West Meets East? Identifying the Gap in Current Cross-Cultural Training Research

Abstract

The purpose of this article was to examine current cross-cultural training (CCT) research, using the lens of “East Meets West.” The two research questions guiding our inquiry are (a) What are the major themes discussed in the existing CCT literature? and (b) What are the emerging issues that need to be addressed? Using the integrative literature review method, we first identified four themes: theories/conceptual frameworks, expatriate adjustment, CCT methods, and the effectiveness of CCT. We found that previous CCT research lacks the “East Meets West” perspective. Four issues need to be incorporated into future CCT research, namely, family factors, cross-cultural assessment, domestic versus international assignments, and trainer quality. This article purports to make three major contributions to the existing literature: (a) identify gaps in the literature, (b) expand the perspectives of CCT research from the lens of “East Meets West,” and (c) generate implications for research and practice.

Keywords

cross-cultural training expatriates intercultural relations “East Meets West”“West Meets East”

On a trip around the world several years ago, Geert [Hofstede] bought three world maps. All three are of the flat kind, projecting the surface of the globe on a plane. The first shows Europe and Africa in the middle, the Americas to the west, and Asia to the east. The terms, the West and the East were products of a Euro-centered worldview. The second map, bought in Hawaii, shows the Pacific Ocean in the center, Asia and Africa on the left (and Europe, tiny, in the far upper left-hand corner), and the Americas to the right. From Hawaii, the East lies west and the West lies east! The third map, bought in New Zealand, was like the second, but upside down: south on top and north at the bottom. Now Europe is in the far lower right-hand corner. Which of these maps is right?

—Hofstede, Hofstede, and Minkov (2010, p. xiii)

In today’s interconnected world, companies operating outside of their national boundaries are rapidly increasing. A growing number of overseas factories and branches means that more expatriates will go abroad, requiring more effective cross-cultural training (CCT) that can help them learn both content and skills that will facilitate effective cross-cultural interaction (Black & Mendenhall, 1990). CCT is the educative process used to improve intercultural learning needed for successful interactions in diverse cultures (Landis, Bennett, & Bennett, 2004).

Previous studies on this topic have focused mostly on the adjustment of Western expatriates. Many studies on CCT looked at companies whose headquarters are located in North America and in Europe. With the rapid increase in global market exchanges brought forth by the rise of the East, Asian multinational corporations (MNCs) have extended their subsidiaries beyond their borders. Although Asian companies are expanding globally and sending their employees to Western branches, CCT literature still largely approaches intercultural perspectives and experiences through a Western-centric lens. There is a compelling need to understand the ways these Asian global companies support their expatriate adjustment process with a shift in the interpretive paradigm from the West to the East.

In this study, we use the term “East” to signify Asia and the “West” to refer to countries in North America and Europe (Nisbett, 2004). We are well aware of the relational nature of the terms, East and West. The concepts are not fixed, but are determined by the positionality of the parties involved, as illustrated in the beginning of this paper. Key characteristics of East and West would depend on contexts. Chen and Miller (2011) used the term East to describe “China and other so-called ‘Far Eastern’ countries that have been influenced by Confucian thought” (p. 6), emphasizing relational perspectives of an Eastern business mindset. Others have looked at “long-term perspectives” (Hofstede et al., 2010) or “high-context culture” (Hall, 1966) as major characteristics.

Problem Statement

Recent changes in global markets have prompted our interest in CCT research. First, many U.S. firms have not necessarily been successful in selecting and retaining effective managers for international assignments (Hechanova, Beehr, & Christiansen, 2003). Second, numerous Asian countries have emerged as economic superpowers, and an increasing number of Asian companies are expanding abroad (Glover & Wilkinson, 2007; Peng, Bhagat, & Chang, 2010). Third, successful Asian companies are becoming active global players and sending expatriates to non-Asian countries (Khanna, Song, & Lee, 2011; Yeung, Warner, & Rowley, 2008).

Although there is an immediate need for a new framework in CCT brought on by these rapid global changes, research specifically focusing on Eastern companies in the West is still lacking. Although an increasing number of Eastern companies are performing successfully in Western markets with local workforces, there are only a handful of studies conducted about this topic—namely, Takeuchi, Yun, and Russell (2002), Kim and Slocum (2008), and Moon, Choi, and Jung (2012). The purpose of this study, therefore, is to examine current CCT research involving expatriates, identify missing areas, address emerging issues, and provide implications for research and practice in Human Resource Development (HRD). This article, adopting the lens of “East Meets West,” will contribute an alternative perspective on CCT research.

Method

To examine the key themes in CCT research and provide useful implications for future investigation, we focus on the two questions to guide our inquiry:

Research Question 1: What are the major research themes discussed in current CCT literature?

Research Question 2: What are the emerging issues that need to be addressed in CCT research from the “East Meets West” perspective?

We used an integrative literature review method (Callahan, 2010; Torraco, 2005). An integrative literature review is characterized by a concentrated focus on a topical area (CCT in this study) and a methodology clearly outlining topics to be included. We followed the three suggested steps: searching an electronic database, browsing major human resources (HR) and intercultural relations journals, and supplementing with secondary sources. In 2010 and 2011, we used Business Source Premier as a major electronic database search through our university library online search systems. We set the timeline of the publication year since the year of 1990, although we did also include a few key articles published before 1990 (e.g., Tung, 1981). To see a broader perspective on CCT, we used search terms, such as CCT, cross-cultural adjustment, and cross-cultural management. Through our search, we identified 91 relevant journal articles. Realizing that it would be unreasonable to cover all the constructs and factors involved in cross-cultural management, we chose to limit our review to articles that directly related to the topic of CCT. This limited our selection to 42 studies on CCT.¹ We also browsed articles published in four HR journals (Human Resource Development International, Human Resource Development Quarterly, Human Resource Development Review, and International Journal of Human Resource Management) and a key journal in Intercultural Relations (International Journal of Intercultural Relations). In addition, we acquired secondary sources from works retrieved through the previous two methods.

Torraco (2005) indicated that various aspects of literature can be reviewed with scrutiny depending on the purpose and topic. For this article, we used a content analysis method to examine key themes of the current CCT research based on a qualitative content analysis method (Graneheim & Lundman, 2004). We read articles, identified research foci and keywords for each, categorized common themes, and allocated key themes to the articles. From our research, we identified four key research themes from current CCT research.

Key Themes in Current CCT Research

To answer the first research question, we identified four key research themes, including theories/conceptual frameworks, expatriate adjustment, CCT methods, and the effectiveness of CCT.

Theories/Conceptual Frameworks

Major theories/conceptual frameworks used in CCT research (Black & Mendenhall, 1990; Littrell, Salas, Hess, Paley, & Riedel, 2006) include Cultural Values Framework, Social Learning Theory, Experiential Learning Theory, Sequential Adjustment Theory, and Social Capital Theory.

Cultural values framework

One of the most widely used conceptual frameworks in cross-cultural research is Hofstede’s Cultural Values Framework (Hofstede et al., 2010), which is used to study individual behaviors and attitudes. Kirkman, Lowe, and Gibson (2006) reviewed 180 studies published between 1980 and 2002 to consolidate the verifiable aspects of Hofstede’s Cultural Values Framework. Individualism versus collectivism was the most frequent prominent difference between Asian and Western countries in culture studies.

In the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) research program (Chhokar, Brodbeck, House, & GLOBE Research Program, 2007; Javidan, Dorfman, deLuque, & House, 2006), 170 researchers worked collaboratively to collect and analyze data on nine cultural values from 17,000 managers in 62 cultures and 10 culture clusters. This program reflects Hofstede’s significant impact on the study of global leadership. Javidan et al., (2006) used findings from the GLOBE project to provide a basis for conceptualizing worldwide leadership differences. Hofstede et al. (2010) elaborated their framework to six cultural dimensions, including power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism versus collectivism, masculinity versus femininity, long-term versus short-term orientation, and indulgence versus restraint.

Although cultural dimensions have been useful in understanding national culture differences (Hampden-Turner & Trompenaars, 2000; Hofstede et al., 2010; Javidan et al., 2006; Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner, 2000), we also recognize the danger of “dimension dogma” as Gundling, Zanchettin, and Aperian Global (2007) emphasized in their study of global diversity. It is important to understand that such cultural dimensions may only provide a partial framework as they change at variable rates and Contexts across the world.

Social Learning Theory

Social Learning Theory is one of the most popular theories explaining the positive effect of CCT (Littrell et al., 2006). An individual’s learning takes place through the flow of information or knowledge while modeling other people’s behaviors and the consequences thereof, before an actual experience occurs (Bandura, 1977). Behavior modification, based upon Social Learning Theory proposed by Bandura (1977), has four central elements: attention, retention, reproduction, and incentives. CCT is regarded as a social learning process, in which an expatriate obtains knowledge, skills, abilities, and behaviors through observation and practice (Bhawuk & Brislin, 2000; Black & Mendenhall, 1990; Littrell et al., 2006). Black and Mendenhall (1990), in their seminal CCT study, presented Social Learning Theory as a theoretical framework for CCT research.

Experiential Learning Theory

Kolb’s Experiential Learning Theory remains one of the most commonly used theories of how managers learn from experience (Kolb & Kolb, 2009; Yamazaki & Kayes, 2004). Experiential learning is a process of constructing knowledge within a creative tension between the four learning modes: experiencing, reflecting, thinking, and acting (Kolb & Kolb, 2009). Experiential Learning Theory, through extensive empirical validation in many different fields, provides a means to develop testable propositions. On the basis of Kolb’s Experiential Learning Theory and 73 cross-cultural learning skills identified from literature, Yamazaki and Kayes (2004) proposed nine cross-cultural competencies (e.g., building relationships, valuing people of different cultures, and coping with ambiguity) and developed a taxonomy of cross-cultural learning competencies necessary for successful expatriate adaptation.

Sequential Adjustment Theory

According to Sequential Adjustment Theory, there are four phases in the adjustment level: the ethnocentric phase, the culture-shock phase, the conformist phase, and the adjustment phase, as depicted by the U-curve and W-curve models (Selmer, Torbiörn, & de Leon, 1998; Ting-Toomey & Chung, 2012). The U-curve model indicates that expatriates go through an initial honeymoon phase, then a slump phase, and finally an effective phase where they are able to manage their international assignments (Selmer et al., 1998). The six-stage W-curve model, which was extended from the U-curve model, is composed of honeymoon, hostility, humorous, at-home, reentry culture shock, and resocialization stages (Ting-Toomey & Chung, 2012). In Sequential Adjustment Theory, training is a process, not a one-time event. Consequently, CCT impact can vary in each state according to the individual’s psychological reaction to a culture (Littrell et al., 2006).

Social Capital Theory

Social Capital Theory has become increasingly important because CCT involves relationships between cultural contexts, as in Portes’ (1998) definition of social capital: “Whereas economic capital is in people’s bank accounts and human capital is inside their heads, social capital inheres in the structure of their relationships” (p. 7). Social capital creates interpersonal interactions that promote understanding of diverse cultures and provides a mechanism for reconciling diverse perspectives (Gupta & Govindarajan, 2004; Lengnick-Hall & Lengnick-Hall, 2006). In an effort to ensure that information is adapted to cultural differences, expatriates are expected to develop strong relationships with those best placed in the local context to respond to the national peculiarities (Gubbins & Garavan, 2009). In this context, key competency dimensions (building relationships, social networking, communication and interpersonal skills) of Social Capital Theory, therefore, become more integrated in CCT.

Expatriate Adjustment

The second theme identified in the CCT literature was expatriate adjustment. Expatriate adjustment refers to the degree of “psychological comfort and familiarity an individual feels for the new culture” (Black & Mendenhall, 1990, p. 130). Black, Mendenhall, and Oddou (1991) showed that adjustment is multifaceted by encompassing factors concerning anticipatory adjustment (training) and in-country adjustment (work and nonwork factors). Nonwork factors such as spouse/family cross-cultural adjustment are critical factors and can have a “spillover effect” on expatriates’ adjustment (Bhaskar-Shrinivas, Harrison, Shaffer, & Luk, 2005). Particularly, in her pioneering work in CCT, Tung (1981) found that a spouse’s inability to adjust to the foreign host culture was the foremost reason for expatriate failure.

Mesmer-Magnus and Viswesvaran (2008) in their research on expatriate management examined the big five personality factors (agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability, extraversion, and openness to experience) as predictors of expatriate success. These authors indicated that although many organizations provide little formal preparation for expatriation, CCT is effective in developing trainees’ cultural perceptions, facilitating adjustment to the host-country culture, and enhancing performance in international assignments.

Caligiuri and Tarique (2006) focused on selection and training that promotes cross-cultural effectiveness among expatriates. The authors argued that the key to expatriate success is to understand the interaction of selection and training to determine who benefits the most from international training activities. Through surveys with international executives from three large MNCs, Caligiuri and Tarique (2011) indicated that a combination of selection and development (training) is critical for achieving key business goals to build a well-prepared pipeline of future global leaders.

CCT Method

The third theme identified from our review concerns CCT methods. A variety of CCT methods have been suggested (Littrell et al., 2006; Tung, 1981). Research indicates that a comprehensive CCT delivers the most effective training (Earley, 1987; Landis et al., 2004). In this case, “comprehensive” relates to the number of different types of CCT in which expatriates participate (Puck, Kittler, & Wright, 2008). Moon et al. (2012) emphasized that the comprehensiveness of CCT is more important than the length of CCT. Tung (1981), in her seminal study, listed five training programs for expatriates: area studies programs, cultural assimilation, language training, sensitivity training, and field experiences. She suggested that training methods should be chosen according to the type of assignment and should be contingent to two determinant factors: the degree of similarity between the culture of origin and the host culture, and the degree of interpersonal interaction between the manager and host country’s inhabitants.

Earley and Peterson (2004) criticized existing approaches to intercultural training, such as the cultural values awareness approach. Using the concept of cultural intelligence, the authors argued that expatriate training should include metacognitive, motivational, and behavioral components. In contrast, Yamazaki and Kayes (2004) proposed the aforementioned nine cross-cultural competency clusters, such as building relationships and valuing people of different cultures. The key implication of Yamazaki and Kayes (2004) is a shift from teaching about culture to developing skills to manage across cultures.

The following empirical studies examined different types of CCT programs. Osman-Gani (2000), in his study of expatriates for various MNCs operating in three major business sections of Singapore, provided information on program types, contents, duration, delivery mode, and providers and identified cultural differences. His study was among the first to focus on expatriates in Asia, outside of Europe and the United States. Holtbrügge and Schillo (2008), through a case study of a German software company, suggested that intercultural training be an instrument for overcoming the challenges of virtual assignments. Shen and Lang’s (2009) study pointed out that Australian MNCs tend to provide highly rigorous CCT in the form of short-term international assignments.

The Effectiveness of CCT

The fourth theme identified in our review relates to the effectiveness of CCT. Table 1 demonstrates that some studies have demonstrated positive results of CCT, whereas other studies have returned negative results. Of 13 identified empirical studies, six studies were meta-analyses of previous empirical studies and the rest reported the study results.

Table 1.

Research on the Effectiveness of CCT.

Lead author (Pub. Year)	Theoretical framework	Sample	Dependent variable	Findings
Black (1990)	Social learning theory	29 empirical studies	Cross-cultural skill development, adjustment, and performance	CCT had a positive impact on expatriates’ cross-cultural skill development, adjustment, and performance
Black (1991)	Multifaceted conceptualization of adjustment	220 managers in Asia	Cross-cultural adjustment	Most expatriates received little predeparture training; the company-provided training was ineffective
Deshpande (1992)	Hunter and Schmidt’s (1990) meta-analytical framework	21 empirical studies including unpublished studies	Black and Mendenhall’s (1990) indicators	The effect of CCT was positive
Kealey (1996)	Intercultural effectiveness training	15 studies on the impact of intercultural training	Adaptation and performance	Literature on the impact of CCT was deficient in terms of meeting the criteria of experimental research
Morris (2001)	CCT evaluations	41 empirical studies	Performance criteria consistent with Deshpande and Viswesvaran (1992)	The effectiveness of CCT was somewhat weaker than expected
Caligiuri (2001)	Met expectations (CCT and language)	73 expatriates in countries all over the world	Cross-cultural adjustment	The more relevant the predeparture CCT, the more expectations were met; language similarity affected expectations
Hechanova (2003)	Hunter and Schmidt’s (1990) meta-analytical framework	42 empirical studies including those unpublished studies	Adjustment	CCT was negatively related to all three facets of adjustment
Mendenhall (2004)	Kealey and Protheroe’s (1996) selection criteria	28 CCT evaluation studies published from 1988 to 2000	Impact of CCT programs	CCT evaluation studies have taken an easy road in measuring the impact of CCT programs
Selmer (2005)	CCT	165 expatriates assigned by Western firms to China	Expatriate adjustment	CCT had a weak positive association with work adjustment for expatriates in joint ventures
Waxin (2005)	Cross-cultural adjustment	224 expatriates in India from France, Germany, Korea, and Scandinavian countries	Adjustment (work, interaction, and general)	CCT facilitated all three facets of expatriate adjustment; the larger the cultural distance, the more pronounced the effects of CCT
Puck (2008)	Classification of CCTs	339 German expatriates in countries all over the world	Expatriate adjustment	Did not provide empirical support for the impact of predeparture CCT on adjustment; the central role of language for adjustment
Osman-Gani (2009)	Self-efficacy and cross-cultural adjustment	169 expatriates (from Japan, USA, German, and Singapore) on overseas assignments in Asia	Cross-cultural adjustment	The positive effects of CCT on expatriate adjustment are due to an increase in self-efficacy as a result of a training
Moon (2012)	Cultural intelligence (CQ) and goal orientation	190 Korean expatriates in USA, China, Japan, Germany, & Hong Kong	Cross-cultural adjustment	Predeparture CCT is important for the development of CQ as well as cross-cultural adjustment; the comprehensiveness of predeparture CCT can be a stronger predictor of CQ than the length of CCT

Note: CCT = cross-cultural training.

Positive results

Black and Mendenhall (1990) conducted the first study on the effectiveness of CCT in terms of an expatriate’s cross-cultural skill development, adjustment, and performance by reviewing 29 empirical studies. Their study revealed that CCT had a positive impact on individuals’ development of skills, their adjustment to the cross-cultural situation, and their job performance. This pioneering work served as a foundation for the subsequent empirical studies on CCT.

The following six studies (including one meta-analysis and five empirical studies) demonstrate positive results, indicating that CCT accelerates expatriate adjustment. Deshpande and Viswesvaran’s (1992) meta-analysis of 21 studies provided evidence that CCT has a positive impact on cross-cultural skill development, cross-cultural adjustability, and job performance of individuals. Caligiuri, Phillips, Lazarova, Tarique, and Bürgi (2001) showed that the more contextually tailored and relevant the predeparture CCT, the more expectations were either met or positively exceeded. Selmer (2005) found that CCT had a weak positive association with work adjustment for expatriates in joint ventures in China. Waxin and Panaccio (2005) examined the effect of four types of CCT (conventional/experimental and general/specific to the host country) on expatriate adjustment and found that CCT, in all its forms, facilitated all three facets of expatriates’ adjustment (work, interaction, and general). This study’s results demonstrated that the most effective types of training were the experimental strategies, particularly experimental trainings focused on the host-country’s culture (specific experimental). Osman-Gani and Rockstuhl (2009) demonstrated that the positive effects of CCT on expat adjustment are due to an increase in self-efficacy as a result of training. Moon et al. (2012) showed that predeparture CCT is important for the development of cultural intelligence as well as cross-cultural adjustment.

Negative results

Findings of the other six studies (including two empirical studies and four meta-analyses) have cast some doubts on the effectiveness of CCT. Black and Gregersen (1991) identified that most expatriates received little predeparture training and that the company-provided training was ineffective. Puck et al.’s (2008) analysis of 339 German expatriates in countries all over the world did not provide empirical support for the assumed impact of predeparture CCT on adjustment, rather, they found that language played a central role as a prerequisite for adjustment. Morris and Robie (2001) identified 16 studies for expatriate adjustment and 25 studies for expatriate performance. The results of this meta-analysis revealed that CCT was somewhat less effective than expected. This study supports the use of CCT for expatriates, with a caution that its effectiveness should be carefully evaluated. Hechanova et al.’s (2003) meta-analysis of 42 empirical studies demonstrated that CCT negatively relates to all three facets of adjustment (self-efficacy, interaction with host nationals, and family support). Kealey and Protheroe (1996) also argued that the existing literature on the impact of intercultural training is seriously deficient; no study on intercultural training for expatriates has met the full criteria for rigorous experimental research (e.g., the use of multiple measures beyond self-reports). In addition, on the basis of 28 quantitative evaluation studies, Mendenhall et al., (2004) found that most studies relied on self-reports and most treatment groups were composed of university students.

Summary

A major criticism of the existing literature on the effectiveness of CCT is that it is often based on anecdotal evidences and broad theories and models (Caligiuri & Tarique, 2006). Most CCT research has been theoretical; few empirical studies have assessed the relationship between CCT and expatriate performance (Littrell et al., 2006). It is also important to understand that the effectiveness of CCT is interpreted differently depending on cross-cultural context. The field of CCT is acutely aware that it is “in the uncomfortable position of having a product which is acutely needed but still of unproven efficacy” (Kealey & Protheroe, 1996, p.162). CCT research needs to generate more empirical studies with rigorous research designs, such as longitudinal studies and multiple measures of adjustment and performance (Hippler, 2009; Mendenhall et al., 2004).

These critiques mainly point to the issues related to the heavy reliance on quantitative methods and the lack of empirical studies in the CCT literature. It will be more meaningful to develop a qualitative way to measure expatriate performance and CCT effectiveness. From our own “East Meets West” perspective, we argue that current CCT research focuses too heavily on Western expatriates’ experience, which only reveals a partial picture of CCT research and practice. Of 13 empirical studies that showed the effectiveness of CCT, only three studies (Caligiuri et al., 2001; Moon et al., 2012; Puck et al., 2008) examined expatriates from East on overseas assignments in West. The major purpose of these studies was to show the impact of CCT on expatriates from East working in many countries around the world, yet not detailing how they adjusted to Western countries. Future investigation, therefore, should closely examine the experiences of non-Western expatriates, paying attention to crucial and emerging issues. Below are some of these issues that need to be incorporated into CCT research, particularly from the “East Meets West” lens.

Emerging Issues in CCT Research

To answer the second research question, we recommend the incorporation of an alternative perspective of “East Meets West” into researching CCT. With necessary caution, we claim the importance of using the terms East and West for their referential values. It is worth noting that the term “West” has mostly enjoyed the primary position of the two—frequently being conferred with the position of the subject, with the East treated as the object of knowledge for the West to pursue and explore. The concept of “West Meets East” (as in the conference theme of the 2011 Academy of Management) has recently emerged as desirable because this construction demonstrates progress since “West Leads East,” a theme celebrated in the past (Chen & Miller, 2011).

In the previous section, we indicated a lack of (empirical) studies conducted from the perspective of “East Meets West.” We are referring to a need to learn from the experiences of global companies such as Samsung in South Korea (Khanna et al., 2011) and Acer in Taiwan (Lin & Hou, 2010) to be able to develop an understanding of the new landscape that CCT would serve. In a case study of a U.K.-based subsidiary of a South Korean-owned MNC, Glover and Wilkinson (2007) explored different sociocultural practices employed at the firm and the gap between implementation and internalization. While South Korean MNCs are increasingly adopting Westernized approaches to HR, the adoption takes various forms. Glover and Wilkinson (2007) argued that the tensions created by the complex network of relationships reflect the importance of relationship building in Asian business practice.

On the basis of our literature review of CCT research and supported by our collective experiences in CCT practice, we recommend emerging issues to be addressed in the future CCT research and practice from the “East Meets West” perspective: family factors, cross-cultural assessment, domestic versus international assignments, and trainer quality.

Family Factors

Many MNCs tend to put emphasis on expatriates’ technical competence on the job but often ignore family factors that deserve more attention in the selection process. A closer examination of family factors in CCT provides practical implications for HRD practitioners because the adaptation of family members has been a major factor determining expatriate success (Lee, 2007; Rosenbusch & Cseh, 2012). Family factors vary depending on expatriates’ country and culture of origin. In some Asian countries, a spouse’s (un)willingness to live abroad (called “the expatriate dilemma”; Groysberg, Nohria, & Herman, 2011), marital status, physical conditions of the elderly parents, and education of school-aged children are important determinants for expatriate success, which are often overlooked in CCT literature.

Cross-Cultural Assessment

Careful analysis is needed when conducting a cross-cultural assessment (Paige, 2004) to measure an individual’s or group’s intercultural sensitivity or intercultural competence (Hammer, Bennett, & Wiseman, 2003). One of the most critical issues in cross-cultural assessment is cross-cultural validity (Bennett, 1993). Although increasing numbers of MNCs are using assessment to measure employees’ cross-cultural competence, most assessments are developed from Western cultural values. Currently, these assessments are translated into local languages and used in non-Western contexts to assess local candidates’ competencies for selection and promotion.

There are four issues for concern in cross-cultural assessment. The first concerns assessment questionnaires. Although assessment questionnaires are translated into multiple languages, often the cultural nuances are not aptly translated. What is encouraged as successful competence in Western culture often is not readily applicable to non-Western contexts. For example, while self-promotion is considered as a positive quality in U.S. workplaces, the same trait is often valued negatively in many Asian countries (Stahl, Mendenhall, & Oddou, 2012). Modesty and self-humbling (Ting-Toomey & Chung, 2012), regarded as an important virtue in Confucian cultures, are often perceived as a lack of participation or self-confidence in Western context. Especially considering sociocultural norms and their influence on business practices in many non-Western countries, assessment using translated questionnaires may cause misunderstanding and result in serious inaccuracy. Further, even when questionnaires are provided in local languages, the results and feedback are provided mostly in English.

The second issue concerns the question of cross-cultural validity (Bennett, 1993). Although instruments claim to be cross-culturally valid, instrument samples often comprise small non-Western groups. This produces assessment results that could be misleading. As a result, many non-Western participants question instrument items and often puzzle over the assessment results.

Third, although many organizations emphasize language skills in the expatriate selection process, language competence does not necessarily and automatically guarantee intercultural competence. Expatriates have said in their interviews, “You can get by without knowing the language, but you can’t get by without knowing the culture” (personal communication, June 5, 2012). Language competence is not a magic bullet for intercultural competence. Becoming fluent fools (Bennett, 1997), those who are able to articulate linguistically, yet fail to understand the culture, can cause an “unrecoverable error” in a cross-cultural encounter.

Fourth, most of current CCT assessment rely heavily on self-reported data. However, people from various cultures have different attitudes about self-evaluation; some consider modesty or saving face important in reporting their accomplishments. Therefore, people from other cultures tend to respond differently to a Likert scale questionnaire. While, conducting CCT in different countries, we have done one-on-one interviews to learn more about participants’ background and burning issues after they complete the Likert scale questionnaire. Respondents from East-Asia, for example, tend to use the middle point of Likert scales more frequently (Tungli & Peiperl, 2009) as a reflection of cultural norms emphasizing balance and harmony.

With increasing demands from various organizations using assessment to measure employees’ cross-cultural competence, the aforementioned key factors bring critical questions to HRD practitioners. How accurate and applicable are these assessment results, especially when compared with those who come from a culture where self-promotion is encouraged? How should we assess and interpret intercultural competence, when the very definition of effectiveness and appropriateness is culturally constructed? These are just a few pressing questions that beg further investigation.

Domestic Versus International Assignments

Domestic versus international assignments and the consideration of the cultural distance between expatriates’ home country and host country are another factor for HRD practitioners to pay attention to in future CCT research and practice. MNCs often assign employees with high potential to international assignments as part of global leadership pipeline programs. Although these employees perform successfully in a domestic market, they often fail in international assignments. Challenges between domestic and international assignments vary significantly. Unlike the predictors of success in a domestic context, other factors (personality characteristics, language fluency, and prior international experiences) play a larger role in predicting expatriate success (Caligiuri, Tarique, & Jacobs, 2009).

Flexibility and code-shifting skills from one culture to another culture are considered an important success factor for international expatriates (Gundling, 2003). Whereas Chinese managers are encouraged to approach employees with indirect communication and use metaphors to deliver their points, U.S.–American managers often have a negative view of indirect communication. Even the word self has a negative connotation in many Asian countries where relationships and collectivism are a norm (Stahl et al., 2012). In a highly group-oriented culture found in many Asian countries, group harmony is critical for successful job performance; therefore, one of the leader’s primary roles is to strengthen group ties (Gardner, 2000).

Trainer Quality

Importance of trainer quality (Hutchins, Burke, & Berthelsen, 2010) is another variable for successful CCT that has not been fully examined in the literature. CCT and its impact vary depending on who delivers a program. Interviews with HR managers from MNCs reveal that they are hesitant to invest in CCT because trainers often fail to address the competitive complexity that MNCs face. Although some CCT trainers draw from cultural dimensions literature, they often lack practical experience. In other cases, trainers have practical experiences but not enough in-depth knowledge of CCT research and fail to provide foundational concepts and principles that are important for CCT participants to understand. CCT trainers, therefore, should be able to balance theoretical knowledge and practical experience so that they are able to illustrate how concepts and principles apply to expatriate adjustment processes in real world.

Discussion

Developing intercultural competence (Bennett, 2008; Deardorff, 2009; Hammer et al., 2003) is no longer just a recommendation but a requirement for responding to the challenges of globalization. The need for companies to prepare expatriates for global markets has become crucial and urgent. Although intercultural competence is becoming a critical factor for success, definitional and conceptual challenges continue to grow (Morley & Cerdin, 2010), especially because the major focus of much CCT literature is exclusively on Western perspectives. Current CCT assessment criteria, as well illustrated, often reflect biased cultural views of Western cultural values. To examine CCT from a new perspective, more data and sources from non-Western companies should be collected and used to design and develop CCT. In this regard, the key issues addressed in this study provide some practical implications.

First, we are asking researchers and practitioners to pay more attention to how perspectives on culturally specific ways that cultural diversity is interpreted in CCT, moving beyond simple geographical distinction of East and West. Although diversity has been translated with reference to racial, ethnic, or gender differences in the United States, other countries have their own experiences on how people differ, depending upon their historical and linguistic heritages (Gundling et al., 2007). This means the training teams need to identify the areas where a single concept can have different but equally viable operational definitions depending on culture. An international assignment and subsequent participation in CCT provides a pertinent example. In some cases, being selected for an assignment overseas and intercultural training is seen as a reward in itself as an acknowledgment of high-potential employee, while the same case can be interpreted as punishment for a lack of intercultural competence.

The second possible implication is that trainers should exert more effort to understand family factors and their impact on their trainees in culturally dependent ways. Although the number of studies examining the importance of family roles in expatriate adjustment (Lee, 2007; Rosenbusch & Cseh, 2012) is increasing, there is still a need to understand family roles in more culturally specific contexts. For example, how is success defined in Confucian Asian societies? Is an individualized concept of success in many Western CCT adjustment models adequate to assess the collective notion of success where a family is regarded as a unit? According to Hippler (2009), key motives of relocatees at German MNCs were centered around individual goals, such as seeking a professional challenge versus seeking a personal challenge. These distinctions were argued to assist HR managers in the recruitment and selection phase (Romani & Szkudlarek, 2013). For many East-Asian expatriates, however, overseas’ assignment to English-speaking countries can bring tangible educational benefits for the assignees’ children as command of English is a key to success in many Asian educational systems. The reverse is usually not the case for English-speaking expatriates assigned to Asian countries. This is just one example that points to the importance of family factors in the expatriates’ successful performance. The success of their overseas assignment is associated with the successful adjustment of their family members whose concerns are qualitatively different from those of many Western expatriates. Issues such as family adjustment and performance assessment cannot be fully understood without taking cultural components into consideration.

While the importance of CCT is increasingly recognized, measuring the immediate impact and effectiveness of CCT remains a challenge for HRD practitioners. Because it is difficult to quantify the effectiveness of CCT and measure its immediate impact on expatriate performance, CCT has been one of the areas most vulnerable to cuts when MNCs face financial difficulties. Defining effectiveness in CCT could also vary according to cultural context. As the third possible implication, we encourage companies to consider evaluating the long-term impact of CCT, using qualitative and culturally appropriate approaches to assessment. If companies depend solely on translated questionnaires that do not incorporate culturally specific norms and values, a quick summative assessment would not be useful, and may even be risky, which may also raise possible ethical concerns (Romani & Szkudlarek, 2013).

Expatriates’ performance in the domestic contexts is not always a reliable predictor for their success overseas, though it is often used as an important factor in the decision-making process for international assignments. Osborn (2012) argued for the identification of “culture-specific career variables as a necessary step to allow for research-based statements of best practices for using cross-cultural assessments” (p. 14). HRD practitioners need a wider variety of means to ensure expatriate success. One suggestion is to invite repatriates in the company’s CCT so participants can acquire culturally relevant, situated knowledge in the process of social learning in which first-hand experiences are formed in a culturally-specific context.

To minimize cultural misunderstandings between the expatriates and the employees of the host county, the company should also provide CCT for the expatriate’s host country counterparts. While CCT literature discusses ways to assist expatriates to better adjust to their host countries, it is equally important to provide culturally relevant training to the host country’s counterparts, including expatriates’ supervisors, colleagues, and staff members. Effective cross-cultural communication will only be successful when it is conducive to effective communication between expatriates and their counterparts in the host country.

Study Limitations

Our study did have its limitations; it reviewed existing literature as well as anecdotal observations but was not able to identify a significant number of empirical studies, particularly from our perspective of “East Meets West.” While CCT research has attempted to examine different characteristics of the East and the West, the interconnectedness and complexity of global environment require a more integrated approach. A major difficulty in researching CCT has been a lack of an agreed-on definition of East and West. Some scholars argue that the terms East and West represent oversimplifications (Gupta, 2011). Others argue that the recent conception of Asia as a narrower geography needs to be broadened (Peng, Bhagat, & Chang, 2010). Even East-Asian countries should not all be treated as an aggregate of highly collectivistic Confucian societies (Kang & Kim, 2011; Rowley, Benson, & Warner, 2004). While consensus is often hard to reach, it is still important to consider increased internationalization and the complex demands placed on leaders and expatriate employees in international business, which highlights the call for increased human resource capacities in this area (Morley & Cerdin, 2010).

A number of Western expatriates in Asia with whom we have worked often mention that a common mistake they made was to assume that all Asians share the same cultural values. Not only do Southeast-Asia and East-Asia have distinctive cultures, but East-Asian countries themselves demonstrate divergent cultural values that strongly influence their business practices and should not all be treated as an aggregate of highly collectivistic Confucian societies (Kang & Kim, 2011; Rowley et al., 2004). For example, by analyzing contemporary television drama, Kang and Kim (2011) demonstrate how dissimilar Japanese culture is to Chinese, Korean, and Taiwanese cultures. Although Confucianism originated from China, currently it is not China but Korea that keeps the strongest Confucian tradition when it comes to business practices and family traditions. While the notion of national/regional cultural differences has been a useful tool, it is also important to recognize diversity in CCT research.

Conclusion

We identified major research themes in current CCT literature and suggested emerging issues that need to be addressed in the field including family factors, cross-cultural assessment, domestic versus international assignments, and trainer quality. The importance of considering family factors in cultural contexts, increasing demands and misuses of assessment tools, the difference between domestic and international assignments, and the importance of finding competent CCT trainers are major practical implications we emphasized in terms of CCT practice. A realistic expectation for an assignment, culturally rooted predeparture training, ongoing in-country support from the subsidiaries and the headquarters, and continuous support for a reentry are additional important factors to consider.

We argued for a need for CCT research concerning global Asian companies from a perspective of “East Meets West.” On the basis of this review, immediate research agendas call for further investigation on the following: (a) How do these non-Western companies train their expatriates for successful performance in international contexts? (b) How do contextual variables (e.g., types of expatriates, gender and age, and length of an assignment) influence expatriate adjustment and performance? and (c) What cultural issues in CCT should be addressed for non-Western companies? As CCT attempts to better prepare expatriates in global economy, future research needs investigations on diversity across and within cultures that eventually extends beyond the binary terms such as East and West.

Footnotes

Authors’ Note

This title “West meets East?” is an intentional word play. We wanted to emphasize the fact that West should no longer assume the default primary position in the encounter as a subject. We question this assumption and propose a new framework, “East meets West” where East is given the subject position.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Notes

Author Biographies

Kyoung-Ah Nam is an assistant professor in the International Communication Program at American University’s School of International Service. She has extensive experience in intercultural relations, cross-cultural training, global leadership development, international education, and public relations in North America and in Asia, working with international organizations and key transnational companies. Her research and teaching interests include intercultural communication, expatriate intercultural training, global leadership development, maximizing study/work abroad, identifying communication gaps in the STEM classroom, and interaction between international faculty and U.S. students.

Yonjoo Cho is an assistant professor of Instructional Systems Technology at Indiana University. She had worked as an HR professional for more than 10 years, both in business and academic sectors. Her research interest centers on action learning in organizations, based on her work experience as an external facilitator in large companies in South Korea. Other research interests include a new scholarship in human performance technology, human resource development, and workplace issues.

Mimi Lee is an associate professor of Curriculum and Instruction at the University of Houston. She received her PhD in Instructional Systems Technology from Indiana University at Bloomington in 2004, with an ethnographic study focusing on the complexities of intercultural understanding in a rural learning environment. Her research interests include theories of identity formation, sociological examination of online communities, issues of representation in education, and critical theory in instructional design.

References

Bandura

(1977). Social learning theory. Oxford, UK: Prentice Hall.

Bennett

J. M.

(2008). On becoming a global soul: A path to engagement during study abroad. In Savicki

(Ed.), Theory, research, and application in international education (pp. 13-31). Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.

Bennett

M. J.

(1993). Towards ethnorelativism: A developmental model of intercultural sensitivity. In Paige

R. M.

(Ed.), Education for the intercultural experience (2nd ed., pp. 21-71). Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.

Bennett

M. J.

(1997). How not to be a fluent fool: Understanding the cultural dimension of language. In Fantini

A. E.

(Ed.), New ways in teaching culture (pp. 16-21). Alexandria, VA: TESOL.

Bhaskar-Shrinivas

Harrison

D. A.

Shaffer

M. A.

Luk

D. M.

(2005). Input-based and time-based models of international adjustment: Meta-analytic evidence and theoretical extensions. The Academy of Management Journal, 48, 257-281.

Bhawuk

D. P. S.

Brislin

R. W.

(2000). Cross-cultural training: A review. Applied Psychology, 49, 162-191.

Black

J. S.

Gregersen

H. B.

(1991). Antecedents to cross-cultural adjustment for expatriates in Pacific Rim Assignments. Human Relations, 44, 497-515.

Black

J. S.

Mendenhall

(1990). Cross-cultural training effectiveness. Academy of Management Review, 15, 113-136.

Black

J. S.

Mendenhall

Oddou

(1991). Toward a comprehensive model of international adjustment: An integration of multiple theoretical perspectives. Academy of Management Review, 16, 291-317.

10.

Caligiuri

Phillips

Lazarova

Tarique

Bürgi

(2001). The theory of met expectations applied to expatriate adjustment: The role of cross-cultural training. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 12, 357-372.

11.

Caligiuri

Tarique

(2006). International assignee selection and cross-cultural training and development. In Stahl

G. K.

Björkman

(Eds.), Handbook of research in international human resource management (pp. 302-322). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

12.

Caligiuri

Tarique

(2011). Dynamic competencies and performance of global leaders: The role of personality and developmental experiences (Final report). Alexandria, VA: SHRM Foundation Research.

13.

Caligiuri

Tarique

Jacobs

(2009). Selection for international assignments. Human Resource Management Review, 19, 251-262.

14.

Callahan

J. L.

(2010). Constructing a manuscript: Distinguishing integrative literature reviews and conceptual and theory articles. Human Resource Development Review, 9, 300-304.

15.

Chen

M.-J.

Miller

(2011). The relational perspective as a business mindset: Managerial implications for East and West. Academy of Management Perspectives, 25(3), 6-18.

16.

Chhokar

J. S.

Brodbeck

F. C.

House

R. J.

, & Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness Research Program. (2007). Culture and leadership across the world: The GLOBE book of in-depth studies of 25 societies. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

17.

Deardorff

D. K.

(2009). The Sage handbook of intercultural competence. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

18.

Deshpande

S. P.

Viswesvaran

(1992). Is cross-cultural training of expatriate managers effective: A meta analysis. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 16, 295-310.

19.

Earley

P. C.

(1987). Intercultural training for managers: A comparison of documentary and interpersonal methods. The Academy of Management Journal, 30, 685-698.

20.

Earley

P. C.

Peterson

R. S.

(2004). The elusive cultural chameleon: Cultural intelligence as a new approach to intercultural training for the global manager. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3, 100-115.

21.

Gardner

(2000). Learning, Chinese-style. In Weaver

G. R.

(Ed.), Culture, communication and conflict (2nd ed., pp. 309-311). Boston, MA: Pearson.

22.

Glover

Wilkinson

(2007). Worlds colliding: The translation of modern management practices within a UK based subsidiary of a Korean-owned MNC. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18, 1437-1455.

23.

Graneheim

U. H.

Lundman

(2004). Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today, 24, 105-112.

24.

Groysberg

Nohria

Herman

(2011). HBR case study: The expat dilemma. Harvard Business Review, 89(11), 150-153.

25.

Gubbins

Garavan

T. N.

(2009). Understanding the HRD role in MNCs: The imperatives of social capital and networking. Human Resource Development Review, 8, 245-275.

26.

Gundling

(2003). Working globesmart: 12 people skills for doing business across borders. Palo Alto, CA: Davies-Black.

27.

Gundling

Zanchettin

, & Aperian Global. (2007). Global diversity: Winning customers and engaging employees within world markets. Boston, MA: Nicholas Brealey.

28.

Gupta

A. K.

(2011). The relational perspective and East Meets West: A commentary. Academy of Management Perspectives, 25(3), 19-27.

29.

Gupta

A. K.

Govindarajan

(2004). Global strategy and organization. New York, NY: John Wiley.

30.

Hall

E. T.

(1966). The hidden dimension. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.

31.

Hammer

M. R.

Bennett

M. J.

Wiseman

(2003). Measuring intercultural sensitivity: The intercultural development inventory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 27, 421-443.

32.

Hampden-Turner

Trompenaars

(2000). Building cross-cultural competence. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

33.

Hechanova

Beehr

T. A.

Christiansen

N. D.

(2003). Antecedents and consequences of employees’ adjustment to overseas assignment: A meta-analytic review. Applied Psychology, 52, 213-236.

34.

Hippler

(2009). Why do they go? Empirical evidence of employees’ motives for seeking or accepting relocation. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20, 1381-1401.

35.

Hofstede

G. J.

Minkov

(2010). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the mind (3rd ed.). Chicago, IL: McGraw-Hill.

36.

Holtbrügge

Schillo

(2008). Intercultural training requirements for virtual assignments: Results of an explorative empirical study. Human Resource Development International, 11, 271-286.

37.

Hunter

J. E.

Schimidt

F. L.

(1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

38.

Hutchins

H. M.

Burke

L. A.

Berthelsen

A. M.

(2010). A missing link in the transfer problem? Examining how trainers learn about training transfer. Human Resource Management, 49, 599-618.

39.

Javidan

Dorfman

P. W.

deLuque

M. S.

House

R. J.

(2006). In the eye of the beholder: Cross cultural lessons in leadership from project GLOBE. Academy of Management Perspectives, 20(1), 67-90.

40.

Kang

Kim

(2011). Are our families still Confucian? Representations of family in East Asian television dramas. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 14, 307-321.

41.

Kealey

D. J.

Protheroe

D. R.

(1996). The effectiveness of cross-cultural training for expatriates. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 20, 141-165.

42.

Khanna

Song

Lee

(2011). The paradox of Samsung’s rise. Harvard Business Review, 89(7/8), 142-147.

43.

Kim

Slocum

J. W.

(2008). Individual differences and expatriate assignment effectiveness: The case of U.S.-based Korean expatriates. Journal of World Business, 43, 109-126.

44.

Kirkman

B. L.

Lowe

K. B.

Gibson

C. B.

(2006). A quarter century of “culture’s consequences”: A review of empirical research incorporating Hofstede’s cultural values framework. Journal of International Business Studies, 37, 285-320.

45.

Kolb

A. Y.

Kolb

D. A.

(2009). Experiential learning theory. In Armstrong

S. J.

Fukami

C. V.

(Eds.), The Sage handbook of management learning, education and development (pp. 42-68). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

46.

Landis

Bennett

J. M.

Bennett

M. J.

(Eds.). (2004). Handbook of intercultural training (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

47.

Lee

P.-C.

(2007). Family support as a factor in cultural adjustment. Journal of Business Systems, Governance & Ethics, 2(2), 29-35.

48.

Lengnick-Hall

M. L.

Lengnick-Hall

C. A.

(2006). International human resource management and social network/social capital theory. In Stahl

G. K.

Björkman

(Eds.), Handbook of research in international human resource management (pp. 475-487). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

49.

Lin

H.-C.

Hou

S.-T.

(2010). Managerial lessons from the East: An interview with Acer’s Stan Shih. Academy of Management Perspectives, 24(4), 6-16.

50.

Littrell

Salas

E. S.

Hess

K. P.

Paley

Riedel

(2006). Expatriate preparation: A critical analysis of 25 years of cross-cultural training research. Human Resource Development Review, 5, 355-388.

51.

Mendenhall

M. E.

Stahl

G. K.

Ehnert

Oddou

Osland

J. S.

Kühlmann

T. M.

(2004). Evaluation studies of cross-cultural training programs: A review of the literature from 1988 to 2000. In Landis

Bennett

J. M.

Bennett

M. J.

(Eds.), Handbook of intercultural training (pp.129-143). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

52.

Mesmer-Magnus

J. R.

Viswesvaran

(2008). Expatriate management: A review and directions for research in expatriate selection, training, and repatriation. In Harris

M. M.

(Ed.), Handbook of research in international human resource management (pp. 183-206). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.

53.

Moon

Choi

Jung

(2012). Previous international experience, cross-cultural training, and expatriates’ cross-cultural adjustment: Effects of cultural intelligence and goal orientation. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 23, 285-330.

54.

Morley

M. J.

Cerdin

J.-L.

(2010). Intercultural competence in the international business arena. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 25, 805-809. doi:10.1108/02683941011089099

55.

Morris

M. A.

Robie

(2001). A meta-analysis of the effects of cross-cultural training on expatriate performance and adjustment. International Journal of Training and Development, 5, 112-125.

56.

Nisbett

(2004). The geography of thought: How Asians and Westerners think differently…and why. New York, NY: Free Press.

57.

Osborn

D. S.

(2012). An international discussion about cross-cultural career assessment. International Journal for Educational and Vocational Guidance, 12, 5-16. doi:10.1007/s10775-012-9220-0

58.

Osman-Gani

A. M.

(2000). Developing expatriates for the Asia-Pacific region: A comparative analysis of multinational enterprise managers from five countries across three continents. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 11, 213-235.

59.

Osman-Gani

A. M.

Rockstuhl

(2009). Cross-cultural training, expatriate self-efficacy, and adjustments to overseas assignments: An empirical investigation of managers in Asia. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 33, 277-290.

60.

Paige

R. M.

(2004). Instrumentation in intercultural training. In Landis

Bennett

J. M.

Bennett

M. J.

(Eds.), Handbook of intercultural training (pp. 85-128). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

61.

Peng

M. W.

Bhagat

R. S.

Chang

S.-J.

(2010). Asia and global business. Journal of International Business Studies, 41, 373-376.

62.

Portes

(1998). Social capital: Its origin and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 1-24.

63.

Puck

J. F.

Kittler

M. G.

Wright

(2008). Does it really work? Re-assessing the impact of pre-departure cross-cultural training on expatriate adjustment. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19, 2182-2197.

64.

Romani

Szkudlarek

(2013). The struggles of the interculturalists: Professional ethical identity and early stages of codes of ethics development. Journal of Business Ethics, 112, 1-19. doi:10.1007/s10551-012-1610-1

65.

Rosenbusch

Cseh

(2012). The cross-cultural adjustment process of expatriate families in a multinational organization: A family system theory perspective. Human Resource Development International, 15, 61-77.

66.

Rowley

Benson

Warner

(2004). Towards an Asian model of human resource management? A comparative analysis of China, Japan, and South Korea. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 15, 917-933.

67.

Selmer

(2005). Cross-cultural training and expatriate adjustment in China: Western joint venture managers. Personnel Review, 34, 68-84.

68.

Selmer

Torbiörn

de Leon

C. T.

(1998). Sequential cross-cultural training for expatriate business managers: Predeparture and post-arrival. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 9, 831-840.

69.

Shen

Lang

(2009). Cross-cultural training and its impact on expatriate performance in Australian MNEs. Human Resource Development International, 12, 371-386.

70.

Stahl

G. K.

Mendenhall

M. E.

Oddou

G. R.

(2012). Readings and cases in international human resource management and organizational behavior. New York, NY: Routledge.

71.

Takeuchi

Yun

Russell

J. E. A.

(2002). Antecedents and consequences of the perceived adjustment of Japanese expatriates in the USA. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 13, 1224-1244.

72.

Ting-Toomey

Chung

L. C.

(2012). Understanding intercultural communication. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

73.

Torraco

R. J.

(2005). Writing integrative literature reviews: Guidelines and examples. Human Resource Development Review, 4, 356-367.

74.

Trompenaars

Hampden-Turner

(2000). Riding the waves culture: Understanding cultural diversity in business. London, England: Nicholas Brealey.

75.

Tung

R. L.

(1981). Selection and training of personnel for overseas assignments. Columbia Journal of World Business, 16, 69-78.

76.

Tungli

Peiperl

(2009). Expatriate practices in German, Japanese, U.K., and U.S. multinational companies: A comparative survey of changes. Human Resource Management, 48, 153-171.

77.

Waxin

M.-F.

Panaccio

(2005). Cross-cultural training to facilitate expatriate adjustment. Personnel Review, 34, 51-67.

78.

Yamazaki

Kayes

D. C.

(2004). An experiential approach to cross-cultural learning. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3, 362-379.

79.

Yeung

Warner

Rowley

(2008). Growth and globalization: Evolution of human resource management practices in Asia. Human Resource Management, 47(1), 1-13.