Journal of International Business Studies (2007) 38, 819–835
& 2007 Academy of International Business All rights reserved 0047-2506 $30.00
www.jibs.net
Expatriate assignments and intra-organizational
career success: implications for individuals and
organizations
Mark C Bolino
Division of Management, University of Oklahoma,
Price College of Business, Norman, OK, USA
Correspondence:
Mark C Bolino, Division of Management,
Price College of Business, University of
Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019, USA.
Tel: þ 1 405 325 3982;
Fax: þ 1 405 325 7688;
E-mail: [email protected]
Abstract
Anecdotal accounts and reports in the popular press often suggest that
international assignments are critical for employees who seek to move up the
career ladder more quickly. Nevertheless, previous research on repatriation
indicates that many former expatriates feel that their overseas assignments
have harmed, rather than helped, their careers. Relatively little research,
though, has sought to understand how expatriate assignments might be
related to career success. This paper, then, presents a conceptual model
describing the relationship between expatriate assignments and intra-organizational career success. Specifically, theories of career mobility are used to
develop a framework for outlining the factors likely to determine whether
expatriate assignments help or hinder the advancement of employees who
have worked as international assignees. The model also indicates that repatriate
career success influences an organization’s ability to retain its current
repatriates and recruit future expatriates. Some implications of this research
and directions for future research are discussed as well.
Journal of International Business Studies (2007) 38, 819–835.
doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400290
Keywords: expatriation; repatriation; career success
Received: 1 August 2005
Revised: 19 October 2006
Accepted: 25 November 2006
Online publication date: 31 May 2007
Introduction
As businesses continue to globalize, it has become increasingly
common for organizations to assign their employees to extended
work assignments overseas (Stahl et al., 2002). Expatriate assignments not only enable multinational firms to carry out their
current global initiatives, but also serve as an important tool for
developing the global managers who will lead these organizations
in the future (Kobrin, 1988; Shay and Baack, 2004; Takeuchi et al.,
2005). In other words, globalization has created an increased
demand for business leaders with a high level of global awareness and
well-honed international skills, and expatriate assignments play an
important role in the development of such global managers
(Gregersen et al., 1998; Stroh et al., 2005). Indeed, Stroh et al. (2005:
3) have argued that, for many executives, international assignments
are the ‘single most influential force in their development as
managers.’ Moreover, several studies suggest that CEOs with international assignment experience tend to be more effective at managing
multinational corporations (MNCs) than CEOs who lack such
Expatriate assignments and intra-organizational career success
Mark C Bolino
820
experience (Roth, 1995; Daily et al., 2000; Carpenter
et al., 2001).
Previous work, though, indicates that employees
usually find expatriate assignments very challenging and sometimes overwhelming (McEvoy and
Parker, 1995; Black et al., 1999; Bhaskar-Shrinivas
et al., 2005). Indeed, a great deal of research has
sought to understand how organizations can minimize the high failure rates and other difficulties
that often characterize extended overseas assignments (Stroh et al., 2005). However, in spite of the
challenges associated with expatriate assignments,
many employees are still willing to accept an
overseas posting because they believe it will help
them get ahead in their companies (Mendenhall
et al., 2002). In fact, Stahl et al. (2002) found that
59% of expatriates believed that an expatriate
assignment would help them advance within their
organizations.
Such beliefs may stem from popular press
accounts, which often extol the career-enhancing
effects of international assignments by claiming that
working as an expatriate will ‘supercharge your
career’ (Fisher, 1997), ‘boost your career’ (Fisher,
2005), or be a ‘ticket to the top’ (Lublin, 1996).
Indeed, the findings of a recent survey by Chief
Executive magazine and Spencer Stuart (an executive
search firm) – which was widely reported in the Wall
Street Journal and other business publications –
suggest that extended overseas work experience is
critical for those who want to make it to the very top
of an organization (Martin, 2004). By and large, then,
most popular-press accounts tend to indicate that
employees who have worked as expatriates will tend
to get ahead more quickly in their organizations.
Some researchers have also implied that there is a
link between international experience and career
success. For example, with regard to employees
who are apprehensive about working overseas,
Daily et al. (2000: 520) offered these words of
caution: ‘for those who would aspire to the
executive suite, such a view toward international
assignments may be shortsighted.’ Nevertheless,
such recommendations often have little real data to
back them up. Moreover, although empirical
studies of managerial careers have sometimes found
that international experience is helpful to one’s
career (e.g., Judge et al., 1995; Ng et al., 2005), such
research typically treats expatriate assignments as a
dichotomous variable (i.e., respondents either had
an expatriate assignment or did not have one).
In reality, though, it is unlikely that all expatriate
assignments are equivalent with regard to their
Journal of International Business Studies
potential effects on career advancement. For example, an expatriate assignment is likely to harm one’s
career if the individual performs poorly in his or her
overseas job, especially if the expatriate has to be
recalled early. On the other hand, an employee who
excels in an international assignment, learns about
critical overseas markets, and develops strong crosscultural leadership skills is likely to have his or her
career prospects improved by his/her expatriate
experience (Suutari, 2003). In short, the relationship between international experience and career
success is likely to be rather complex.
Generally speaking, Stahl et al. (2002: 216) argue
that ‘relatively little is known about the long-term
impact of international assignments on managers’
careers.’ Indeed, surveys of human resource (HR)
professionals regarding this relationship often yield
conflicting results. For example, Stroh et al. (2005)
indicate that, while most HR executives believe that
expatriate assignments have a positive career
impact, the majority of those who have had
international assignments actually believe that it
has adversely affected their careers. However, in a
more recent survey, only 34% of HR professionals
believed that international experience was helpful
to one’s career (GMAC Global Relocation Services,
2004). Moreover, Carpenter et al. (2001: 507) found
that, while many firms often ‘intend’ to hire CEOs
with international assignment experience, relatively few US multinationals are actually led by
CEOs with such qualifications. In their research,
even fewer members of the top management team
had an international background. In light of the
shortage of global leaders, Sambharya (1996: 44)
recommends that global firms must ‘do a better job
of selling the notion of international assignments
to their managers as a stepping stone to entry into
the upper echelon and not into obscurity.’
Although the link between expatriate assignments and career success is unclear, research on
repatriation clearly indicates that former expatriates are often extremely disappointed and frustrated when they come back home, and many
perceive that their employers do not value their
international experience (Baughn, 1995; Selmer,
1999; Bossard and Peterson, 2005). In fact, some
expatriates believe that they would have been
better off in terms of their careers if they had never
gone overseas at all. For example, one former
expatriate quoted in a study by Gregersen (1992)
advised potential international assignees in his
company not to go; in that same study, the spouse
of another repatriate described her husband’s
Expatriate assignments and intra-organizational career success
Mark C Bolino
821
experience in this way: ‘It was almost as if 12
years of experience overseas was a disadvantage
for continued employment with the company’
(Gregersen, 1992: 48).
Moreover, whereas most expatriates believe that a
global assignment will lead to a promotion (Stahl
et al., 2002), research indicates that, in fact, only
very few employees are promoted when they come
home (Black et al., 1992). Indeed, most companies
do not give their expatriates any post-assignment
employment guarantees whatsoever (Tung, 1998;
GMAC Global Relocation Services, 2004), and
20–50% of repatriates are no longer employed by
their companies within 2 years of coming back
home (Stroh et al., 1998; Bossard and Peterson,
2005). For this reason, Peltonen (1997: 106) argues
that ‘among the most problematic aspects of
repatriation are the unfulfilled expectations regarding expatriates’ career advancement once they have
returned to their home organization.’ Similarly,
Welch (2003: 155) concludes that there is ‘a paucity
of evidence of the actual positive benefits of an
expatriate assignment’ in terms of employees’
career prospects.
Given the continued globalization of business,
and the fact that managers with international
assignment experience are more effective at leading
global organizations (Daily et al., 2000; Carpenter
et al., 2001), it is important to gain a better
understanding of the relationship between expatriate assignments and career success. Indeed, organizations that have a better grasp of the career
implications of international assignments should
be better able to reduce repatriate turnover and
increase the willingness of other employees to
accept an overseas posting (Stroh et al., 2000).
Moreover, this issue is critical for the increasing
number of employees who will face the decision to
accept or decline an overseas posting. As Peltonen
(1997: 107) points out, though, ‘a striking feature of
repatriation research is that only few, if any,
attempts have been made to understand the underlying mechanisms of puzzling career outcomes.’
The purpose of this paper, then, is to explore how
working as an expatriate may facilitate or hinder
managers’ career progress. In examining this issue,
the paper seeks to advance previous research on
expatriation and career progress in three ways.
First, this paper draws upon previous theories
to develop a conceptual framework linking expatriation, intra-organizational career success, and
organizational and employee outcomes. Second,
this model is used to formulate some specific
propositions about the factors that determine
whether expatriate assignments facilitate intraorganizational career success, and about how
repatriate career success, in turn, affects an organization’s ability to hold on to their current repatriates and recruit new expatriates. Third, and finally,
the paper describes avenues for future research on
the relationship between expatriation and career
success. Some practical implications of this work
are offered here as well.
Developing a conceptual framework of
repatriate career success
There are two important boundary conditions
established for the model described in this section.
The first is a boundary condition regarding the
conceptualization of career success. In previous
work, some researchers view career success
somewhat broadly (London and Stumpf, 1982;
Judge and Bretz, 1994; Judge et al., 1995). For
instance, Judge et al. (1995: 486) define career
success as ‘the positive psychological or work
related outcomes or achievements one has accumulated as a result of one’s work experiences.’
Accordingly, their notion of career success is
concerned with both objective aspects of career
success (e.g., promotions) and subjective elements
as well (e.g., satisfaction with one’s career). However, in this paper, I shall be principally concerned
with the degree to which expatriate assignments
facilitate the career advancement of expatriates.
I chose this focus because previous research already
indicates that, by and large, expatriates find that
their overseas assignments have enhanced and
enriched their personal lives (Stahl et al., 2002).
What is unclear, though, is whether such assignments positively affect their subsequent career
progression. Thus career success is defined here in
terms of upward mobility.
The second boundary condition is that I focus on
the relationship between expatriate assignment
experience and intra-organizational career success.
In other words, this model does not directly address
the link between international assignments and
career success that repatriates may have later at
companies other than the ones that sent them
overseas. Thus I leave the relationship between
international assignment experience and extraorganizational career success as a direction for
future research. My principal reason for doing so
is that previous research on repatriation indicates
that many, if not most, employees believe that
accepting an international assignment is going to
Journal of International Business Studies
Expatriate assignments and intra-organizational career success
Mark C Bolino
822
facilitate their advancement within the organization that offered the assignment (Stahl et al., 2002;
Stroh et al., 2005). Indeed, one of the key reasons
why many former expatriates are so dissatisfied
with their repatriation is that they believe they
have made a real sacrifice for their companies, and
they expected that their companies would show
some appreciation for those efforts by promoting
them. Put simply, expatriates frequently agree to
work overseas for their companies because they
believe it will help them get ahead in those same
companies. Therefore, in this paper, I shall focus on
the link between expatriate assignment experience
and intra-organizational career success.
The framework developed in this paper is based
largely on models of career mobility that have
examined career success in a domestic context. In
particular, there are three theories of career mobility that should be very relevant in outlining a
framework for understanding career success among
former expatriates. First, human capital theory
suggests that individuals tend to get ahead more
quickly when they invest in themselves, are
experienced, and have noteworthy accomplishments and achievements (Becker, 1964; Judge
et al., 1995; Wayne et al., 1999). For this reason,
human-capital variables have been widely recognized as important determinants of career success
(Ng et al., 2005). Based on this perspective, then,
expatriates should advance in their organizations
when they have done well overseas and have
acquired and developed valuable skills and abilities.
Second, Schein’s (1971) career-cone model proposes
that employees who move toward the ‘core’ of an
organization (where important organizational
activities take place) will ultimately advance more
rapidly than those who work in areas that are more
peripheral to, or further removed from, the central
strategy or mission of an organization (Schein,
1978; O’Hara et al., 1994; Orpen, 1998). Consistent
with this theory, O’Hara et al. (1994) found that
centrality was positively associated with intraorganizational career success. This idea is also
consistent with other theoretical models of career
movement. For example, network theories of career
success suggest that employees who work in areas
that are more visible or central have greater upward
mobility (Seibert et al., 2001); likewise, many
researchers have observed that working in the
critical functional areas of an organization usually
leads to more rapid promotions (Gunz and Jalland,
1996). Accordingly, international assignments
should facilitate intra-organizational career success
Journal of International Business Studies
when such experience puts expatriates into the core
of what the organization does.
Third, and finally, career development practices,
such as mentoring and other support, have been
linked with career success as well (Wayne et al.,
1999). Consistent with this notion, researchers
have also proposed that certain organizational
practices facilitate the career progression of expatriates (Feldman and Thomas, 1992; Stroh, 1995;
Selmer, 1999). In particular, Feldman and Thomas
(1992) argued that career development programs
play an important role in fostering expatriate
effectiveness, and other research indicates that
such practices facilitate the adjustment of repatriates as well (Bossard and Peterson, 2005). More
generally, it has been found that both mentoring
and career development assistance facilitate career
success (Wayne et al., 1999; Ng et al., 2005). The
degree to which employees have been supported by
their organizations, then, is likely to affect their
chances for career success.
In terms of the organizational implications of
repatriate career success, there is clear evidence
indicating that repatriates are more likely to quit
when their organizations have mishandled their
repatriation (Gregersen, 1992; Baughn, 1995;
Peltonen, 1997; Bossard and Peterson, 2005). Repatriate
turnover is likely to be especially high when
organizations have not met the expectations of
expatriates who have come back home (Stroh et al.,
2000). Moreover, this line of research suggests that
high turnover rates among repatriates typically
have a negative impact on the willingness of other
workers to relocate internationally (Stroh, 1995).
An integration of these perspectives on career
advancement and repatriation can be summarized
in this way:
Individuals need certain skills, abilities, and
achievements to get ahead in organizations, and
certain types of international assignments are
more likely to facilitate or highlight such accomplishments.
Individuals tend to get ahead when they have
worked in areas that are seen as central to the
success of the organization, so organizations will
place more value on expatriate experiences that are
consistent with their principal strategy or mission.
Individuals tend to get ahead when they have
had career development assistance, and expatriates who have received such support are likely to
have greater career success in the firm that
expatriated them.
Expatriate assignments and intra-organizational career success
Mark C Bolino
823
The extent to which former expatriates tend to
get ahead will influence an organization’s ability
to retain its current repatriates and to recruit new
expatriates.
The framework consists of three categories of
antecedents of repatriate career success. The first
category is expatriate experience: these variables
describe the nature of the repatriate’s experience
overseas and the extent to which he or she has
demonstrated success and developed important
skills. The second category is the parent-organization
context: these variables are ones likely to determine
the degree to which organizations value international experience. The third category is career
development practices: these variables address the
degree to which the careers of expatriates have been
supported by their organizations through the use of
specific actions. It is proposed that, together, these
factors will influence the intra-organizational
career success of former expatriates, and it is
expected that intra-organizational career success,
in turn, will affect organizational and employee
outcomes. In particular, it is proposed that intraorganizational career success will impact the willingness of other employees to accept an expatriate
assignment, and will influence repatriate turnover
as well (although this effect will also be moderated
by repatriate expectations and motives). The key
elements of the framework are depicted in Figure 1.
Expatriate experience
The first aspect of the model suggests that certain
assignment experiences are more likely to be
associated with intra-organizational career success
among former expatriates. In particular, it is
proposed that repatriates will tend to get ahead
when they:
(1) excelled in their overseas assignments;
(2) were sent overseas for managerial development;
(3) had significant levels of international experience
and
(4) were assigned to subsidiaries with greater strategic importance.
Expatriate success
While multiple aspects of expatriate adjustment
have been thoroughly investigated, several scholars
have recently argued that expatriate performance
and success should receive greater attention among
researchers (e.g., Shay and Baack, 2004; Shaffer
et al., 2006). Harrison and Shaffer (2005) indicate
that successful expatriates are those who (a) do not
quit their assignments prematurely, and (b) perform effectively by completing their tasks and
Antecedents of Repatriate Career Success
Expatriate Experience
•
•
•
•
Successful posting (P1a/b)
Developmental assignments (P2)
Significant international experience (P3)
Strategic importance of assignment unit (P4)
Organizational & Employee
Outcomes
Willingness of other
employees to accept an
expatriate assignment (P10)
Parent-Organization Context
•
•
Global strategic posture (P5)
CEO & TMT international experience (P6)
Intra-organizational
career success
Repatriate turnover (P11)
Career Development Practices
•
•
•
Figure 1
Connectivity mechanisms (P7)
Repatriation adjustment assistance (P8)
Career development plans (P9)
Repatriate
Expectations and
Motives (P12a/b)
Basic framework of repatriate career success.
Journal of International Business Studies
Expatriate assignments and intra-organizational career success
Mark C Bolino
824
developing/maintaining interpersonal ties with
host-country employees.
Previous studies have often noted the high failure
rates associated with expatriate assignments
(McEvoy and Parker, 1995; Shaffer and Harrison,
1998; Stroh et al., 2005). Although some scholars
have challenged the idea that expatriate failure
rates are as high as previously suggested (Harzing,
1995; Forster, 1997), it seems likely that expatriates
who return from their overseas assignments
prematurely will find that their career paths have
been altered. Researchers, though, have yet to
examine the career implications of expatriate
failure. Although it is possible that some failed
expatriates could return home without facing any
real career consequences, it seems very unlikely
that expatriates who come home early would
actually be promoted. In other words, career
success should be greater among those who completed their international assignments than among
those who failed to see their assignments through
to completion.
While previous research has often focused on
premature returns (i.e., expatriate failure), research
indicates that employees who complete their
expatriate assignments are frequently ineffective
in their overseas jobs (Black et al., 1991). That is,
performing well on the job is often a challenge for
those employees who do not return home early
(Caligiuri, 2000; Kraimer and Wayne, 2004; Shay
and Baack, 2004). Moreover, respondents in a
qualitative study by Suutari (2003) indicated that,
if employees do not perform well overseas, their
international experience is likely to be more of a
liability than an asset. Likewise, Yan et al. (2002:
385) suggest that employees need to ‘demonstrate
superior performance’ in order for international
assignment experience to enhance their career
prospects. Consistent with this notion, human
capital theory suggests that individuals who have
done well in previous jobs and have more accomplishments are more likely to be promoted (Judge
et al., 1995; Lyness and Thompson, 2000). Accordingly, expatriates who succeed in their assignments
– by seeing them through to completion and
performing effectively while overseas – are more
likely to get ahead when they repatriate.
Proposition 1a: Intra-organizational career success will be greater among former expatriates who
completed their overseas assignments than
among those who failed to see their assignments
through to completion.
Journal of International Business Studies
Proposition 1b: Intra-organizational career success will be greater among former expatriates who
performed effectively in their overseas jobs than
among those who performed ineffectively in their
overseas jobs.
Developmental assignments
Previous research indicates that expatriates are
typically sent overseas for managerial development,
to serve as a source of control, or to fill in an
overseas vacancy until a permanent employee can
be found (Edstrom and Galbraith, 1977; Bolino and
Feldman, 2000; Shay and Baack, 2004). In general,
research on career success indicates that developmental job assignments facilitate advancement
(Lyness and Thompson, 2000). Furthermore, Shay
and Baack (2004: 218) argue that overseas assignments for managerial development ‘allow individuals to initially or further develop the requisite
international skills and thereby become a more
valuable resource to their MNC.’ However, owing to
the very nature of the assignment, expatriates who
are sent abroad to control subsidiary operations are
less concerned with developing international skills
and abilities. Instead, these international assignees
seek to ensure that subunits are acting in ways that
serve the overall interests of the organization rather
than local interests (Kobrin, 1988). At the same time,
Bolino and Feldman (2000) suggest that fill-in assignments are usually less challenging and offer fewer
opportunities for skill utilization and development.
Thus expatriates sent overseas for the purpose of
managerial development should be more likely to
advance than those assigned for other purposes.
However, while developmental assignments
should have career-enhancing effects, such assignments may be developmental only to the extent
that employees allow them to be. That is, an
employee’s attitude regarding his or her own
development could be as important as the true
nature of the assignment. Put simply, then,
employees sent overseas for managerial development will benefit from such assignments only to
the extent that they allow themselves to truly
develop. For example, few benefits are likely to
accrue to expatriates who are sent overseas for
managerial development but nevertheless maintain
a ‘fill-in’ mindset.
Proposition 2: Intra-organizational career success
will be greater among former expatriates who
were sent overseas for managerial development
than among those sent for other purposes.
Expatriate assignments and intra-organizational career success
Mark C Bolino
825
Significant international experience
The relationship between the degree of international assignment experience and post-assignment
success is somewhat unclear. Based on human
capital theory, longer assignments should afford
expatriates more opportunities to develop skills
and abilities. Consistent with this idea, Bolino and
Feldman (2000) found that assignment length was
positively related to expatriates’ ability to utilize
their existing skills and to develop new ones.
Similarly, employees who have been on multiple
expatriate assignments should have additional opportunities to develop their cross-cultural
skills and abilities. Accordingly, international
assignees who have had longer assignments or have
had multiple overseas postings should be more
marketable within their organizations when they
return home.
However, it should also be noted that some have
argued that the longer expatriates remain overseas,
the more likely it is that they may experience an
‘out of sight, out of mind problem’, which could
adversely affect their careers (Stroh et al., 1998;
Mendenhall et al., 2002). Such expatriates may also
risk being labeled permanent expatriates (Feldman
and Thomas, 1992). Furthermore, it has been
argued that the longer expatriates have been away
overseas, the more difficult it is for them to
successfully adjust and perform when they finally
come back home (Black et al., 1992). Thus it is
possible that having too many expatriate assignments or being assigned overseas for very long
periods could actually do more harm than good in
terms of one’s career.
In particular, overseas assignments that last
less than 1 year are typically considered short-term
assignments (Selmer, 2004; Konopaske and Werner,
2005). Konopaske and Werner (2005), however,
define long-term assignments as ones that for last
between 1 year and 4 years. Based on these
definitions, then, it seems that international
experience may begin to become more of a liability
when expatriates have been away from home for
more than 4 years, and assignments that last much
longer than that may be especially problematic.
Indeed, in a study by Feldman and Thomas
(1992: 283), respondents who had worked overseas
for 8–10 years indicated that their careers
had suffered because they had stayed abroad
‘too long.’ Therefore the relationship between
international assignment experience and intraorganizational career success is expected to be
curvilinear.
Proposition 3: Intra-organizational career success
will be greater among former expatriates who
have had significant international experience
(in terms of assignment length and the number
of assignments) than among those with relatively
little international experience; however, being
overseas too long will be negatively related to
intra-organizational career success.
Strategic importance of the overseas subunit
Among the many subsidiaries of the MNC, certain
subunits are likely to be especially important. In
other words, some subsidiaries will make more
important contributions to the overall strategic
mission of the organization than others (Nohria
and Ghoshal, 1994; Bolino and Feldman, 2000).
Likewise, some subunits will be located in countries
or markets that are considered especially important
for the organization. Expatriates who have been
assigned to units that are seen as critically important to the organization’s future success will tend to
move closer to the core of the organization’s overall
mission. Accordingly, when these international
assignees return home, they should be promoted
more rapidly than those who were assigned to units
that have less strategic relevance to the parent
company. Here I focus on two aspects of strategic
importance: (1) the role of the subsidiary in terms
of knowledge inflows and outflows; and (2) the
strategic importance of the market in which the
subsidiary is located.
Gupta and Govindarajan (1991) suggest that
subunits typically play one of four strategic roles,
based on the degree to which they utilize knowledge created outside their own unit and the extent
to which knowledge developed by the subunit is
shared with other organizational units. According
to their framework, subsidiaries that are implementers create very little knowledge, and rely heavily
on knowledge from the parent company or
other subsidiaries to carry out their activities.
Local innovators are subsidiaries that are highly
autonomous and create knowledge that is tailored
to suit the local market, and thus is not widely
shared with the parent organization or with other
subsidiaries. Integrated players are subunits that
develop knowledge that can be used by subsidiaries;
however, these subsidiaries are also dependent on
external knowledge from the parent company or
other subunits in order to operate. Finally, subsidiaries that are global innovators are those that
serve as the principal source of knowledge for the
other units of the MNC. Thus these subunits are
Journal of International Business Studies
Expatriate assignments and intra-organizational career success
Mark C Bolino
826
characterized by high levels of knowledge
outflows and low levels of knowledge inflows from
the rest of the MNC (Gupta and Govindarajan,
1991).
Gupta and Govindarajan (1991) argue that subsidiaries that are integrated players or global
innovators tend to have greater strategic importance because they develop knowledge that is used
throughout the larger organization. Furthermore,
they indicate that managers who work in these
types of subsidiary usually have greater levels of
global responsibility and authority. Accordingly,
former expatriates who were assigned to subsidiaries that have global innovator or integrated
player roles should advance more rapidly than
those who were assigned to subsidiaries with
implementer or local innovator roles.
Expatriates should also be better positioned for
advancement when they have worked in critical
overseas markets. Gupta and Govindarajan (2000)
suggest that strategic markets are ones that have
great potential owing to their size or rate of growth,
or ones that have great learning potential because
of their rapidly developing technologies or sophisticated and demanding customers. In recent years,
for example, there has been considerable discussion
about how many companies in the US and elsewhere consider China to be a long-term strategic
market that is considered vital to their future
performance (Yan, 1998). Again, the idea of the
career cone suggests that the experience of employees who have been assigned to markets that are
viewed as largely peripheral or insignificant is likely
to be less valued by the organization. In contrast,
international assignees who have worked in subsidiaries located in critical overseas markets should
move closer to the organization’s core, and therefore should be able to climb the career ladder more
quickly.
Proposition 4: Intra-organizational career success
will be greater among former expatriates who
were assigned to subsidiaries with greater strategic importance than among those assigned to less
important subsidiaries.
Overall, then, the model suggests that repatriates
will get ahead more quickly when they performed
well in their international jobs, were sent overseas
for managerial development, have significant
(but not excessive) international experience, and
were assigned to units that are strategically
important.
Journal of International Business Studies
Parent-organization context
According to the model, former expatriates are more
likely to advance when they possess knowledge,
skills, and abilities that are thought to be critical
to the success of their organization. Specifically, it
is proposed that intra-organizational career success
will be greater among repatriates who:
(1) work in organizations that have a global
strategic posture; and
(2) work in firms where the CEO and top management team also have extensive international
experience.
Global strategic posture
Carpenter and Fredrickson (2001: 534) define a
firm’s global strategic posture as ‘the degree to
which a firm depends on foreign markets for
customers and factors of production and the
geographical dispersion of these markets and
factors.’ Based on this definition, an international
company that focuses principally on exporting
would have a rather narrow global strategic posture.
In contrast, a company with a broad global strategic
posture is one that seeks to achieve competitive
advantage by leveraging its worldwide capabilities
through the effective coordination of its overseas
subunits (Sanders and Carpenter, 1998); companies
with such an orientation also tend to use their
geographically dispersed resources to make strategic moves and countermoves in order to launch
attacks or mount defenses against their competitors
(Bartlett and Ghoshal, 1989; Gupta and Govindarajan,
2000; Kostova and Roth, 2003).
As an organization’s global strategic posture
broadens, the level of international interdependence and integration increases within the firm
(Roth, 1995; Kostova and Roth, 2003). In other
words, the subunits of the firm must all operate and
respond to global challenges collectively rather
than autonomously (Roth, 1995; Sanders and
Carpenter, 1998). Roth (1995) found that managers
with greater overseas experience were better able to
manage international interdependence because
they had a better grasp of the complexities of the
multinational context. Thus firms that have a
broad global strategic posture are likely to have a
relatively greater need for managers and employees
who understand international business and are
familiar with the overseas operations of the organization. Indeed, previous research suggests that
CEOs with international assignment experience are
able to manage companies that have a broad
Expatriate assignments and intra-organizational career success
Mark C Bolino
827
strategic posture more effectively than CEOs who
lack such experience (Carpenter et al., 2001).
According to the model, former expatriates
should be more likely to advance when their
companies consider international activities to be
activities that are critical to their overall mission or
strategy. That is, upward mobility should be
enhanced because firms with a global strategic
posture are reliant upon the skills that former
expatriates possess (Anderson et al., 1981). Thus
career advancement should be greater among
repatriates employed by companies where the
global strategic posture is broad rather than narrow.
Proposition 5: Intra-organizational career success
will be greater among former expatriates working
in firms with a broad global strategic posture than
among those working in firms with a more
narrow global strategic posture.
CEO and top management team international
experience
Previous research has linked the international
experience of an organization’s CEO and top
management team (TMT) with its emphasis on
international business. For example, Sambharya’s
(1996) findings indicate that firms whose TMT
members have greater levels of overseas experience
tend to have greater international involvement.
Similarly, in a study of small and medium-sized
enterprises, Reuber and Fischer (1997) found that
internationally experienced TMTs tended to form
more global partnerships and pursue foreign sales
more quickly after start-up. Likewise, Carpenter et al.
(2001) and Carpenter and Fredrickson (2001) suggest
that companies are more likely to have a broader
global strategic posture when their CEO and top
team members have had international assignment
experience. Overall, then, when an organization is
led by individuals with global experience, it is likely
that employees who have international assignment
experience will also be seen as critical players, and
thus advance more rapidly when they return home
from their expatriate assignments.
Proposition 6: Intra-organizational career success
will be greater among former expatriates working
in companies where the CEO and TMT have
international experience than among those in
companies where the CEO and TMT lack international experience.
In summary, these propositions suggest that
expatriate assignments will be associated with
career success in firms with a broad global strategic
posture, and in companies managed by CEOs and
TMTs who have had significant international
assignment experience themselves.
Career development practices
The final set of antecedents is comprised of career
development practices. Feldman and Thomas
(1992) proposed that organizational career development programs play an important role in
fostering expatriate effectiveness. Other research
indicates that such practices facilitate the adjustment of repatriates as well (Bossard and Peterson,
2005). In domestic settings, it has also been found
that mentoring and career development assistance
are related to career success (Wayne et al., 1999;
Ng et al., 2005). With regard to career advancement
following an international assignment, I argue that
three practices are especially important:
(1) the use of connectivity mechanisms;
(2) repatriation assistance and
(3) career development plans.
Connectivity mechanisms
As described earlier, a common problem among
expatriates is that they often lose touch with people
and events back at the home office (Harris, 1989;
Mendenhall et al., 2002). In previous research,
scholars have advocated that organizations should
implement career development practices that keep
expatriates connected with the home office while
they are working overseas (e.g., Mendenhall
et al., 2002). These practices have sometimes been
referred to as connectivity mechanisms (Hsieh et al.,
1999). Connectivity mechanisms often involve
assigning expatriates back-home mentors and
sponsors, or allowing expatriates to visit the home
office on a regular basis (Hauser, 1998). Moreover,
previous research suggests that individuals’ ability
to cultivate and maintain important connections
and networks is significantly related to their career
success (Seibert et al., 2001).
For example, Feldman and Thomas (1992) argue
that back-home mentors can help an expatriate
stay abreast of important career opportunities that
might benefit him or her. Likewise, many companies allow expatriates to make regular visits back
home in order to maintain relationships with
colleagues and supervisors there (Guzzo et al.,
1994; GMAC Global Relocation Services, 2004).
Staying connected to colleagues and supervisors is
important, because there are frequently significant
Journal of International Business Studies
Expatriate assignments and intra-organizational career success
Mark C Bolino
828
changes back at the home office while international
assignees are out of the country (Black, 1992). For
example, reorganizations or restructurings may
occur during the expatriate’s absence. Accordingly,
supervisors who had reassured expatriates that
there would be a place for them when they
completed their assignments may have been reassigned, or may no longer work for the organization
when the expatriate actually returns years later.
Moreover, expatriates who have lost touch with key
decision-makers or who have little knowledge of
new job openings back at the home office are likely
to be at a disadvantage relative to expatriates who
have maintained close ties with people back home
and have an awareness of internal career opportunities there (Feldman and Thomas, 1992). Thus it is
likely that expatriates who have maintained ties
through the use of connectivity mechanisms will
experience greater intra-organizational career success following their repatriation.
Proposition 7: Intra-organizational career success
will be greater among former expatriates who
were provided with connectivity mechanisms
than among those who were not provided with
connectivity mechanisms.
Repatriation adjustment assistance
A number of studies have documented the difficulties that many expatriates experience in terms of
readjusting to life and work back home (e.g., Black,
1992; Black et al., 1992; Gregersen and Stroh, 1997;
Stroh et al., 1998). Furthermore, this work indicates
that, when expatriates have a difficult time adjusting, it often adversely affects their job performance
(Adler, 1981; Black et al., 1992). For this reason,
researchers have argued that organizations need to
provide assistance and support to facilitate the
adjustment of repatriates. For example, it has been
suggested that employers can ease the ‘reverse
culture shock’ faced by many expatriates by offering repatriate training, realistic re-entry previews,
re-orientation programs, financial and tax assistance, and so on (Harvey, 1989; Black, 1992;
Baughn, 1995; Mendenhall et al., 2002). Unfortunately, when repatriates have not received such
support, they are likely to have greater difficulty
reintegrating, and will be more likely to struggle at
work (Adler, 1981). Moreover, when returning
expatriates fail to hit the ground running, and
demonstrate low levels of job performance, their
chances of being promoted are likely to diminish.
Thus repatriates who received repatriation assistance
Journal of International Business Studies
upon their return should have greater intra-organizational career success.
Proposition 8: Intra-organizational career success
will be greater among former expatriates who
were given repatriation adjustment support when
they returned home than among those who did
not receive such support.
Career development plan
There are often few guarantees when employees
accept an expatriate assignment. Indeed, less than
10% of expatriates are assured of a promotion when
they return home, and many are not guaranteed a
position of any kind within the company (Tung,
1998; GMAC Global Relocation Services, 2004).
Moreover, a common complaint among repatriates
is that they are often put in temporary positions or
in ‘holding patterns’ rather than permanent jobs
when they return home to their organizations
(Harvey, 1989; Black and Gregersen, 1991). In order
to address the concerns of expatriates, Feldman and
Thomas (1992) recommended that international
assignees be given a career development plan
ensuring that the overseas assignment makes sense
in terms of the employee’s overall career with the
company. Equally important, employers must actually enact such plans with regard to the employee’s
expatriation and repatriation. In other words,
career development plans are unlikely to be helpful
if they are not followed.
Although such plans would not guarantee that
the expatriate will be promoted when he or she
returns, it should increase the likelihood that the
expatriate will advance more rapidly when he or
she gets back. Indeed, former expatriates who have
been placed in temporary jobs or in positions that
make little use of their international experience are
likely to be at a disadvantage relative to those who
have been given new job assignments that clearly
draw upon the knowledge, skills, and abilities that
they acquired while working abroad.
Proposition 9: Intra-organizational career success
will be greater among former expatriates who
were given career development plans that were
implemented during their expatriation/repatriation than among those whose career development plans were not implemented, or those who
were never given such plans.
In summary, then, intra-organizational career
success is more likely to occur when comp-
Expatriate assignments and intra-organizational career success
Mark C Bolino
829
anies provide connectivity mechanisms; offer repatriation assistance; and establish and enact career
development plans for their international assignees.
Organizational and employee outcomes
associated with intra-organizational career
success
Thus far in this paper I have sought to describe
when expatriate assignments will facilitate career
success. In this section I now seek to clarify the
outcomes associated with career success (or failure)
among expatriates. From employees’ point of view,
there is great value in understanding when overseas
assignments are likely to help them get ahead in
their organizations. Indeed, equipped with such
knowledge, employees can actually make informed
decisions about the costs and benefits of accepting
an international posting. At the same time,
this issue has real implications for organizations,
too – especially in terms of recruiting future
expatriates and retaining former ones. Here, then,
I address these important organizational and
employee outcomes.
Willingness to work overseas
As discussed earlier, managers with global skills and
abilities are in high demand, and there is a shortage
of managers who possess such skills (e.g., Gregersen
et al., 1998; Konopaske et al., 2005). Nevertheless,
several studies indicate that some employees are
unwilling to accept an overseas work assignment
(Aryee et al., 1996; Borstorff et al., 1997; Konopaske
et al., 2005; van der Velde et al., 2005). One critical
reason for their reluctance is that many prospective
international assignees have seen what has happened to their colleagues when they returned
home, and these potential expatriates often
come to believe that their colleagues would have
been better off if they had just stayed home
(Borstorff et al., 1997; Stroh et al., 2005; van der
Velde et al., 2005).
Konopaske and Werner (2005) argue that the
potential career implications of working overseas
are an especially important factor to contemplate
among employees considering whether to accept or
decline international assignments that will last
longer than a year. For this reason, Stroh et al.
(1998) argue that organizations that seek to send
qualified employees overseas in the future must be
able to demonstrate that international assignments
have enhanced the careers of those who have
accepted such assignments in the past. Indeed, to
the extent that employees observe that returning
expatriates tend to get ahead in their organizations,
it is likely to increase their own willingness to work
overseas. Thus prospective expatriates should be
more willing to accept global assignments when
their repatriated colleagues have experienced career
success.
Proposition 10: The intra-organizational career
success of former expatriates is positively related
to the willingness of other employees to accept
expatriate assignments.
Repatriate turnover
Researchers have often lamented high turnover
rates among repatriates (Black et al., 1992; Allen
and Alvarez, 1998). In particular, research indicates
that, within 2 years of their return, roughly 20–50%
of repatriates no longer work for the organization
that sent them overseas (Stroh et al., 1998; Bossard
and Peterson, 2005). High turnover among repatriates is costly for organizations in at least two ways.
First, given the considerable expense associated
with sending employees overseas for several years,
repatriate turnover means that organizations are
losing resources in which they have already
invested heavily. Second, when former expatriates
leave their organizations, they take along with
them the skills, abilities, and connections that are
critical to the future success of global firms
(Stroh et al., 2005). For example, Kostova and
Roth (2003) suggest that the networks created
by expatriates are an important aspect of the
social capital that enables multinationals to more
successfully manage interdependence. Moreover,
other studies indicate that CEOs with overseas
experience are more effective at running global
corporations (Daily et al., 2000; Carpenter et al.,
2001). Put simply, then, high repatriate turnover
represents a real loss for firms that do business
internationally.
By and large, research regarding repatriate turnover indicates that former expatriates leave their
companies because their returns have been mismanaged, and because they feel unappreciated
(Allen and Alvarez, 1998; Bossard and Peterson,
2005). Consistent with these findings, Tung (1998)
found that a majority of international assignees
were satisfied with expatriation, but that most were
dissatisfied with repatriation. Furthermore, she
suggests that ‘inadequate advancement opportunities upon return’ is one of the principal reasons
for high levels of dissatisfaction among former
expatriates (Tung, 1998: 138). Previous research
Journal of International Business Studies
Expatriate assignments and intra-organizational career success
Mark C Bolino
830
indicates that employees who see limited advancement opportunities are often more likely to leave
their organizations (Johnston et al., 1993). Accordingly, former expatriates should be most likely to
quit when they have had limited career success
within their organizations following an overseas
assignment. In contrast, those who have been able
to get ahead following an expatriate assignment
should be less interested in leaving their companies.
link between expatriate experience and intraorganizational career success. Specifically, turnover will be higher among employees who believe
their organizations promised them that working
overseas would facilitate intra-organizational
career success and failed to keep such promises
than among those who felt such promises were
kept, or did not perceive that such promises
were made.
Proposition 11: The intra-organizational career
success of former expatriates is negatively related
to repatriate turnover.
An employee’s primary motive for having accepted
a global assignment is also likely to moderate the
relationship between intra-organizational career
success and turnover. In particular, while repatriates who fail to advance in their careers are likely to
leave their companies, turnover is likely to be
especially high among employees whose principal
motivation for working as an international assignee
was because it would enhance their intra-organizational career success. However, Stahl et al. (2002)
point out that employees often accept international
assignments because working overseas can broaden
one’s horizons, reduce narrow-mindedness, and
enrich one’s personal life. Repatriates who accepted
their assignments for these reasons, then, should
view their overseas experiences positively, even if
there has been little benefit to them in terms of
their careers (Stahl et al., 2002). Thus, among
expatriates who accepted an overseas assignment
for their own personal development (rather than
because they expected it to help them get ahead),
intra-organizational career success is likely to have
a weaker effect on their decision to leave (or remain
with) their company.
While turnover is likely to be high among repatriates who are frustrated with their post-assignment
career prospects, there are likely to be some
important moderators of this relationship. In
particular, Stroh et al. (2000) argue that employee
expectations play a critical role in determining how
repatriates are likely to react to career aspirations
that go unfulfilled. Although most companies
make few explicit promises with regard to promotions or advancement following an international
assignment (Tung, 1998; GMAC Global Relocation
Services, 2004), many organizations do imply that
such experience is valuable to the company, and
will in fact be rewarded (Carpenter et al., 2001;
Welch, 2003). Accordingly, expatriates usually
come home expecting to be welcomed and appreciated. Moreover, they often expect that their
newly acquired skills and abilities will enable them
to get ahead more quickly.
If employees expected that an overseas assignment would facilitate their career success, they are
likely to be especially dissatisfied if these expectations are undermet (Stroh et al., 2000). To the
extent that organizations have met or overmet
employees’ expectations about career advancement, however, turnover should be less likely to
occur. Accordingly, turnover should be highest
among those who accepted an expatriate assignment because they thought it was a ticket to the top
(but it turned out not to be). In contrast, employees
who felt their organizations lived up to their
promises, or never offered any guarantees, will be
less likely to quit when they find that their overseas
experience has not helped their ascendancy back at
home.
Proposition 12a: The relationship between intraorganizational career success and turnover is
moderated by repatriate expectations about the
Journal of International Business Studies
Proposition 12b: The relationship between intraorganizational career success and turnover is
moderated by employees’ primary motive for
having accepted an overseas assignment. Specifically, turnover will be higher among employees
who accepted an overseas assignment because it
would help their careers than among those who
accepted an overseas assignment for their own
personal development.
Discussion
There have often been stories in the popular press
claiming that expatriate assignments facilitate
career success (e.g., Lublin, 1996; Fisher, 1997,
2005). However, there is in fact a paucity of
research addressing this link. Moreover, most
studies of repatriation indicate that repatriates
often believe that their overseas experience has
Expatriate assignments and intra-organizational career success
Mark C Bolino
831
been more of a liability than an asset in terms of
their careers (Gregersen, 1992; Baughn, 1995;
Bossard and Peterson, 2005). In this paper, I have
developed a framework delineating the linkages
between expatriate assignments and intra-organizational career success. Moreover, whereas previous
work has sometimes suggested that international
assignment experience might have career-enhancing effects (e.g., Judge et al., 1995; Ng et al., 2005),
this framework suggests that the relationship
between expatriation and career success is not so
straightforward. In other words, there are multiple
factors that will influence the degree to which
overseas experiences help or hinder the advancement of employees who have worked as international assignees. This model also posits that
intra-organizational career success has important
implications for organizations and individuals with
regard to the retention of former expatriates and
the recruitment of future expatriates.
Directions for future research
Testing the model
With regard to empirical tests of this model, a few
points should be made. First, there are already
existing measures for most of the core constructs
described here. For example, Carpenter et al. (2001)
developed a measure of global strategic posture that
is calculated using a firm’s foreign sales, foreign
production, and geographic dispersion; likewise,
researchers have developed measures of career
development plans, mentoring, and other career
development practices (e.g., Feldman and Thomas,
1992; Selmer, 1999). The measurement of other
variables, though, is less clear. For example, scholars have different views on the ways in which
expatriate success should be measured (Forster,
1997). In order to find empirical support for this
model, then, it will be necessary to have measures
that accurately assess these constructs.
In addition, there are a number of control
variables that should probably be included in any
empirical tests of this model. In particular, while it
is suggested here that repatriates will fare better in
their careers when they were sent overseas for
managerial development, this variable alone may
not fully capture the real nature of the tasks or roles
that expatriates fulfill overseas. For example, Harvey
and Novicevic (2001) indicate that expatriates may be
given tasks that are coordinative, computational, or
creative. It is possible that the degree to which
expatriates worked on these different tasks while
overseas could influence their career success back
home. In testing the model, then, researchers may
need to consider the specific tasks that expatriates
completed in their assignments.
Furthermore, personality variables can also be an
important determinant of individual career success.
Indeed, previous work indicates that individuals
who are conscientious, are high self-monitors,
possess an internal locus of control, and have a
proactive personality tend to have greater career
success (Kilduff and Day, 1994; Seibert et al., 1999;
Ng et al., 2005). Other individual differences – such
as gender, race, marital status, education – are likely to
be especially relevant, too (Judge et al., 1995; Ng et al.,
2005). Likewise, the relationship between expatriate
experience and intra-organizational career success
could depend upon the career stage of the expatriate.
For instance, Tung (1998) argues that younger
employees often benefit more from working overseas
because they are typically given more significant
duties and responsibilities than they would have had
back home. On the other hand, more seasoned
executives might be better equipped to parlay a stint
overseas into a higher-level position back home. In
testing this model, then, it will be important that
researchers collect data on these variables in order to
control for their potential influence.
In addition to these variables, researchers may
also want to take into account other contextual
factors that could influence career success. In
particular, industry and functional area could
clearly have important influences on the relationships in this model. Likewise, Anderson et al. (1981)
point out that intra-organizational mobility is often
a function of vacancies. Thus repatriates who have
returned home along with a large cohort of other
repatriates may find it more difficult to get ahead. It
would be advisable, therefore, to control for the
repatriate cohort size when testing key elements of
this model. Allen and Alvarez (1998) indicate that
expatriates sometimes get caught in the middle of
disputes between headquarters and subsidiaries
that could hurt their careers somewhere down the
road. Thus the politics of doing one’s job overseas
might jeopardize an expatriate’s future prospects
back home. Similarly, expatriates may be perceived
more favorably when they have assignments that
require them to work extensively with managers
back home and thereby allow them to develop
valuable connections. Political climate, then, is
another variable that could influence these relationships, and thus should also be considered as a
potential control variable.
Journal of International Business Studies
Expatriate assignments and intra-organizational career success
Mark C Bolino
832
Considering multiple factors and mediated models
The model presented here represents an important
starting point for considering the ways in which
expatriate experience affects one’s career; nevertheless, researchers will also need to build upon this
work and develop models that consider multiple
factors simultaneously. For example, is it better
(in terms of one’s career) to turn down an expatriate
assignment or to accept one and fail overseas or
return prematurely? Likewise, it is difficult to
determine what the career implications of an
overseas assignment might be if the company has
a rather narrow global strategic posture (which
should decrease an expatriate’s chances of career
success), but the expatriate is assigned to a
strategically important subunit, performs well overseas, and is well supported (which should all
increase his or her chances of career success). In
short, future studies need to determine which
factors are more or less important in predicting
the intra-organizational career success of former
expatriates.
Likewise, future work should consider how the
various factors presented here may interrelate or
interact. In particular, it is likely that many of the
predictors are linked in specific ways. For example,
expatriates may tend to be sent overseas for
developmental purposes when they work in companies with a global strategic posture or in which
the TMT and/or CEO have had international
experience. Some of the factors in the model could
also moderate the effects of other factors. It is
possible, for instance, that being successful in an
assignment might be more strongly related to intraorganizational career success when the expatriate
was assigned to an important subunit. Clearly,
then, the framework presented in this paper is
merely a starting point for developing more
sophisticated models.
Indeed, additional moderating variables may also
be relevant to the model described here. For
example, it is possible that international experience
could be especially useful when individuals have
also had other important experiences, or have a
particular background. In other words, expatriate
assignments might sometimes be necessary, but not
sufficient, in helping employees make it to the top
of an organization. Relatedly, it would also be
worthwhile to examine the direct and indirect
effects that expatriate experience has on career
success. In other words, do former expatriates
tend to get ahead because they went overseas, or
did they develop certain skills or qualities while
Journal of International Business Studies
working abroad that, in turn, helped them advance
more quickly? Thus more work is needed to understand the potential mediating processes that could
explain the relationship between overseas experience and career success.
Evaluating career success
While this research has outlined some of the
principal instances in which expatriation will
facilitate intra-organizational career success, a
number of other issues must also be explored in
order to truly understand the career implications of
working as an expatriate. In particular, future
research must seek to assess the career trajectories
of former expatriates relative to those of individuals
who were offered an expatriate assignment and
declined it, or relative to those who were never
really considered for an overseas assignment.
Accordingly, rather than just comparing the career
progress of repatriates based on the factors outlined
in this paper, future studies should also determine
whether employees would have been better off if
they had turned down an overseas posting, or if
they had never been offered an assignment in the
first place.
Another issue with regard to evaluating the
relationship between expatriate assignment experience and career success is that one must take into
account the number of promotions since the
expatriate completed the assignment, or the number of promotions someone has received vs the
number of years they have been back home.
Indeed, there may be a real lag between completing
an expatriate assignment and that overseas experience actually paying off with one’s employer. For
example, some former expatriates might initially be
placed in holding patterns, or into their old jobs.
Down the road, though, their experiences may
finally yield dividends in terms of more rapid
advancement. Thus former expatriates may only
benefit from their international experiences years
later. Clearly, then, those who seek to investigate
this question rigorously will need to include a
longitudinal aspect to their overall research design.
It would also be interesting to look more closely
at what happens to employees who refuse to be sent
overseas. There is certainly anecdotal evidence that
some employees feel pressured to accept international postings because declining them would hurt
their careers (Feldman and Thomas, 1992). Again,
though, there are really no hard data on this point.
Put simply, then, does turning down an assignment
really hurt one’s career? This is likely to be a
Expatriate assignments and intra-organizational career success
Mark C Bolino
833
complex issue. For example, the career implications
of turning down an assignment may vary depending on the nature of the assignment or its location.
Thus it may be permissible to refuse to be sent to an
unusual or culturally tough location, but it may be
frowned upon when employees decline postings at
a more familiar overseas site. It is possible, too, that
men who are unwilling to accept an overseas
assignment could be penalized to a greater extent
than women who decline an international posting,
or that it is seen as more acceptable for employees
with families to state their preference to stay home.
Individuals at different career stages might also
have more or less discretion in accepting or
declining an expatriate assignment. Likewise, it
may be acceptable to refuse one assignment, but
refusing multiple assignments may do great harm
to one’s intra-organizational career prospects. Overall, then, more work is needed in order to better
understand the career implications of declining an
expatriate assignment as well.
A related question here is the way in which
premature returns (i.e., failure in an expatriate
assignment) might affect an employee’s career
path. In a study by Riusala and Suutari (2000),
some respondents had considered returning home
early (i.e., not seeing their assignment through to
its completion). However, most of these expatriates
were wary of doing so because they believed that
failure to complete the overseas assignment would
adversely influence their career prospects back
home. Indeed, 31% of the respondents who contemplated an early return believed such a move
would ‘very negatively’ affect their career, and 45%
thought it would ‘negatively’ affect their career.
Nevertheless, we still have little understanding of
the ways in which premature returns might be
related to the career prospects of expatriates, and
whether the concerns of these individuals were
truly warranted.
Potential practical implications
Finally, if the propositions offered here receive
some empirical support, there will be some important practical implications of this work. In particular, employees making the decision to accept
or decline an expatriate posting need to look
carefully at their organizations and the nature of
the proposed assignment in order to make an
informed decision about whether becoming an
expatriate will ultimately help or hinder their
standing within the organization. As argued here,
in terms of intra-organizational career success,
it may not always make sense to agree to be sent
overseas. At the same time, organizations need
to be honest about the link between expatriate
assignments and career success within their own
organizations. Moreover, if organizations can
find ways to reward former international assignees,
it should not only assist them in attracting
future expatriates, but also enable them to retain
those who have already completed an overseas
assignment.
Acknowledgements
I thank JIBS Departmental Editor Professor Mary Ann
Von Glinow and two anonymous reviewers for their
helpful feedback on earlier drafts of this article.
References
Adler, N.J. (1981) ‘Re-entry: Managing cross-cultural transitions’,
Group and Organization Studies 6(3): 341–356.
Allen, D. and Alvarez, S.A. (1998) ‘Empowering expatriates and
organizations to improve repatriation effectiveness’, Human
Resource Planning 21(4): 29–39.
Anderson, J.C., Milkovich, G.T. and Tsui, A. (1981) ‘A model of
intra-organizational mobility’, Academy of Management Review
6(4): 529–538.
Aryee, S., Chay, Y.W. and Chew, J. (1996) ‘An investigation of
the willingness of managerial employees to accept an
expatriate assignment’, Journal of Organizational Behavior
17(3): 267–283.
Bartlett, C. and Ghoshal, S. (1989) Managing Across Borders: The
Transnational Solution, Harvard Business School Press: Boston, MA.
Baughn, C. (1995) ‘Personal and Organizational Factors Associated with Effective Repatriation’, in J. Selmer (ed.) Expatriate
Management: New Ideas for International Business, Quorum
Books: Westport, CT, pp: 215–230.
Becker, G. (1964) Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical
Analysis with Special Reference to Education, Columbia University Press: New York.
Bhaskar-Shrinivas, P., Harrison, D.A., Shaffer, M.A. and
Luk, D.M. (2005) ‘Input-based and time-based models
of international adjustment: meta-analytic evidence and
theoretical extensions’, Academy of Management Journal 48(2):
257–280.
Black, J.S. (1992) ‘Coming home: the relationship of expatriate
expectations with repatriation adjustment and job performance’, Human Relations 45(2): 177–192.
Black, J.S. and Gregersen, H.B. (1991) ‘When Yankee comes
home: factors related to expatriate and spouse repatriation
adjustment’, Journal of International Business Studies 22(4):
671–694.
Black, J.S., Gregersen, H.B. and Mendenhall, M.E. (1992)
‘Toward a theoretical framework of repatriation adjustment’,
Journal of International Business Studies 23(4): 737–760.
Journal of International Business Studies
Expatriate assignments and intra-organizational career success
Mark C Bolino
834
Black, J.S., Mendenhall, M. and Oddou, G. (1991) ‘Toward a
comprehensive model of international adjustment: an integration of multiple theoretical perspectives’, Academy of Management Review 16(2): 291–317.
Black, J.S., Morrison, A.J. and Gregersen, H.B. (1999) Global
Explorers: The Next Generation of Leaders, Routledge: New
York.
Bolino, M.C. and Feldman, D.C. (2000) ‘The antecedents and
consequences of underemployment among expatriates’,
Journal of Organizational Behavior 21(8): 889–911.
Borstorff, P.C., Harris, S.G., Feild, H.S. and Giles, W.F. (1997)
‘Who’ll go? A review of factors associated with employee
willingness to work overseas’, Human Resource Planning
20(3): 29–41.
Bossard, A.B. and Peterson, R.B. (2005) ‘The repatriate experience as seen by American expatriates’, Journal of World
Business 40(1): 9–28.
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(1): 67–88.
Carpenter, M.A. and Fredrickson, J.W. (2001) ‘Top management
teams, global strategic posture, and the moderating role of
uncertainty’, Academy of Management Journal 44(3): 533–545.
Carpenter, M.A., Sanders, W.G. and Gregersen, H.B. (2001)
‘Bundling human capital with organizational context: the
impact of international assignment experience on multinational firm performance and CEO pay’, Academy of Management Journal 44(3): 493–511.
Daily, C.M., Certo, S.T. and Dalton, D.R. (2000) ‘International
experience in the executive suite: the path to prosperity?’
Strategic Management Journal 21(4): 515–523.
Edstrom, A. and Galbraith, J.R. (1977) ‘Transfer of managers as a
coordination and control strategy in multinational organizations’, Administrative Science Quarterly 22(2): 248–263.
Feldman, D.C. and Thomas, D.C. (1992) ‘Career management
issues facing expatriates’, Journal of International Business
Studies 23(2): 271–294.
Fisher, A. (1997) ‘Six ways to supercharge your career’, Fortune
135(1): 46–48.
Fisher, A. (2005) ‘Offshoring could boost your career’, Fortune
151(2): 36.
Forster, N. (1997) ‘The persistent myth of high expatriate failure
rates: a reappraisal’, International Journal of Human Resource
Management 8(4): 414–433.
GMAC Global Relocation Services (2004) Global Relocation
Trends 2003/2004 Survey Report, GMAC Global Relocation
Services, National Foreign Trade Council, and SHRM Global
Forum: Oak Brook, IL.
Gregersen, H.B. (1992) ‘Commitments to a parent company
and a local work unit during repatriation’, Personnel Psychology
45(1): 29–54.
Gregersen, H.B. and Stroh, L.K. (1997) ‘Coming home to
the arctic cold: antecedents to Finnish expatriate and
spouse repatriation adjustment’, Personnel Psychology 50(3):
635–654.
Gregersen, H.B., Morrison, A.J. and Black, J.S. (1998) ‘Developing leaders for the global frontier’, Sloan Management Review
40(1): 21–32.
Gunz, H.P. and Jalland, R.M. (1996) ‘Managerial careers and
business strategies’, Academy of Management Review 21(3):
718–756.
Gupta, A.K. and Govindarajan, V. (1991) ‘Knowledge flows and
the structure of control within multinational corporations’,
Academy of Management Review 16(4): 768–792.
Gupta, A.K. and Govindarajan, V. (2000) ‘Managing global
expansion: a conceptual framework’, Business Horizons 43(2):
45–54.
Guzzo, R.A., Noonan, K.A. and Elron, E. (1994) ‘Expatriate
managers and the psychological contract’, Journal of Applied
Psychology 79(4): 617–626.
Journal of International Business Studies
Harris, J.E. (1989) ‘Moving managers internationally: the
care and feeding of expatriates’, Human Resource Planning
12(1): 49–53.
Harrison, D.A. and Shaffer, M.A. (2005) ‘Mapping the criterion
space for expatriate success: task- and relationship-based
performance, effort and adaptation’, International Journal of
Human Resource Management 16(8): 1454–1474.
Harvey, M.G. (1989) ‘Repatriation of corporate executives:
an empirical study’, Journal of International Business Studies
20(1): 131–144.
Harvey, M.G. and Novicevic, M. (2001) ‘Selecting expatriates
for increasingly complex global assignments’, Career Development International 6(2/3): 69–86.
Harzing, A.K. (1995) ‘The persistent myth of high expatriate
failure rates’, International Journal of Human Resource Management 6(2): 457–474.
Hauser, J. (1998) ‘Making the most of your investment’, HR
Focus 75(3): S6.
Hsieh, T., Lavoie, J. and Samek, R. (1999) ‘Are you taking your
expatriate talent seriously?’, The McKinsey Quarterly 3: 71–83.
Johnston, M.W., Griffeth, R.W., Burton, S. and Carson, P.P.
(1993) ‘An exploratory investigation into the relationship
between promotion and turnover: a quasi-experimental longitudinal study’, Journal of Management 19(1): 33–49.
Judge, T.A. and Bretz, R.D. (1994) ‘Political influence behavior
and career success’, Journal of Management 20(1): 43–65.
Judge, T.A., Cable, D.M., Boudreau, J.W. and Bretz, R.D. (1995)
‘An empirical investigation of the predictors of executive
career success’, Personnel Psychology 48(3): 485–519.
Kilduff, M. and Day, D. (1994) ‘Do chameleons get ahead? The
effects of self-monitoring on managerial careers’, Academy of
Management Journal 37(4): 1047–1060.
Kobrin, S.J. (1988) ‘Expatriate reduction and strategic control
in American multinational corporations’, Human Resource
Management 27(1): 63–75.
Konopaske, R. and Werner, S. (2005) ‘US managers’ willingness
to accept a global assignment: do expatriate benefits and
assignment length make a difference?’, International Journal of
Human Resource Management 16(7): 1159–1175.
Konopaske, R., Robie, C. and Ivancevich, J.M. (2005) ‘A
preliminary model of spouse influence on managerial global
assignment willingness’, International Journal of Human
Resource Management 16(3): 405–426.
Kostova, T. and Roth, K. (2003) ‘Social capital in multinational
corporations and a micro-macro model of its formation’,
Academy of Management Review 28(2): 297–317.
Kraimer, M.L. and Wayne, S.J. (2004) ‘An examination of
perceived organizational support as a multidimensional construct in the context of an expatriate assignment’, Journal of
Management 30(2): 209–237.
London, M. and Stumpf, S.A. (1982) Managing Careers,
Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA.
Lublin, J. (1996) ‘An overseas stint can be a ticket to the top’,
Wall Street Journal, 29 January: B1.
Lyness, K.S. and Thompson, D.E. (2000) ‘Climbing the
corporate ladder: do female and male executives follow the
same route?’ Journal of Applied Psychology 85(1): 86–101.
Martin, J. (2004) ‘The global CEO’, Chief Executive, January/
February: 24–31.
Mendenhall, M., Kuhlmann, T., Stahl, G. and Osland, J. (2002)
‘Employee Development and Expatriate Assignments’, in M.
Gannon and K. Newman (eds.) The Blackwell Handbook of
Cross-Cultural Management, Blackwell Publishers: Oxford,
pp: 155–183.
McEvoy, G.M. and Parker, B. (1995) ‘Expatriate Adjustment:
Causes and Consequences’, in J. Selmer (ed.) Expatriate
Management: New Ideas for International Business, Quorum
Books: Westport, CT, pp: 97–114.
Ng, T.W., Eby, L.T., Sorenson, K.L. and Feldman, D.C. (2005)
‘Predictors of objective and subjective career success: a metaanalysis’, Personnel Psychology 58(2): 367–408.
Expatriate assignments and intra-organizational career success
Mark C Bolino
835
Nohria, N. and Ghoshal, S. (1994) ‘Differentiated fit and
shared values: alternatives for managing headquarters–
subsidiary relations’, Strategic Management Journal 15(6):
491–502.
O’Hara, K.B., Beehr, T.A. and Colarelli, S.M. (1994) ‘Organizational centrality: a third dimension of intraorganizational
career movement’, Journal of Applied Behavioral Science
30(2): 198–216.
Orpen, C. (1998) ‘The effects of organizational centrality on
employee career success and satisfaction’, Social Behavior and
Personality 26(1): 85–88.
Peltonen, T. (1997) ‘Facing the rankings from the past:
a tournament perspective on repatriate career mobility’,
International Journal of Human Resource Management 8(1):
106–123.
Reuber, A. and Fischer, E. (1997) ‘The influence of the
management team’s international experience on internationalization behaviors of SMEs’, Journal of International Business
Studies 28(4): 807–825.
Riusala, K. and Suutari, V. (2000) ‘Expatriation and careers:
perspectives of expatriates and spouses’, Career Development
International 5(2): 81–90.
Roth, K. (1995) ‘Managing international interdependence: CEO
characteristics in a resource-based framework’, Academy of
Management Journal 38(1): 200–231.
Sambharya, R.B. (1996) ‘Foreign experience of top management teams and international diversification strategies of US
multinational corporations’, Strategic Management Journal
17(9): 739–746.
Sanders, W.G. and Carpenter, M.A. (1998) ‘Internationalization
and firm governance: the roles of CEO compensation, top
team composition, and board structure’, Academy of Management Journal 41(2): 158–178.
Schein, E.H. (1971) ‘The individual, the organization, and the
career: a conceptual scheme’, Journal of Applied Behavioral
Science 7(4): 401–426.
Schein, E.H. (1978) Career Dynamics: Matching Individual and
Organizational Needs, Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA.
Seibert, S.E., Crant, J.M. and Kraimer, M.L. (1999) ‘Proactive
personality and career success’, Journal of Applied Psychology
84(3): 416–427.
Seibert, S.E., Kraimer, M.L. and Liden, R.C. (2001) ‘A social
capital theory of career success’, Academy of Management
Journal 44(2): 219–237.
Selmer, J. (1999) ‘Career issues and international adjustment of
business expatriates’, Career Development International 4(2):
77–87.
Selmer, J. (2004) ‘Psychological barriers to adjustment of
Western business expatriates in China: newcomers vs. long
stayers’, International Journal of Human Resource Management
15(4/5): 794–813.
Shaffer, M.A. and Harrison, D.A. (1998) ‘Expatriates’ psychological withdrawal from international assignments: work, nonwork, and family influences’, Personnel Psychology 51(1):
87–118.
Shaffer, M.A., Harrison, D.A., Gregersen, H.B., Black, J.S. and
Ferzandi, L.A. (2006) ‘You can take it with you: individual
differences and expatriate effectiveness’, Journal of Applied
Psychology 91(1): 109–125.
Shay, J.P. and Baack, S.A. (2004) ‘Expatriate assignment,
adjustment and effectiveness: an empirical examination
of the big picture’, Journal of International Business Studies
35(3): 216–232.
Stahl, G.K., Miller, E.L. and Tung, R.L. (2002) ‘Toward the
boundaryless career: a closer look at the expatriate career
concept and the perceived implications of an international
assignment’, Journal of World Business 37(3): 216–227.
Stroh, L.K. (1995) ‘Predicting turnover among repatriates: can
organizations affect retention rates?’, International Journal of
Human Resource Management 6(2): 443–456.
Stroh, L.K., Gregersen, H.B. and Black, J.S. (1998) ‘Closing the
gap: expectations versus reality among repatriates’, Journal of
World Business 33(2): 111–124.
Stroh, L.K., Gregersen, H.B. and Black, J.S. (2000) ‘Triumphs and
tragedies: expectations and commitments upon repatriation’,
International Journal of Human Resource Management 11(4):
681–697.
Stroh, L.K., Black, J.S., Mendenhall, M.E. and Gregersen, H.B.
(2005) International Assignments: An Integration of
Strategy, Research, and Practice, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates:
Mahwah, NJ.
Suutari, V. (2003) ‘Global managers: career orientation, career
tracks, life-style implications, and career commitment’, Journal
of Managerial Psychology 18(3): 185–207.
Takeuchi, R., Tesluk, P., Yun, S. and Lepak, D. (2005) ‘An
integrative view of international experience’, Academy of
Management Journal 48(1): 85–100.
Tung, R.L. (1998) ‘American expatriates abroad: from neophytes
to cosmopolitans’, Journal of World Business 33(2): 125–144.
van der Velde, M.E., Bossink, C.J. and Jansen, P.G. (2005)
‘Gender differences in the determinants of the willingness to
accept an international assignment’, Journal of Vocational
Behavior 66(1): 81–103.
Wayne, S.J., Liden, R.C., Kraimer, M.L. and Graf, I.K. (1999) ‘The
role of human capital, motivation and supervisor sponsorship
in predicting career success’, Journal of Organizational Behavior
20(5): 577–595.
Welch, D.E. (2003) ‘Globalization of staff movements: beyond
cultural adjustment’, Management International Review 43(2):
149–169.
Yan, A., Zhu, G. and Hall, D.T. (2002) ‘International assignments
for career building: a model of agency relationships and
psychological contracts’, Academy of Management Review
27(3): 373–391.
Yan, R. (1998) ‘Short-term results: the litmus test for success in
China’, Harvard Business Review 76(5): 61–75.
About the author
Mark C Bolino is an Associate Professor in the Price
College of Business at the University of Oklahoma.
He received his PhD in organizational behavior
from the University of South Carolina. His research
interests include organizational citizenship behavior, impression management, international assignments, and psychological contracts.
Accepted by Mary Ann Von Glinow, Departmental Editor, 25 November 2006. This paper has been with the author for two revisions.
Journal of International Business Studies