Table 3
Number ofRespondents per Nation
Nation
Argentina
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Brazil
Canada
Colombia
Costa Rica
Denmark
Ecuador
England
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Guatemala
Hong Kong
India
Indonesia
Ireland
Israel
Italy
Jamaica
Japan
Korea
Number of ResEondents
5
14
5
16
12
28
5
3
4
5
14
3
II
25
9
9
5
13
7
4
15
21
2
28
9
Nation
Number ofResEondents
Malaysia
6
Mexico
31
Netherlands
4
New Zealand
2
Norway
5
Pakistan
6
Panama
5
Peru
8
Philippines
13
Portugal
4
Singapore
6
South Africa
10
Spain
15
Sweden
7
Switzerland
17
7
Taiwan
12
Thailand
Turkey
15
Uruguay
4
u.s.
Venezuela
Yugoslavia
Arab
West Africa
East Africa
398
2
4
80
7
8
Note. This table includes only the 50 nations and regions into which work behavior measures
were aggregated. Only these nations and regions could be matched with Hofstede's (1988)
cultural index.
43
Expatriate Assignments
44
Table 4
Correlations between Cultural Values and Behavioral Requirements
Managerial Behaviors
Relationship-oriented Behavior
Coordinating teams
Developing and building teams
Teaching others
Coaching and developing others
Providing consultation and advice to others
Cultural Values
Individualism- MasculinityCollectivism
Femininity
-.36**
-.17
-.19t
-.39**
-.33**
-.04
-.29*
-.26*
-.19t
-.25*
-.10
.03
Power
Distance
.24*
.33**
.16
.14
.21 t
.11
Interaction-related Behavior
Interpreting the meaning of information
Communicating with supervisors, peers, or subordinates
Communicating with persons outside the organization
Establishing and maintaining interpersonal relationships
Assisting and caring for others
Selling or influencing others
Resolving conflicts and negotiating with others
Performing for or working directly with the public
-.17
-.17
-.01
.04
-.10
-.22t
.01
-.25*
-.29*
-.12
-.16
.03
-.20t
.04
.02
-.02
-.09
-.2ot
.09
.17
-.03
-.17
.11
.14
.10
.04
.II
Administrative Behavior
Managing
Performing administrative activities
Monitoring and controlling resources
-.18
-.02
-.28*
-.zot
.11
.08
.08
.12
.22t
.14
.26*
.24*
t p < .10 (one-tailed).* p < .05 (one-tailed).** p < .01 (one-tailed).
n=50.