TOPIC: Success of IHRM in training and development; of expatriates As you read the article you choose for this assignment, consider the following questions: How could the topic of this article apply...

As you read the article you choose for this assignment, consider the following questions: How could the topic of this article apply to your personal or professional life? How could it apply to an organization you have observed?

The article you choose must meet the following requirements:

be peer reviewed, relate to the concepts within this course, and be at least 10 pages in length.

The writing you submit must meet the following requirements:

be at least3 pages in length, identify the main topic/question,

1

EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT AND EXPATRIATE

ASSIGNMENTS

Citation:

Mendenhall, M. E., Kuhlmann, T. M., Stahl, G. K., &

Osland, J. S. (2002). Employee development and expatriate

assignments. In M.J. Gannon & K. Newman (eds.) The

Blackwell handbook of cross-cultural management (pp.

155-183). Oxford, UK & Malden, Massachusetts:

Blackwell.

2

EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT AND EXPATRIATE ASSIGNMENTS

The expatriate adjustment research literature has grown enormously in the past

two decades, and the trend seems to be continuing unabated as the field moves into the

new millennium. Thus, it seems both timely and prudent to pause and take stock of the

nature of this growth, and the implications that it holds for future research and practice in

the field.

Those scholars who began conducting research on expatriate adjustment in the

late 1970s and early 1980s (especially those in the field of human resource management

and organizational behavior), find themselves, ironically, in a new, vastly different

professional culture. They are no longer pioneers, but part of a world-wide cadre of

scholars who are actively engaged in conducting research in the area of expatriate

adjustment and international human resource management. However, despite this

progress, challenges remain in the field.

It is an unfortunate fact that it is not uncommon for scholars who study

expatriation from a human resource management perspective to be unaware of expatriate

research that is being done by someone in another discipline, and vice versa. Scholars

who research expatriate issues from the disciplines of anthropology, communication,

human resource management, psychology, and sociology have few common journals in

which to publish their findings and models; thus, scholars find homes for their research

papers in the journals that reside in their major fields. This contributes to an unfortunate

condition of the “right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing,” since it is rare for

scholars to seek out and read journals that are outside of their fields.

The field may technically be multi-disciplinary in nature, but it is not yet truly

inter-disciplinary; the research findings that reside in separate disciplines remain, for the

most part, in publication “silos” that do not lend themselves to integration between

disciplines. Some scholars have informally discussed the necessity of a comprehensive

review of the expatriate adjustment literature so that a collective sense regarding “what

we know and what we don’t know” about the phenomenon of expatriation can be

developed. There seems to be a need for the important findings, theories, and patterns of

3

knowledge about expatriation and repatriation to be warehoused in one place, so that

scholars from a variety of disciplines can access the totality of information that is extant.

The purpose of this paper is to take a first step in beginning to bridge this

“awareness gap” in the field. We will attempt to broadly summarize the theoretical

literature of expatriate adjustment, and will then broadly summarize the general empirical

findings in relationship to the field’s theories. Additionally, this paper will attempt to

link the literature review to issues of application and practice, a dimension that has been

lacking in previous review efforts.

TOWARDS A TYPOLOGY OF EXPATRIATE ADJUSTMENT MODELS

The initial context for theory-building efforts in the field, and the main motivation

behind early theory-building efforts generally centered on the need to organize

independent variables that atheoretical, empirical studies found were linked to various

measures of expatriate adjustment. Using this approach as a foundation, over time

theorists began to develop more conceptually and logically elaborate models based on

theoretical assumptions.

In order to compare and contrast the various theories/models, a rough typology of

models was developed, based upon the classification typologies of Kühlmann (1995a)

and Stahl (1998); in this paper we classify the theoretical models in the field in the broad

categories of: 1) Learning models; 2) Stress-Coping Models; 3) Developmental models;

and 4) Personality-based models. Some models in the field are “theoretical hybrids” that

draw from multiple theoretical perspectives; these will be discussed within the categories

to which we believe each one conceptually best fits. Also, in this paper, the literature of

cross-cultural communication theory will not be reviewed; though much of this literature

arguably deals with some aspects of expatriate adjustment, it does not do so from the

specific perspective of the expatriate, and often does not relate its constructs and findings

to broader issues of adjustment. For an introduction to this literature, please see Samovar

& Porter (1991).

Learning Models

Some scholars who worked in the theory-development domain in the area of

expatriate adjustment in the 1970s and early 1980s relied heavily upon extant

psychological learning theories as foundations for their own model development efforts

4

(David, 1971, 1972; 1976; Dinges, 1983; Guthrie, 1975; 1981). They made the

assumption that since expatriate adjustment had to do with learning new skills and

techniques of adaptation, it was logical to use constructs from learning theories in the

field of psychology as foundational constructs for their own models.

Guthrie (1975) summarized these views when he stated that there were parallels

between expatriates living overseas and extinction-produced aggression, changes in

reinforcers, changes in secondary reinforcers, accidental reinforcement, and the

reinforcement of novel behavior, and held that “it may be fruitful to look upon a second

culture as a massive change in reinforcement contingencies (1975: 112).” The work of

these scholars did not produce full-blown theories per se, but their research was grounded

in the traditional propositions of behaviorism, albeit applied to the realm of expatriate

adjustment. Their research approach laid the groundwork for later scholars’ more

comprehensive theory building efforts.

As the influence of Skinnerian behaviorism waned in psychological circles, neobehaviorist theories, such as social learning theory (Bandura, 1977) emerged and the

ideas inherent in these new models were applied by some scholars in the area to the

problem of expatriate adjustment.

Bochner (1981) argued that “the major task facing a sojourner is not to adjust to a

new culture, but to learn its salient characteristics” (Furnham & Bochner, 1982: 164). He

focused on attempting to understand the processes of social skill acquisition within a new

culture. He believed that focusing on adjustment issues tended to bias the researcher to

view expatriate adjustment as something that existed within the personality of the

expatriate; that is, if the expatriate experienced failures overseas, such scholars deduced

that the failure was likely due to some underlying pathology (Furnham & Bochner,

1982).

Bochner (1981) extended the social skills model of Argyle and Kendon (1967) to

the study of expatriate adjustment. This model makes the assumption that socially

unskilled people have simply not learned, for a variety of reasons, the social interaction

norms of their home culture. The model, originally developed to explain socially

unskilled behavior within a single culture envisions social interaction as a performance,

and that difficulties arise when the actors cannot maintain a successful performance.

5

Socially unskilled people manifest poor performance in being able to express their

attitudes and emotions, exhibit proper body language, understand gazing patterns, carry

out ritualized interpersonal routines (such as greeting others), and properly display

assertion in social settings (Furnham & Bochner, 1982).

Furnham & Bochner (1982) argued that the above problems mirror those of

expatriates, and thus asserted that the social skills model was a useful one for the study of

expatriation. They also argued that the model has the benefit of not being tied to

“hypothetical intrapsychic events . . . which are used as explanatory principles (Bochner,

Lin, and McLeod, 1980)… [rather] its conclusions rest on information about how

particular groups experience specific situations in particular host societies” (Furnham &

Bochner, 1982: 167). Testable hypotheses can be derived from the model’s primary

proposition, namely, that the lack of requisite social skills determines the degree of

culture shock experienced by an expatriate (Furnahm & Bochner, 1982).

Black and Mendenhall (1990), and in another article with Gary Oddou (Black,

Mendenhall, & Oddou, 1991), applied social learning theory (Bandura, 1977) to the study

of expatriate adjustment. Like Bochner and Furnham, they argued that adjustment

required that expatriates learn new roles, rules, and norms of social interaction.

Extending Bandura’s ideas of social learning theory, they held that most new behaviors

during an international assignment are acquired through observational-imitative learning.

Major adjustment problems occur “because there is a high ratio of feedback to the

individuals that they are exhibiting inappropriate behaviors relative to the new and

appropriate behaviors they have learned, coupled with a low utilization of modeled and

observed behaviors which are appropriate in the new culture” (Black & Mendenhall,

1991: 237).

Using principles inherent in social learning theory (attention, retention,

reproduction, incentives, and expectancies), they argued that learning novel cross-cultural

skills required certain levels of rigor in training content, symbolic and participative

modeling processes, and training methods linked to these variables, and developed a

theory-based, contingency framework for conceptualizing and designing cross-cultural

training programs based on these ideas. In 1991, with Gary Oddou, they developed a

more comprehensive framework of cross-cultural adjustment. In the development of this

6

model, they reviewed the U.S. domestic relocation literature and derived a domestic

model from it; next, they reviewed the cross-cultural adjustment literature and developed

a model from it. They combined these models into an integrative, comprehensive model

of “international adjustment” and derived 19 propositions from this model, which in turn

could each generate multiple research hypotheses. This model is a hybrid model, in that

it includes dimensions that come from the personality/trait literature, relocation/transition

literature, and sensemaking literature to name a few. An overarching theme in this

model, however, is that the rules and values of a new culture must be learned in order for

adjustment to take place, which places their hybrid model perhaps most at home in the

“learning models” category. Other theoretical contributions of this model include the

notion of anticipatory adjustment, a multi-dimensional view of degree of adjustment, the

inclusion of mode of adjustment as an influence on expatriate adjustment, and a clearer

depiction of the dynamics and importance of task performance on the adjustment process

(Black, et. al., 1991).

Nicholson, Stepina, and Hochwarter (1990), using ideas from cognitive

psychology, proposed a social information-processing model of expatriate adjustment.

While other learning-oriented scholars discussed the cognitive learning of new cultural

norms by expatriates, these scholars attempted to delineate more carefully how such a

process takes place. Nicholson, et. al. (1990) argued that people need new information

for understanding another culture. Otherwise, they use their own culture information and

scripts. These internal schematic scripts are our learned expectations as to what to do in

such situations.

The model links the dynamics associated with these schematic scripts and relates

them to the process of expatriation: selection through repatriation through subsequent

promotion and assignment. It delineates positive and negative cognitive behavioral

patterns associated with differing assignment outcomes. They argue that training should

provide basic distilled conceptual patterns of schematic frameworks for social

information processing in unfamiliar settings. Thus, in their view, the purpose of training

is to provide a cognitive structural framework for understanding situations in the other

culture and to assist expatriates in the development of a repertoire of cognitive and

behavior schema and responses.

7

In general, the field of expatriate adjustment suffers from a paucity of research

whose goal is to test specific theories. Much of the empirical research in the field is

atheoretical or only tangentially theoretical in nature. The theories above that have seen

the most emphasis in terms of theory-testing have been the social skills model and the

Black, Mendenhall, & Oddou model. Nevertheless, the number of studies that have

investigated these theories by testing their hypotheses is quite minimal.

Empirical studies that lend support directly to the social skills model have been

conducted by Argyle, Furnham, & Graham (1981), and Furnham & Bochner (1982).

However, numerous studies that did not specifically test the social skills model, yet

whose findings corroborate the social skills model, can be mustered in its support (see

Furnham & Bochner, 1982). Similarly, a number of studies can be marshaled to support

the Black et. al. (1991) model of international adjustment (Black, 1988; Black, 1990;

Black & Gregersen, 1991a, 1991b; Black & Porter, 1991; Black & Stephens, 1989) and

the number of other studies that corroborate, but do not explicitly test parts of the theory,

are numerous as well (see Black, et. al., 1999; Selmer & Shiu, 1999).

An interesting implication of all of the learning-based cross-cultural adjustment

theories is that the key to adjustment is for expatriates to learn the ways of the new

culture to which they are assigned. A growing body of research has shown that crosscultural skills training can be effective in facilitating adjustment to a foreign culture and

in improving work performance abroad (Befus, 1988; Bhagat & Prien, 1996; Black &

Mendenhall, 1990; Deshpande & Viswesvaran, 1992; Earley, 1987; Kealey & Protheroe,

1996), thus partially substantiating the claims of the above theorists, albeit in a

roundabout way.

Stress-Coping Models

Based on the premise that the very act of living and working in a foreign culture

can cause massive stress, a number of scholars have applied psychological stress-coping

models to the study of expatriate adjustment (e.g., Befus, 1988; Barna, 1983; Coyle,

1988; Dyal & Dyal, 1981; Kühlmann, 1995a; Stahl, 1998; Walton, 1992; Weaver, 1986;

Weissman & Furnham, 1987). Befus (1988), after reviewing the plethora of theories

regarding the etiology of “culture shock,” concluded that the feelings of anxiety,

confusion, and disruption that often accompany culture shock may be most aptly

8

described as individual reactions to stress. Unlike Oberg (1960) who defined culture

shock as an illness, Befus views it as a normal stress reaction under conditions of

uncertainty, information overload, and loss of control.

Culture shock is an adjustment reaction syndrome caused by cumulative, multiple,

and interactive stress in the intellectual, behavioral, emotional, and physiological

levels of a person recently relocated to an unfamiliar culture, and is characterized

by a variety of symptoms of psychological distress. (1988: 387).

Scholars normally limit culture shock to the initial period of transition and adjustment to

a foreign culture; however, it can be argued that the dysfunctional behavior that

expatriates frequently exhibit throughout their overseas assignment is also, at least, partly

caused by acculturative stress.

In some of the early attempts to evaluate life changes as they relate to

acculturative stress, scholars applied models and findings of the “Critical Life Event”

research program to cross-cultural adjustment (Barna, 1983; Dyal & Dyal, 1981; Roskies,

Iida-Miranda & Strobel, 1977; Spradley & Phillips, 1972). This view of the acculturative

experience holds that any life change, whether positive or negative, is intrinsically

stressful, in that it produces disequilibrium and requires adaptive reactions (see Ward,

1996, for a review of this line of research).

While there are many conceptual and methodological problems associated with

the Critical Life Event approach, its application to the field of expatriation proved to be

useful in quantifying the potential stress of living and working abroad. For example,

Coyle (1988) used the Social Readjustment Rating Scale developed by Holmes and Rahe

(1967) to demonstrate that the amount of change associated with moving to another

country can be a potential 355 units – a score that, according to the author, reflects a 90

percent possibility of health breakdown if a person does not adapt quickly to the changes

involved in relocation. However, few empirical studies using the Critical Life Event

approach have thus far been reported in the field of sojourner adjustment, and

correlations between the amount of life-change associated with relocation and physical or

mental health were usually found to be weak (e.g., Roskies et al., 1977).

A more promising but related approach to the study of expatriate adjustment

focuses on the chronic role strains that may result in continuing stress overseas (Dyal &

9

Dyal, 1981). Role-theory approaches emphasize the fact that expatriate managers face

various competing demands that make their role a very difficult one (e.g., of adjusting to

the local cultural environment and, at the same time, maintaining a trusting relationship

with the home office). As early as 1973, Yun noted that

. . . it is almost impossible for the managers to avoid role conflicts, since their role

is built in such a way that it is easily vulnerable to potential conflicts. ... The

expatriate manager is a sandwich-man being trapped in between his own and

foreign cultures, his own and host governments, and his office and his family.

(1973: 105-106).

Yun (1973), Rahim (1983), and Torbiörn (1985) uncovered in their models the

major relations between expatriate managers and different stakeholders in the home and

host country, and demonstrated that expatriates must act as a connecting link between the

various groups – a task that can create a chronic, intrapersonal conflict situation. Black,

Mendenhall, and Oddou (1991), in their model of international adjustment, proposed that

a high amount of role conflict and role ambiguity may have detrimental effects on the

adjustment and effectiveness of expatriate managers.

Empirical findings support the basic premises underlying these models. Zeira and

his colleagues (Harari & Zeira, 1974; Zeira, 1975; Zeira & Banai, 1984; Zeira & Harari,

1979) have demonstrated that the role set of expatriate managers is very complex because

expatriates and their various stakeholders in the host and home country often have

conflicting expectations of each other. A recent study found that role conflicts are among

the most frequent and severe problems that expatriate managers encounter in their

overseas assignments. They are also those problems that expatriates find most difficult to

cope with – even more difficult than problems resulting from cross-cultural differences in

managerial systems, work organization, and communication patterns (Stahl, 1998; 1999).

Findings of other studies indicate that role conflict and role ambiguity reduce

adjustment, satisfaction, commitment to the parent company, and increase intent to leave

the assignment early, while role clarity and role discretion positively affect criteria of

adjustment and effectiveness of expatriate managers (Black, 1988; Black & Gregersen,

1990; Black & Gregersen, 1991; Gregersen & Black, 1992; Naumann, 1993).

10

While Critical Life Event and Role Theory approaches focus on the various

stimuli, loads, or pressures that expatriates encounter overseas, other stress models

emphasize the physiological reactions due to relocation. Barna (1983) applied Selye’s

(1974) stage model of the General Adaptation Syndrome to describe and explain the

phases of expatriate adjustment: (1) the alarm reaction stage; (2) the stage of resistance;

and (3) the stage of exhaustion. Barna hypothesized that the intense and prolonged

physiological activation that is characteristic of individuals who are trying to adjust (or

trying to resist adjustment) to an unfamiliar environment produces the symptoms of

culture shock. Barna noted that,

after several months of sustained excitation, reserve energy supplies become

depleted, the person’s ‘resistance is down’ (the exhaustion stage of the General

Adaptation Syndrome), and he or she consciously or unconsciously starts using

protective mechanisms. These could be the perceptual or behavioral changes

mentioned so often in the culture-shock literature (1983: 29).

Barna’s analysis also points to the dilemma that the most functional behaviors for

cross-cultural adjustment, such as getting to know host nationals by joining their

activities, learning the foreign language, exploring the unfamiliar surroundings, etc., are

also those that are likely to bring about stress. Consequently, the effective management of

stress, not stress avoidance, should be the goal of expatriate training. According to Barna,

learning to recognize when one is under stress, arranging for privacy when one needs to

relax, and taking a positive attitude towards events that cause stress are effective ways to

prevent overstress (Barna, 1983).

Stress-coping approaches attempt to overcome the one-sided stimulus- and

response models that have dominated the early research on acculturative stress. Lazarus

(Lazarus, 1980; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), the leading scholar in research on stress and

coping, emphasizes the fact that stress does not depend on the objective situation but

upon how the individual subjectively evaluates the situation. Coping is defined as

“efforts, both action-oriented and intrapsychic, to manage (i.e., master, tolerate, reduce,

minimize) environmental and internal demands, and conflicts among them, which tax or

exceed a person’s resources” (Lazarus & Launier, 1978: 311). In contrast to much of the

earlier research in the area of expatriate adjustment that relied upon psychological stress

11

models, the coping paradigm suggests that expatriates are not passive agents over whom

events unfold. Rather, managers in an international assignment are able to draw from a

large repertoire of coping strategies, both open and intrapsychic, to regulate stressful

emotions, bring situational problems under their control, and be proactive agents of

change (Feldman & Thomas, 1992; Kühlmann, 1995a; Stahl, 1998; Tung, 1998).

The models of Ward (1996), Aycan (1997), and Kühlmann (1995a) draw heavily

on the stress-coping model of Lazarus. Ward (1996) presented a model of the

acculturation process that distinguishes between psychological and socio-cultural

adjustment and includes individual, situational, and societal predictors of adjustment. The

model considers culture contact as a major life event that is characterized by stress,

disorientation, and learning deficits and requires cognitive appraisal of the situation and

behavioral, cognitive, and affective responses for stress management. Ward’s model,

however, is silent about how exactly individuals cope with the strains of living and

working in a foreign culture.

Aycan’s (1997) process model of expatriate acculturation partly fills this gap by

including individual coping strategies as determinants of adjustment and performance.

The model suggests that expatriate managers, depending on their appraisal of the foreign

environment, employ a variety of coping processes, including search for social support

and temporary withdrawal to “stability zones.” Kühlmann (1995a) proposed a

comprehensive typology of strategies that individuals use in coping with the strains of

living and working in a foreign culture. According to the model, the strategies that

expatriates use in coping with the problems encountered overseas range from the very

problem-focused to the very symptom-focused, from action-oriented to intrapsychic, and

from person-oriented to situation-oriented behavior.

Stress-coping approaches have only recently stimulated empirical research in the

field of expatriate adjustment. Several studies found that coping is not a “one-strategyfor-each-person phenomenon” (Brislin, 1981: 277), as early research on expatriate

adjustment suggested; on the contrary, it was shown that expatriate managers are able to

draw from a large repertoire of coping strategies, both open and intrapsychic, to manage

situational problems in their international assignments (Feldman & Thomas, 1992;

Feldman & Tompson, 1993; Stahl, 1998; Tung, 1998). However, the findings of these

12

studies also indicate that coping strategies of expatriate managers, albeit sometimes

helpful in reducing the strains of living and working overseas, are often only moderately

successful or even counter-productive in dealing with the problems encountered in an

international assignment.

Other findings suggest that certain coping dispositions, that is, relatively stable

behavioral tendencies in dealing with stressful encounters, discriminate between effective

and ineffective expatriate managers; for example, cross-culturally effective expatriates

have a stronger tendency towards planful problem-solving behavior, culture learning,

relationship building, and conflict resolution, but a weaker disposition towards

ethnocentrism, resignation, and withdrawal from the local culture (Stahl, 1998). Finally,

research within the stress-coping framework produced evidence that stress-inoculation

training can be effective in facilitating adjustment to a foreign culture (Befus, 1988;

Walton, 1992).

Developmental Models

Adler (1975, 1987) proposed a 5-stage model of the transitional experience in a

foreign culture, which he describes as an alternative view of culture shock. The stages

are: Contact-Disintegration-Reintegration-Autonomy-Independence. They represent

movement from a state of low self- and cultural awareness to a state of high self- and

cultural awareness. Another refinement of the culture shock model (Black &

Mendenhall, 1991; Oberg, 1960; Ward, Okura, Kennedy, & Kojima, 1998), is Gudykunst

and Kim’s (Gudykunst & Kim, 1992; Kim, 1988, 1989; Kim & Ruben, 1988) “stressadaptation-growth model of cross-cultural adaptation.” Their model is based on the

assumption that individuals are homeostatic and undertake adaptive activities only when

environmental challenges threaten their internal equilibrium. This process, they argue,

leads to cross-cultural adjustment and personal growth.

Temporary disintegration is…the very basis for subsequent internal

transformation and growth. When the environment continues to threaten internal

conditions, individuals by necessity continue to strive to meet the challenge

through their adaptive activities of acting on the environment as well as

responding to it…This uniquely human adaptive capacity is reflected in increased

knowledge, attitudes, and behavioral capacities. (Gudykunst & Kim, 1992: 251)

13

Both the Adler and Gudykunst and Kim models assume that contact with another

culture causes individuals to psychologically disintegrate, regroup, and then attain a

higher level of development and maturation. The stress-adaptation-growth model, with

its emphasis upon recurring environmental demands for adaptation and growth, moves

away from a linear conceptualization of stages that begin when expatriates enter another

culture and end when they are fully adapted. As Pedersen noted, “Transformation occurs

through a series of degeneration and regeneration events or crises in a nonregular and

erratic movement of change. Part of this process is conscious and other parts more

unconscious as the visitor seeks greater success in the host environment” (1995: 4).

This emphasis upon success, termed intercultural competence, is figural in

Bennett’s (1986, 1993) model of intercultural sensitivity. Created to help cross-cultural

educators and trainers diagnose a learner’s stage of development in dealing with cultural

difference, this personal growth model was derived from extant intercultural

communication theory as well as extensive practical experience. Bennett’s model is

represented by “a continuum of increasing sophistication in dealing with cultural

difference, moving from ethnocentrism through stages of greater recognition and

acceptance of difference, here termed ‘ethnorelativism’ (1986: 2). The three ethnocentric

stages are: Denial, Defense, and Minimization; the three ethnorelative stages are

Acceptance, Adaptation, and Integration. Bennett and Hammer (Hammer, 1999) has

developed an instrument to measure these stages of intercultural sensitivity;

unfortunately, to date, none of the other personal growth theories have been

operationalized to this degree.

Like Bennett, Osland (1995) formulated a phenomenological model based upon

both theory and practical experience. In one of the few expatriate studies involving

grounded theory and qualitative research, Osland analyzed the stories of returned

expatriates and articulated a transformational model that describes the subjective

experience of expatriates. She contends that the metaphor of the hero’s adventure myth

(Campbell, 1968) is a framework that captures the essence of the overseas experience for

many expatriates and highlights the transformation that often occurs in the cross-cultural

context. Like mythical heroes, many expatriates pass through these stages: “The Call to

Adventure,” “Crossing the First Threshold,” “The Magical Friend” (cultural mentor),

14

“The Road of Trials” (including the paradoxes inherent in life abroad), “The Ultimate

Boon” (transformation), and “The Return.” The hero’s adventure metaphor makes no

pretense of assigning time markers to each stage, because personal transformation is an

unpredictable and nonlinear process (Mendenhall, 1999). Osland’s model goes beyond

adjustment, a more frequent focus in expatriate research, to underscore the importance of

the broader concept of personal transformation.

All of these models assume that the cross-cultural experience can result in

positive personal growth. Although the cross-cultural context is particularly fertile

ground for personal development and transformation, however, not all expatriates take

advantage of the opportunity for personal growth. Osland (in press) hypothesizes that

some of the factors that influence this propensity are: reason for going overseas,

personality, attitude, intercultural sensitivity, desire for personal growth, and motivation

to succeed at work and become acculturated.

Research indicates that the strains of adjusting to a foreign culture may lay the

groundwork for subsequent skill acquisition and personality development (Kealey, 1989;

Ratiu, 1983; Ruben & Kealey, 1979. Kealey and Ruben (1983), based on empirical

findings, argued that the persons who will ultimately be the most effective in adjusting to

a foreign culture can be expected to undergo the most intense culture shock during

transition. Apparently, “there is simply no way to derive the benefits of growth without

the concomitant experiences of stress” (Kim & Ruben, 1988: 308).

Many expatriates consider personal growth and acquisition of cross-cultural skills

as an important-perhaps the most important-outcome of their international assignments

(Adler, 1981; Osland, 1995; Thomas, 1995). All but one of the expatriates in a

qualitative study reported changing overseas and could readily identify how they had

changed (Osland, 1995). However, cross-cultural contact through expatriation does not

“automatically” result in better understanding, reduced stereotypes, higher empathy and

improved cross-cultural skills, as is shown by tests of Amir’s (1969) “contact hypothesis”

(Amir, 1976; Brislin, 1981; Bochner, 1982).

Personality-Based Models/Approaches

Historically one of the most prominent issues, which has been discussed in the

field of expatriate research was the categorization of successful expatriates via their

15

personality characteristics. The underlying concern was practical. Identifying the

attitudes, traits, and skills that predict success as an expatriate would improve selection

procedures as well as training practices. Since the 1960s a growing body of anecdotal,

prescriptive, and research literature has focused on describing what it takes to be

successful during an overseas assignment. Divergent lists of potential prerequisites for

expatriate success have been generated. However, they lack comparability concerning

terminology, conceptualization of success, bases for the deduction of characteristics, and

configuration of samples (Spitzberg 1989).

Kealey & Ruben (1983) conducted a thorough literature review on predictors of

overseas success that had been published through 1981. Drawing on studies of Peace

Corps volunteers, overseas businessmen, technical experts, and military personnel, they

found evidence for a high degree of consensus among a set of predictors which include

empathy, flexibility, tolerance, respect, interest in local culture, and technical skills.

Although the results suggest the existence of a general “overseas type,” who successfully

copes with the challenges of an overseas assignment irrespective of country of sojourn,

local culture, task, and organization characteristics. Kealey & Ruben (1983) declared

that the relative contribution of any specific trait will depend on the environment and the

task confronting the expatriate.

In a more recent appraisal of the search for personality characteristics, which

predict overseas success, Kealey (1996) concluded, that the "research continues to

replicate previous findings and thus confirms the validity of a set of general traits and

skills needed to be successful in another culture" (1996: 84). Based upon the current state

of research dealing with predictors of cross-cultural success of sojourner groups like

foreign students, expatriate managers, and development workers, Kealey proposed the

concept of the "model cross-cultural collaborator." This ideal type can be described by

three categories of non-technical skills, all which are relevant to predicting success in an

overseas assignment: (1) adaptation skills (e.g., flexibility, stress tolerance), (2) crosscultural skills (e.g., realism, cultural sensitivity), and (3) partnership skills (e.g., openness

to others, professional commitment).

This profile of skills is recommended as a guide to the selection process of

international assignees as it summarizes the consensual findings of empirical research on

16

personality characteristics needed for achieving overseas success. Nevertheless, the

author continues to stress that the general profile has to be weighted according to the

demands of the position, the organization, the host country, etc. (Kealey, 1996).

Two other attempts to organize the multitude of potential predictors of expatriate

success in broader categories have been undertaken by Mendenhall and Oddou (1985),

and Brislin (1981). Their comprehensive efforts to categorize the hodgepodge list of

personality-based overseas success predictors resulted in a three- and a six-dimensional

solution respectively, which show--despite their different terminologies--a consensus on

the personality characteristics that can be accepted as valid predictors of overseas

success.

In contrast to these inductive categorizations of personality-based predictors,

Ones & Viswesvaran (1997) utilized the Five Factor Model of Personality (Big Five)

from Costa & McCrae (1992) as an organizing framework. The majority of the

personality variables that have been related to the success of expatriates can be

conceptually linked, with high levels of interrater agreement, to the Big Five dimensions:

emotional stability, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and

conscientiousness. The largest number of personality-based determinants of overseas

success fit into the “openness to experience” factor.

Ones & Viswesvaran (1997) demonstrated the theoretical fruitfulness of their

approach by proposing and explaining specific relationships between Big Five factors

and aspects of overseas job performance; however, these relationships require

confirmation by future research studies. Another theoretically unresolved issue, the

interaction of personality variables and situation characteristics in the process of overseas

adjustment and performance, has gained comparatively less attention.

Brislin (1981) was one of the first authors who went a step beyond the traditional

enumeration of personality-based predictors and vague references to moderating

situational factors. In addition to the above-mentioned structure of personality factors

predicting expatriate success, he examined the situations that may influence expatriates’

adjustment and job performance. The 15 situational characteristics considered by Brislin

include, among others, the time constraints of an overseas assignment, the complexity of

tasks, and the presence of a role model. In spite of the detailed examination of potential

17

influences from the expatriate's environment, specific interactive relationships between

the person and situation factors outlined in his model have not yet been adequately

delineated.

Kealey (1989) argued that personal as well as situational factors are relevant in

explaining and predicting expatriate success. Personality characteristics and situational

variables interact in the production of expatriate behavior and success. The personspecific perception, interpretation, and evaluation of the same overseas setting mediate

this interaction. Some hybrid models of expatriate effectiveness (for example, Black et.

al., 1991) elaborate the sets of person and situation variables by listing personality

characteristics, task variables, organization characteristics, and national culture

dimensions which are supposed to contribute to the expatriate’s success. But such efforts

have yielded a paucity of propositions that specify the dynamics and effects of

interactions within and between the sets of success antecedents.

To date, only a small number of studies have focused on exploring empirically

what it takes to be a successful expatriate. Most of the research continues to be

predominantly cross-sectional in nature and to use self-report data obtained from

interviews, surveys, and supervisor/human resource manager ratings. (Dinges & Baldwin,

1996).

In response to criticism that most studies on the success factors of expatriates

have been limited to US- international assignees and to one country of destination, Arthur

and Bennett (1995) conducted a survey with a sample of more than 300 expatriates from

26 countries who were assigned to 43 countries. The participants had to assess the

relative importance of personality characteristics that were perceived to contribute to the

expatriate's success. A factor analysis of the responses identified five factors: "job

knowledge and motivation," "relational skills," "flexibility/adaptability," "extra-cultural

openness," and "family situation." The factor "family situation" ranked highest in the

descending order of importance, a result that corroborates other research on international

assignments (Black, et. al. 1999). In a reanalysis of their data, Arthur and Bennett (1997)

used Campbell's (1990) theory of job performance as a framework and tested it against

four alternative models of international assignee job performance. Results of

confirmatory factor analysis indicated that an eight-factor solution showed the best fit to

18

the data. The factors were labeled "flexibility," "family situation," "management/

administration," "integrity," "effort," "tolerance," "cross-cultural interest," and

"openness."

In addition to identifying the underlying dimensions of expatriate success might

be, it is also important to try to assess the effect of success criteria on possible predictors

of adjustment as well. Cui & Awa (1992) asked 70 business expatriates in China to rate

the importance of 24 personality-based predictors in reference to cross-cultural

adjustment and overseas job performance. The results suggest that cross-cultural

adjustment and effective job requirements have different predictors and priorities. In

adapting to a new culture traits like patience or flexibility play a more dominant role,

whereas job performance requires more interpersonal skills (e.g., the ability to establish

and maintain social relationships). A rather small number of studies have explored the

influences of both personality characteristics and situational variables on the success of

international assignments. For example, Kealey (1989) found that personal characteristics

are more important in predicting overseas adjustment than situational variables.

In contrast, results of a study by Parker and McEvoy (1993) indicate that overseas

work adjustment was mainly affected by organizational variables (e.g., compensation and

career opportunities) whereas general living adjustment primarily was a function of

person variables. This study investigated a model of intercultural adjustment comprising

individual, organizational, and environmental factors by using data from 169 expatriates.

Black & Gregersen (1991) similarly investigated the relationships among individual, job,

organizational and non-work predictors and three facets of cross-cultural adjustment.

Person and situation characteristics appeared to show a complex pattern of relationship

with the dimensions of cross-cultural adjustment.

Stahl (1998) explored the coping strategies of 120 German expatriates who were

assigned to Japan and the U.S. The results show that both countries vary in the problems

and conflicts they present for expatriates. Each class of stressful situation requires a

specific set of coping activities that can be attributed to such personality traits as "the

need to learn," "extraversion," and "empathy." However, the personality characteristics of

successful expatriates in different countries and with different jobs showed little variance,

a finding that supports the notion of a general overseas type.

19

FUTURE DIRECTIONS FOR SCHOLARS

In this section, we will discuss the gaps that exist, both theoretically and

empirically, in the field, and suggest some general strategies that scholars might consider

in bridging these gaps.

Problems of Operationalization

The dependent variable that has driven the theoretical work of the field has been

alternately referred to as acculturation, adjustment, effectiveness, success or satisfaction.

Not only is there a lack of agreement regarding the overlaps and distinctions between

these operationalizations, but there has been little, if any, argument by scholars regarding

this issue (Thomas, 1998).

Furnham and Bochner (1986) stated that acculturation involves the integration of

the foreign and home culture. Expatriate effectiveness is often implicitly based upon this

definition of acculturation. However, the constructs of expatriate adjustment, adaptation,

and acculturation are concepts that are usually used interchangeably by scholars.

Adjustment is often implicitly defined by many scholars as a subjective report of the

expatriates’ satisfaction with different aspects of their sojourn. This trend began with the

work of Lysgaard (1955).

It can be argued that acculturation is a prerequisite for job effectiveness, since it is

difficult to imagine an international situation in which an expatriate could succeed

without making any attempts to adapt to the local culture. Perhaps there are some types

of jobs that require little acculturation and interaction with the host country culture.

Acculturation may not automatically lead to effectiveness, but it is assumed by most

scholars working in the field that it appears to be a prerequisite in some way for

effectiveness to occur.

Many of the theories discussed in this chapter do not explicitly delineate the

relationship between expatriate adjustment and subsequent job performance. Regarding

the variable of expatriate performance, it is clear from the theoretical literature that there

is no consensus in the field regarding a clear definition of this variable. In empirical

studies it is generally measured by self reports due to difficulty of getting superiors’

ratings.

20

In the empirical literature, expatriate success is measured in terms of turnover,

adjustment, or task performance (Thomas, 1998), the most frequent measure being

turnover. Thus, success is frequently operationalized as intent to remain overseas for the

time originally agreed upon by the expatriate and the company. Other turnover-related

variables are organizational commitment and job satisfaction (Thomas, 1998).

Wilson and Dalton (1998) operationalize effectiveness as adjustment and job

performance. They note the difficulty of constructing a valid measure of expatriate

effectiveness since perceptions of effectiveness depend upon the point of view of various

actors. Determination of expatriate effectiveness varies depending upon whose

perspective is sought and the role played by attributions within the particular

organization. A true picture of effectiveness may emerge only when one polls all those

involved -- the organization, the expatriate, his or her peers, host country and third

country coworkers or subordinates, local government representatives, and the

client/supplier network, in addition to sources of objective data. From a practical “datacollection standpoint,” the use of subjects from a variety of organizations limits the

operationalization of effectiveness to expatriate self-reports, the most common measure,

and their recollection of the organization’s evaluations of their work. (Osland, 1990).

The challenge of operationalization of the dependent variable of expatriate

effectiveness/success/adjustment/satisfaction is not a new one: Stoner, Aram, and Rubin

described it well in 1972 and not much has changed since then:

The problem of investigating the question of effective overseas performance is

complicated by the shortage, in many studies and reports, of a satisfactory-or in

some cases any- measure of performance, and by the problems of heterogeneous

environments, heterogeneous yet small populations of subjects under study, and

the failure to distinguish between chance relationships and those which are

statistically significant. (1972: 304)

Paucity of Longitudinal Studies

Very few longitudinal studies exist in the literature, resulting in all the attendant

methodological problems of cross-sectional analysis. However, a few exceptions to this

trend exist.

21

A noteworthy longitudinal study was undertaken by Kealey (1989). Technical

advisors of the Canadian International Development Agency were asked to assess several

personality traits before their international assignments, and were asked to complete a

survey of performance criteria during their sojourn as well. A statistical analysis of

"winners" and "losers" identified a few personality characteristics that discriminated

between these groups. The resulting profile of the effective technical advisor included

characteristics which Kealey and Ruben (1983) and Kealey (1996) also identified as

general predictors of expatriate success. Some characteristics that were found to

discriminate in Kealey’s 1983 longitudinal study were not included in his later

development of the concept of the model cross-cultural collaborator.

Martin, Bradford, and Rohrlich (1995) used a modified expectancy violations

model on 248 U.S. students. The students described their expectations concerning 13

aspects of overseas living, pre and post sojourn. The findings indicated that: 1) sojourners

consistently reported that expectations were met or positively violated; 2) fulfillment/

violation of expectations was related to location of sojourn and somewhat to gender, but

not to prior intercultural experience; and 3) there was a positive relationship between the

violation of expectations and the overall evaluation of sojourn experience, supporting the

expectancy violations model. Ward and her associates (Ward & Kennedy,1999; Ward,

et. al, 1998), in two longitudinal studies, found that psychological and sociocultural

adaptation challenges are generally greater in the early stages of an overseas sojourn and

that they decrease over time. This pattern held for a variety of nationalities, with social

difficulty decreasing over a year’s time after the first few months of stay in the new

culture.

The need is simple and concise: more scholars need to begin conducting

longitudinal studies. The barriers to this course of action are obvious—money, time,

access, and the pressure to publish now, not in the future. Nevertheless, the need

remains.

Ethnocentric bias

Most empirical research in the field examines the expatriation process from a onesided perspective, focusing solely on accounts of expatriate managers. Few empirical

studies on expatriation have included the host country perspective. Notable exceptions

22

are the studies of Zeira and his colleagues (e.g., Zeira & Banai, 1984; 1985), and of

Sinangil and Ones (1997), who examined factors that host country stakeholders perceive

to contribute to expatriate success. Selmer (1997) provides an in-depth view of the

cultural context of both Swedes and Chinese and their cross-cultural similarities and

differences. His book is a good example of cross-border research regarding what occurs

when two diverse groups begin interacting with one another.

In order to avoid this common ethnocentric bias in expatriation research, it will be

necessary to include the host country perspective in research designs. Scholars in the

field need to do a better job systematically addressing the determinants, processes, and

outcomes of expatriate effectiveness from a host country perspective. Such an approach

causes complexity in the life of the social scientist—one must find multiple, new sample

groups and wrestle with extricating the data from them in a way that preserves the

validity of the data. However, until more scholars pursue this route, our understanding of

the phenomenon will remain limited.

Further Examination of Paradoxes

The empirical research in the field of expatriation has produced a number of

contradictory – or even paradoxical – findings that require further examination. For

example, the variable of “culture novelty” (Black, et. al., 1991) refers to the notion that

host countries that are culturally distant from the home country are harder to adjust to

than less alien environments. Alternatively referred to as “cultural distance” (Stening,

1979), “cultural toughness” (Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985), and “culture barriers”

(Torbiörn, 1987), the theoretical evidence intuitively and logically suggests that culture

novelty is a determinant of expatriate adjustment. However, there is only mixed

empirical support for the “culture novelty hypothesis.”

While some studies support the culture novelty hypothesis (Black & Stephens,

1989; Furnham & Bochner, 1982; Parker & McEvoy, 1993; Stroh, Dennis, & Cramer,

1994; Torbiörn, 1982; Ward & Kennedy, 1993), other findings did not support the culture

novelty hypothesis (Black & Gregersen, 1991; Janssens, 1995; Kealey, 1989; Parker &

McEvoy, 1993; Selmer, 1999; Takeuchi & Hannon, 1996). These contradictory findings

suggest the need for further exploration of the mechanisms through which culture novelty

influences the degree and the mode of expatriate adjustment (Thomas, 1998).

23

It has often been argued that previous experience in a foreign country will

facilitate adjustment to a new expatriate environment (e.g., Brewster & Pickard, 1994;

Church, 1982; Engelhard & Hein, 1996), and empirical studies have in fact found a

positive relationship between previous overseas work experience and cross-cultural

adjustment (Black, 1988; Parker & McEvoy, 1993). However, findings of a larger

number of studies indicate that previous experience abroad does not affect, or can even

negatively affect, expatriate adjustment and effectiveness (Black & Gregersen, 1991; Cui

& Awa, 1992; Dunbar, 1992; Kumar & Steinmann, 1988; Pinder & Das, 1979; Stahl,

1998). Thus, the relationship between previous international experience and adjustment

in a foreign assignment may be more complex than formerly thought. For example, in a

study of technical advisors posted to developing countries, Kealey (1989) found that

individuals with more experience abroad showed higher levels of satisfaction and higher

self ratings of effectiveness. However, Kealey also found in this study that previous

experience did not correlate with job effectiveness as rated by peers or researchers.

Altogether, the results of empirical studies indicate that “learning the ropes” in a foreign

posting is a process that must begin anew after each assignment – a finding that seems to

contradict common sense and, if validated, would have profound implications with

respect to the human resource development function of international job assignments.

Empirical investigations on the effectiveness of cross-cultural training point to

another interesting paradox. While research has generally produced strong empirical

support for a positive relationship between pre-departure training and different criteria of

adjustment (Bhagat & Prien, 1996; Bird, Heinbuch, Dunbar & McNulty, 1993; Black &

Mendenhall, 1990; Deshpande & Viswesvaran, 1992; Earley, 1987; Kealey & Protheroe,

1996), some studies found that cross-cultural training inhibited adjustment to a foreign

culture (Black & Gregersen, 1991; Gregersen & Black, 1992). Gregersen and Black

(1992) speculate that this “the negative relationship may be a function of too little

training, a false sense of security, or inaccurate information derived from it” (1992: 84).

Quantiative Bias

To summarize the preceding section, empirical research in the field has produced

a number of contradictory findings that require further examination of the processes

through which expatriates adjust to living and working in a foreign culture. However, it

24

seems unlikely that adjustment processes can be easily unearthed via the standardized

survey questionnaires that empirical studies on expatriation have almost exclusively

relied on in the past. Qualitative methodologies, such as in-depth interviews, naturalistic

case studies, participant observation, and participant observation need to be employed in

order to provide alternative data (Church, 1982; Kühlmann, 1995a; Mendenhall, 1999). If

this is done, some of the aforementioned paradoxes may be dissolved. For example,

qualitative interview data in a recent study on expatriation (Stahl, 1998) suggested that

the unexpected negative relationship between previous overseas experience and crosscultural adjustment that was found in a sample of German expatriates in Japan and the

U.S. was caused by a relatively high number of “corporate gypsies” who had already

been posted to several other countries before their current assignment and who simply

“refused” to adjust to yet another foreign culture. There are several examples of

qualitative expatriate studies, some of which also employ quantitative methods and

triangulation (Adler, 1987; Briody & Chrisman, 1991; Napier & Taylor, 1995; Osland,

1995; Selmer, 1997).

The Need for Model Testing

Another serious gap in the field is the lack of model testing. The last two decades

of research on expatriation show that most of the empirical work in the field has been

anecdotal or atheoretical in nature. The various models that have been developed to

describe and explain the adjustment process in an expatriate assignment have not been

adequately tested, and it is not uncommon that scholars develop new models without

testing or building on previous models. This is unfortunate because the models that have

been reported in this chapter not only integrate and organize the extant empirical findings

in the field but also allow for the formulation of new, testable hypotheses. For example,

Black, Mendenhall, and Oddou (1991) derived 19 testable propositions from their model

of expatriate adjustment. These propositions include the relationship between variables

such as individual skills and attitudes, HRM practices, aspects of the role set of expatriate

managers, and various dimensions of cross-cultural adjustment. However, the number of

empirical studies that have examined the postulated relationships is still limited. The

same holds true for other models in the field such as those of Aycan (1997), Ones &

25

Viswesvaran, (1997), Parker and McEvoy (1993), and Ward (1996), whose propositions

and hypotheses have not yet, or have only partially, been tested.

Alternative models and Alternative Paradigms

Mendenhall (1999) discussed the need to employ alternative paradigms in the

study of expatriation in order to view the phenomenon from a more complete perspective.

Traditionally, the scholars who have studied this field have employed research

methodologies that have been created from the assumptions of logical positivism (Landis

& Wasilewski, 1999; Mendenhall, 1999). He suggests that studying expatriation from

the perspective of such paradigms as nonlinear dynamics and hermeneutics, in addition to

that of logical positivism, will provide a more comprehensive understanding of the

phenomenon (Mendenhall & Macomber, 1997; Mendenhall, Macomber, Gregersen, &

Cutright, 1998).

Scholars should also remember that expatriation is not a unique phenomenon of

the late 20th century. What can be learned—both good and ill--from the years of

experience that many churches have gained from sending missionaries abroad? What did

the merchants of the East Indian Company report about their intercultural encounters?

How did the British Civil Service prepare its assignees for India? Perhaps there may be

important insights to be gained by studying expatriate adjustment through the lenses of

historical research methods.

It may also be fruitful if scholars were to consider creating contingency models

that would delineate the impact of different environments and overseas tasks on the

development of expatriates with specific personality backgrounds. There is an

astonishing paucity of empirical research on the consequences of an overseas assignment

in terms of competence building and personality development. Not every problem the

expatriate encounters is culture-bound. Many problems have to do with parent-host

company relations, family situations, climatology (e.g., sunlight deprivation), etc. It may

be possible that current theoretical models of the expatriation process may concentrate

too heavily on the issue of adjustment to the foreign culture.

To summarize, it is evident that despite the volume of research (both theoretical

and empirical) on expatriate adjustment that has accumulated over the past three decades,

the vistas for future research are open and invite further exploration. A great deal of the

26

current work is prescriptive and lacks a sound empirical base. The empirical studies that

have been conducted are often atheoretical in nature and do not explicitly test existing

models. Many of the extant theoretical models are heavily influenced by the disciplinary

affiliation of researchers and their country of origin; thus, the research in this field

remains overall ethnocentric and monodisciplinary. To overcome these deficiencies

more inter-disciplinary as well as international collaboration will be important. Such a

collaboration would provide deeper insights into the dynamics of expatriation and would

more thoroughly validate applications from such research for practitioners, who must

deal with the complexities and strains associated with living and working overseas.

APPLYING THE MODELS TO IHRM FUNCTIONS

Great strides have been made over the past decades in the design of instruments to

assist HR professionals in the selection, training, career planning, and reintegration of

expatriates. Unfortunately, the progress that has been made in the acquisition of

knowledge and the design of techniques necessary to improve the management of

expatriates has not been paralleled by a similar improvement in IHRM policies and

practices of MNCs. The following sections examine current IHRM practices as well as

innovative approaches to expatriate management.

Recruitment and Selection of Expatriates

The effective recruitment of human resources in MNCs is a complex function that

involves a number of staffing issues: executive nationality staffing policies, predictors of

cross-cultural effectiveness, equal employment opportunity, recruitment of host-country

nationals, etc. (Dowling, Welch, & Schuler, 1999). In most cases there are only a small

number of candidates to choose from for an international assignment due to the

specialized requirements of the job and the availability of personnel who are capable and

willing to work abroad for an extended period of time. In particular, the widely held

belief that career opportunities are better for those who stay at home where the decisions

are made, i.e. at head office, makes it difficult for MNCs to recruit able managers for an

overseas posting (Gertsen, 1990; Hamill, 1989; Tung, 1988).

This problem is further intensified by the fact that the goals that are usually

associated with an international assignment, such as coordination and control, transfer of

know-how, and development of informal information networks (Edström & Galbraith,

27

1977; Tung & Miller, 1990), require recruitment of managers with an intimate knowledge

of the company. This need for internal recruitment narrows the pool of candidates for an

expatriate assignment. As a consequence, “the man chosen is often simply the man who

happened to be there” (Torbiörn, 1982: 51).

A shortage of candidates may partly explain why international staffing practices

hardly ever resemble the sophisticated selection processes proposed in the literature. A

recent study conducted by Arthur Andersen Inc. (1999) found that only 26 percent of the

surveyed companies had a strategic international staffing plan, and less than 15 percent

had specific international assignment selection criteria and processes in place. The

findings of another survey show that 94 percent of U.S. companies hold line management

responsible for assessing the suitability of international candidates, and 96 percent rate

the technical requirements of a job as the most important selection criteria for

international assignments (National Foreign Trade Council; see Swaak, 1995).

Although the roles of line management and of the HR function in international

staffing processes vary across countries and industries (Black et al., 1999; Brewster,

1991), results of other surveys also indicate that MNCs base selection decisions for

international assignments primarily on candidates’ technical knowledge and past

performance in the home country. This practice does not seem to have changed much

over the past three decades, and it appears to be invariant across MNCs in different

countries (Baker & Ivancevich, 1971; Baliga & Baker, 1985; Brewster, 1991; Gertsen,

1990; Hamill, 1989; Ivancevich, 1969; Marx, 1996; Miller, 1973; Tung, 1982; Wirth,

1992).

The international staffing problem is further intensified by the fact that most

companies lack effective methods for selecting managers for overseas postings. The

findings of several surveys show that U.S, European, and Japanese MNCs tend to rely on

unstructured interviews and references from superiors when making international staffing

decisions (Gertsen, 1990; Stahl, 1998; Swaak, 1995; Tung, 1982; Wirth, 1992). These

instruments have been criticized for their low validity in predicting performance even

within the domestic environment; as a basis for international selection decisions, their

results may be totally misleading. Yet, the systematic utilization of selection procedures

with higher predictive validity, such as biographical data questionnaires, structured

28

interviews, and assessment centers, is virtually non-existent in MNCs. A study conducted

by the National Foreign Trade Council (see Swaak, 1995) found that only 18 percent of

the surveyed companies used structured interviews, 6 percent used psychological testing,

and 2 percent had a formal assessment center. Black, Gregersen and Mendenhall (1992),

after reviewing current international selection practices, conclude that, “unfortunately, the

short-term approach of most multinational firms leads them to rely on a limited set of

criteria (technical skills) and the least reliable and valid selection methods” (1992: 72).

In summary, it appears that international selection processes vary little from those

used for domestic assignments. In placing a heavy emphasis on technical qualification

and past performance in the home country, HR professionals and line executives who are

responsible for international selection decisions ignore the fact that success in a domestic

operation does not necessarily guarantee a manager’s effectiveness in a foreign

environment. As has been mentioned in this paper, empirical research has clearly

demonstrated that extra-professional factors, such as interpersonal skills, communication

competence, adaptability, and certain perceptual predispositions, are critical to the

success of managers in an international assignment.

Improving International Selection Decisions

How can international selection decisions be improved? Effective methodologies to

assist managers in the decision-making process have been discussed by several authors

(e.g., Black et al., 1999; Kealey, 1996; Ronen, 1986; Tung, 1981). Kealey (1996: 100)

suggests an integrated screening and selection system that includes three phases or

components:

(1) Establishing the profile of skills and knowledge;

(2) Planning and implementing the selection procedures;

(3) Training and monitoring the overseas performance.

In selecting from a pool of candidates for an international assignment, individual

qualifications have to be matched with the job requirements, cultural constraints, and the

host organization environment. As Torbiörn (1982) has noted, “selection will be based on

the candidates’ own qualifications and merits, but these should always be viewed in light

of what the overseas assignment will demand in each specific case“ (1982: 46). It is

obvious that positions such as chief executive officer or marketing manager of a foreign

29

operation require more contact with the local community than others; without the ability

to adjust to the foreign culture and to establish trusting relationships with host nationals,

managers in such positions will not be able to achieve the various goals associated with

their assignments. In contrast, managers occupying positions that require less interaction

with the local community, such as financial analysts or technical “trouble shooters,” may

be able to perform successfully on their jobs without adjusting to the foreign culture and

establishing close contacts with host nationals (Ronen, 1986; Tung, 1981). These

examples illustrate that it is necessary to undertake a careful analysis of the job,

organization, and host culture first, and then establish and prioritize the selection criteria

according to the demands of the particular position.

After the demands of an overseas position have been identified, individual data must

be collected that allow for the prediction of success or failure. While factors such as

technical qualification and past performance in the home country can be easily evaluated

by superior appraisals, as stated earlier in this paper, the criteria that are predictive of

success in an international assignment are difficult to measure. Nevertheless, some

progress has been made over the past decade in the design of screening and selection

techniques for overseas assignments (Black et al., 1999; Brown, 1987; Deller, 1997,

1999; Gertsen, 1990; Kealey, 1996; Kühlmann & Stahl, 1998; Ronen, 1986; Spreitzer,

McCall & Mahoney, 1997; Stahl, 1998, in press). Specific instruments that have been

developed for the selection of expatriates include:

• Personality tests;

• Biographical data questionnaires;

• Structured interviews;

• Behavioral assessment techniques.

The validity of these methods to predict the success of expatriate managers is still

unknown. However, since instruments such as unstructured interviews or personality tests

have proved to be of little use in evaluating the skills required for effective performance

in an overseas assignment, the most promising avenue for improving international

selection processes probably lies in the utilization of behavioral assessment techniques

(Black et al., 1992; Gertsen, 1990; Mendenhall, Dunbar & Oddou, 1987). Kealey (1996)

summarized the benefits of behavioral assessment techniques when he noted that “the

30

best predictor of behavior is behavior. What people say and what people do are often

inconsistent” (1996: 97).

Before concluding the section on expatriate recruitment, two important issues

deserve further attention. First, in order to avoid an ethnocentric bias in the selection of

expatriates, it seems necessary to include the host country perspective in the decision

process as well (Ronen, 1986; Sinangil & Ones, 1997; Zeira & Banai, 1985). Since in

some cases, at least, the expectations of local stakeholders may differ from those of the

corporate headquarters, selection criteria for an international assignment have to be

compatible with the expectations of the host environment. Zeira and Banai (1984, 1985)

advocate an “open-system approach” to the selection of expatriate managers that includes

criteria such as cultural empathy, tactfulness, tolerance, and the ability to withstand

pressures of conformity to the corporate headquarter’s expectations when such pressures

conflict with legitimate expectations of the host country organization. “This broadening

of the spectrum would make it possible for MNCs to base the selection of their

international executives on the expectations of the real environment in which EMs

[expatriate managers] operate and with which they must cope” (Zeira & Banai, 1985: 37).

Another overlooked feature in the international selection process is the adaptability

and support of the family. Although research has clearly demonstrated the importance of

the family, particularly the spouse, to the success of an international assignment (Adler,

1997; Black & Stephens, 1989; Pellico & Stroh, 1997; Shaffer & Harrison, 1998;

Torbiörn, 1982; Tung, 1981), the family is usually not included in the selection process.

According to Brewster (1991), only 16 percent of European companies conduct

interviews with the potential expatriate and spouse as part of the international screening

process. Gertsen (1990) found that less than 10 percent of the surveyed companies

interviewed the spouse because HR managers thought this was interfering with the

employee’s private life. However, Wirth (1992), in a survey of HR professionals in

German MNCs, found that more and more spouses expect to be part of the selection

process for an international assignment. If treated as a job counseling session, and if

combined with a realistic preview of the living conditions overseas, potential expatriates

and their families will probably benefit from such interviews, as long as they are

31

conducted in a professional manner by well-trained HR managers (Black et al., 1999;

Sieveking, Anchor & Marston, 1981).

Training and Development of Expatriates

As expatriate assignments play an increasingly critical role in the execution of

international business strategies and the development of global managers, the effective

training of expatriates is of strategic importance to the overall success of MNCs.

Despite the importance of expatriate assignments and the high costs associated with

them, the findings of several surveys show that most companies provide either inadequate

pre-departure preparation or no formal training at all (Baliga & Baker, 1985; Brewster,

1991; Forster, 1997; Gertsen, 1990; Marx, 1996; Stahl, 1998; Torbiörn, 1982; Tung,

1981, 1982; Tung & Arthur Andersen Inc., 1997; Wirth, 1992). While MNCs are

generally helpful in arranging transport, housing, etc., and in preparing assignees for the

requirements of their job, few expatriates are offered comprehensive training programs

designed to enhance their understanding of the foreign culture and to improve crosscultural skills.

Tung (1982) found evidence that European and Japanese MNCs were somewhat

more conscious of the importance of cross-cultural training than U.S. companies.

However, a more recent survey of HR managers of European MNCs found that only 40

percent of the companies offered some kind of pre-departure preparation; of these

companies, only half included an element of cultural orientation in their programs

(Brewster, 1991). The picture looks even gloomier if expatriates are surveyed instead of

HR managers who may, in some cases at least, tend to report inflated figures (Stahl,

1998).

In general, companies that do offer cross-cultural training programs provide

preparation that is not comprehensive in nature. Most programs emphasize area

orientation briefings and language acquisition but provide little training of cross-cultural

skills (Dowling et al., 1994; Hiltrop & Janssens, 1990; Mendenhall et al., 1987). Also, the

duration of most cross-cultural training programs is relatively short considering the

amount of knowledge and skills that is needed in order to succeed in an international

assignment – the majority of programs take one week or less (Baliga & Baker, 1985;

Brewster, 1991). Besides, companies tend to not provide much follow-up training once

32

the expatriate manager has been posted abroad (Mendenhall, 1999; Osland & Bird, in

press). Finally, the spouses of expatriates are usually left out of whatever type of

preparation is provided by the company (Black & Gregersen, 1991; De Cieri, Dowling &

Taylor, 1991; Torbiörn, 1982). For example, Black and Stephens (1989) found that over

90 percent of the firms in their study offered no pre-departure training for spouses.

In summary, then, little appears to be provided in the way of pre-departure

preparation and in-country training for expatriate managers and their families. The main

reasons of MNCs for not offering comprehensive training programs are (Baumgarten,

1995; Gertsen, 1990; Kühlmann, in press; Mendenhall et al., 1987; Ronen, 1989; Tung,

1981):

• the belief that cross-cultural training programs are not effective or relevant;

• trainee dissatisfaction with training programs;

• time constraints prior to an international assignment;

• the trend toward employing local nationals in foreign subsidiaries;

• the costs involved in providing cross-cultural training;

• no perceived need for cross-cultural training on the part of top management.

The reluctance to provide comprehensive training for expatriate managers is akin to

the general failure on the part of MNCs to commit efforts and resources to the

development of global leadership skills. Based on the results of a recent survey of U.S.

Fortune 500 firms, Gregersen, Morrison, and Black (1998) found that most companies

lack the quantity and quality of global leaders they need: 85 percent do not think they

have an adequate number of globally competent executives, and 67 percent believe that

their existing leaders need additional knowledge and skills before they meet needed

capabilities. In spite of this, 92 percent of the firms report that they do not have

comprehensive systems for developing global executives. Other studies have also found

that MNCs frequently fail to bridge the gap between existing management resources and

those necessary for meeting the challenges of a global business world (Arthur Andersen

Inc., 1999; Edström & Lorange, 1984; Forster, 1997; Kopp, 1994; Tung & Miller, 1990).

Improving Expatriate Training and Development

A growing body of research has shown that cross-cultural training can be effective in

sensitizing individuals to cultural issues, in facilitating adjustment to a foreign culture, in

33

improving work performance abroad, and in helping employees to develop a global

mindset (Albert, 1983; Bhagat & Prien, 1996; Bird, et.al, 1993; Black & Mendenhall,

1990; Brewster & Pickard, 1994; Cushner & Landis, 1996; Deshpande & Viswesvaran,

1992; Earley, 1987; Kealey & Protheroe, 1996; Podsiadlowski & Spieß, 1996; Tung,

1982).

The methodologies available for training and development of expatriate managers

can be classified into four categories on the basis of the approaches used and the content

of the training (Gudykunst, Guzley & Hammer, 1996; Gudykunst & Hammer, 1983):

(1) Didactic Culture-General Training: academic lectures on the influence of culture on

behavior; cultural self-awareness training; culture-general assimilators.

(2) Experiential Culture-General Training: cross-cultural communication workshops;

self-assessments; assignments to micro-cultures.

(3) Didactic Culture-Specific Training: area orientation briefings; analysis of case

studies; intercultural sensitizer training.

(4) Experiential Culture-Specific Training: culture-specific simulations and role-plays;

bi-cultural communication workshops; field trips in the host country.

Numerous kinds of training programs exist within each of these four categories (see

Baumgarten, 1995; Bhawuk, 1990; Black & Mendenhall, 1990, 1991; Brislin, Landis &

Brandt, 1983; Gudykunst et al., 1996; v. Helmolt & Müller, 1993; Pusch, 1994; Ronen,

1989; Thomas, 1995) that can be differentiated according to degree of content rigor and

participant involvement. Black and Mendenhall (1990) hypothesized that the required

level of rigor of cross-cultural training depends upon the situational factors of the

international assignment. In general, the greater the novelty of the host culture, the higher

the degree of interaction with host nationals, and the greater the novelty of the job to be

carried out, the more rigorous and participative the training method should be (Black &

Mendenhall, 1990; Black et al., 1999).

How can the quality of expatriate training be improved? First, it seems necessary

that cross-cultural training programs utilize multi-level approaches to stimulate learning

processes in the cognitive, affective, and behavioral area. In addition to purely didactical

or analytical approaches, a comprehensive training program should also include elements

34

that foster experiential learning, such as role plays, negotiation simulations, and field

experiences (Baumgarten, 1995; Kühlmann, 1995b; Mendenhall et al., 1987).

Secondly, it seems important that training is not seen as a one-shot remedy just

prior to departure. Pre-departure programs can equip the expatriate with the basic

knowledge and skills to “survive”, but training has to be continued during the overseas

assignment to help the expatriate cope with the difficulties encountered (Black et al.,

1999; Grove & Torbiörn, 1985; Mendenhall & Stahl, in press).

Thirdly, since the success of an expatriate assignment depends not only on the

expatriate himself/herself but also on the local people he/she has to work with, companies

should train the host-country staff for cross-cultural interaction as well (Baumgarten,

1995; Dowling et al., 1994; Vance & Smith-Ring, 1994).

Fourth, some empirical studies show that a realistic job preview increases overall

adjustment and overseas job performance (Feldman & Tompson, 1993; Stroh, Dennis, &

Cramer, 1994). Providing the expatriate with accurate job expectations and a clear sense

of what he/she is “getting into” seems to aid the adjustment process, and can easily be

added as an element of expatriate training programs. Finally, as spouses often face more

serious adjustment difficulties than the expatriates themselves do, they also have to be

included in the training (Adler, 1997; Briody & Chrisman, 1991; De Cieri et al., 1991;

Harvey, 1985; Osland, 1995).

Even a comprehensive cross-cultural training program as the one described above

is not likely to be effective unless it is part of an integrated international human resource

development system. Since most of the determinants of expatriate success lie in the area

of abilities, attitudes, and personality traits, they require development over an extended

period of time (Baumgarten, 1995; Mendenhall, in press). Companies need to identify the

potential of managers for an international assignment early on in their careers and select

those for development who have the required talent. Such an integrated, long-term

approach to the career planning, selection, and development of expatriate managers is

best viewed within the framework of global leadership development.

Within this framework, international transfers are viewed as maybe the most

powerful strategy for developing global leaders (Adler & Bartholomew, 1992; Evans,

Lank & Farquhar, 1990; Gregersen et al., 1998; Mendenhall, 1999; Yeung & Ready,

35

1995). Consequently, the careful selection and training of expatriates is not only seen as a

prerequisite for successfully accomplishing the task goals of an international assignment

but also as a means for developing the human resources that are necessary for meeting

the challenges of a global business world.

Ongoing support of expatriates and their families

In overseas assignments, expatriates and their families have to find ways to cope

with the changes that the new job and foreign environment require. Even a thorough

preparation for the assignment cannot entirely protect expatriates from adjustment

troubles, confusion due to unexpected behavior, the experience of unpredictability, and

the feeling of abandonment and isolation. International assignments often involve role

conflicts between family and career or between home-country expectations and hostcountry job demands. It takes expatriates up to twelve months to feel comfortable in the

new position abroad and in the foreign environment (Tung, 1998). Within this critical

time frame the performance and well being of expatriates (and their families) are affected

(Black & Mendenhall, 1991; Church, 1982; Grove & Torbiörn, 1985). This suggests that

MNC's should offer support to expatriates and their families not only in the preparation

phase but also during the actual time abroad.

The main reasons why MNCs provide their expatriates with ongoing support are

to (Fontaine, 1996; Schröder, 1995): (1) improve job performance, (2) support adjustment

to the new living conditions and cultural environment, and (3) help maintain contact with

the home country. The last two goals are valid for both expatriates and their families.

Improving job performance

Expatriates face the challenge that their style of working or managing varies from

what the host-country colleagues are used to. To adjust the expatriates' behavior to their

new work environment, companies provide skills-oriented support. Common practices

include the following (Debrus, 1995; Fontaine, 1996; Harris & Moran, 1991): job

training by predecessor from the home or host country; nomination of a mentor for the

expatriate in the host company; continuing language education or performance appraisals

during the assignment; and in-country coaching.

Performance appraisals have special significance, as their purpose is not only to

increase performance in ongoing assignments but also to form the information base for

36

career decisions after the return to the home country. But the appraisal systems used for

expatriates by MNCs show several shortcomings - for example (Gregersen, Black & Hite,

1995; Black, Gregersen & Mendenhall, 1992; Harvey, 1997):

• The performance criteria do not incorporate the strategic goals of the assignment

and the specific purposes for the appraisal (evaluation, development, compensation

etc.).

• Performance criteria and standards are not tailored to the local context of the

foreign assignment. Few MNCs take contextual influences (economic conditions,

legal constraints, employee qualification etc.) into consideration when appraising

the expatriate’s performance.

• Expatriate appraisals tend to include a smaller number of raters than domestic

appraisals. For the most part only local supervisors are involved, who may not be

familiar with the unique aspects of international assignments.

• The majority of MNC's do not conduct expatriate performance appraisal more than

once a year.

Harvey (1997) put together a comprehensive model of important issues that need

to be taken into consideration when developing a performance appraisal system for

expatriates. The model incorporates the purpose of the appraisal, the position

characteristics, the environmental context of the ratee's performance, rater and ratee

characteristics, the assessment criteria, and the process of appraisal itself. A more recent

model by Marja Tahvanainen (1998) depends upon the interaction of the following

variables: nature of the job, organizational structure, standard performance management

system, style and skills of the manager and employee, top management support, size of

the company unit and maturity level of the company operations in the host country. She

developed her contextual model of expatriate performance management based upon her

analysis of the practices of 99 international companies operating in Finland, and upon her

case study of Nokia Telecommunications. In these studies she found no significant

differences in how the performance of expatriates and domestic employees is managed.

37

Adjustment to the living conditions and the cultural environment

The bulk of support instruments have traditionally focused on helping expatriates

and their families to cope with the difficulties of living in foreign surroundings. A variety

of instruments are being used:

• Relocation service (assistance with passport, banking, tax, moving, and housing

arrangements)

• Designing an adequate salary including cost-of-living-allowances, taxequalization, take-over of rent payments etc.

• Easing access to social networks (clubs, charities)

• Intercultural orientation and training during the assignment

• Spousal assistance for dual career couples

• Counselling in personal or job-related crises

More and more MNCs realise that the spouse plays an important role in the

decision to accept an international assignment and for its success (Black & Stephens,

1989; Birdseye & Hill, 1995; Nicholson & Imaizumi, 1993, Black & Gregersen, 1991;

Shaffer & Harrison, 1998). Moreover spouses suffer from more intense and prolonged

adaptation difficulties than the assignees (Bird & Dunbar, 1991; Black et al., 1999; Black

& Stephens, 1989; Briody & Chrisman, 1991; Brewster & Scullion, 1997; Torbiörn,

1982). As the number of dual-career couples continues to grow, MNCs not only have to

develop programs that help spouses settle in a foreign environment but also have to

address the professional concerns of spouses with pre-move employment status (Stephens

& Black, 1991, De Cieri, Dowling & Taylor, 1991). According to a survey undertaken

by Pellico & Stroh (1997), corporate spousal assistance programs include providing help

to obtain a work permit and find a position, career counselling, and assistance through

attending courses to maintain or improve career-related skills.

Maintaining relationships with the home country.

An overseas assignment has a defined end. Expatriates will need and want to go

home. Therefore, assignees as well as their families have to maintain their private and

professional relationships within the home country. Staying in contact with the home

country involves some extra effort due to the long time without face-to-face contact.

38

Family ties and friendships fade away and the expatriate becomes forgotten in the home

company while being abroad.

Therefore MNCs offer various services to foster existing relationship between

expatriates and their home country/ company. Commonly provided support includes

(Wirth, 1992; Kendall, 1981; Blocklyn, 1989):

• Mailing of professional journals and newspapers

• Information on personal and organisational changes within the home company

• Visits from HR-Managers

• Participation in continuing education programs in the home country

• Sponsorship of home-leaves

• Nomination of a mentor within the home company.

The phrase "Out of sight, out of mind" describes the most important concern

among expatriates (Adler, 1997; Horsch, 1995; Tung, 1988). Therefore, the nomination

of a mentor in the home company is of specific relevance. A mentor who previously has

worked in the host country and is familiar with the expatriate's job can reduce uncertainty

by offering information and introducing the expatriates to colleagues in the host country.

The mentor is the person of contact for all questions related to the parent company and

keeps the expatriate informed about changes and developments while he and his family

are overseas. Ideally, the mentor is a senior-level manager who has the connections and

influence to find a suitable job for the returnee. In addition, a mentor has to make sure

that the expatriate’s needs are taken into consideration in personnel decisions and that an

adequate position is designed and kept free for him/her upon return. Actually, few

companies provide a mentor to their outgoing expatriates (Black et al., 1999; Marx, 1996;

Wirth, 1992).

Most MNCs provide support of some sort. However, the number and type of

support activities varies across companies. Determining the appropriate organizational

assistance for assignees and their families in adjusting to working and living abroad

appears to be a subject that requires future research. Besides company assistance social

support is of great help for expatriates and their partners, although it may not be readily

39

available for them in a new environment. Family members, friends, and co-workers can

offer a variety of supports, not commonly provided by an expatriate's company

(Adelman, 1988; Fontaine, 1996): Guidance in all aspects of living abroad, validation of

identity, reinforcement of confidence, feeling of being understood, senses of familiarity,

intimacy. Therefore, MNCs should not only help to establish relationships with

supporting groups of home-country and host-country nationals but also offer training to

expatriates on how to build up social support on their own.

Repatriation

Coming home after an overseas assignment is often at least as stressful as

adjustment to the conditions of working and living abroad (Martin, 1984; Adler, 1997).

The reasons are manifold. Although many expatriates are guaranteed a continued

employment after the completion of the assignment, the re-entry level and salary remains

unspecified (Marx, 1996; Tung, 1997; Price Waterhouse, 1997). As career advancement

is a key motivation for accepting a foreign assignment, worries about the career

development are common (Baughn, 1995; Gomez-Mejia & Balkin, 1987). Other

frequently cited concerns for repatriates include the feeling, that the company does not

value their overseas experience and newly acquired skills, reduced job discretion, and

difficulties to adapt to unexpected changes the home office and the home country have

undergone during the stay abroad course of the overseas assignment (Adler, 1997; Black,

Gregersen & Mendenhall, 1992, Hammer, Hart & Rogan, 1998). In addition to the

problems expatriates themselves are experiencing, other family members may be

grappling with readjustment difficulties.

Problems with re-entry lead to substantial dissatisfaction and turnover among

repatriates during the first years after repatriation (Harvey, 1989; Stroh, Gregersen &

Black, 1998; Price Waterhouse, 1997). Finding suitable positions for repatriates is a

significant problem for MNC's, that has been exacerbated by the recent trends of

downsizing, de-layering, and outsourcing of operations in domestic companies. As a

consequence, MNCs are facing an increasing reluctance among candidates to accept

international assignments. While there is increasing recognition of the importance of

40

selection and development of international assignees among MNCs, there is little

consideration of the problematic nature of their repatriation (The Conference Board,

1996; Caligiuri & Lazarova, 1999). The following tactics have been proposed to prevent

repatriation problems:

• Realistic re-entry preview: Already when selecting an expatriate, it is important to

create realistic expectations upon repatriation. Explaining to the expatriate what to

expect upon return makes it possible for him to develop ways to deal with the

problems foreseen (Black, 1992; Caligiuri & Lazarova, in press).

• Preferential treatment of repatriates in job decisions: Some companies have

implemented the policy that in case of multiple applicants for one position former

expatriates are given precedence. Thus, the company shows visibly, that international

experience is valued.

• Career planning: Future career steps, along with developmental needs, are already

discussed with the employee before his or her return. Yet repatriation programs

offered by MNCs typically do not include long-term career planning (The Conference

Board, 1996; Marx, 1996) but are confined to a general guaranty for future

employment.

• Limiting duration of assignments: The average assignment length is between three

and five years. A limitation to this timeframe prevents the employee’s expertise from

becoming obsolete and reduces the risk that the expatriate adopts standards and

values of the host country that are different from the ones valid in the home country.

The most common measure to cope with work-related problems of repatriation after

return is to offer a reorientation program. Immediately after return the repatriate is

provided with information about the changes in the company, such as personnel,

products, strategies, and organizational structure.

Just as the professional transition back into the parent company can cause

problems, so too can the readjustment to nonwork environment and social relations in the

home country. Gradually MNCs are starting to help repatriates fit back into their home

country. Repatriates and their families are increasingly being offered professional

assistance and counselling on the experience of returning home and how to adjust back to

41

social life style, status or housing (Sussman, 1986). Given the increasing number of dualcareer couples many MNCs povide support for returning spouses of expatriates to obtain

employment upon return. Repatriation procedures for spouses include career-counselling

as well as financial assistance to reimburse costs related to job search (Pellico & Stroh,

1997).

Utilizing overseas experience

Expatriates have acquired detailed knowledge about the global marketplace and

have enhanced cross-cultural skills that are critical for managing MNCs. The difficult

transition to the new job in the home country is made easier by giving expatriates

recognition, by letting them function as a mentor, or by giving them the opportunity to

share their knowledge and experience through training sessions. On the other hand the

company can create the perception within the organization that an overseas assignment is

valued. Returnees whose international experience is made use of and who are recognized

by colleagues achieve more and are happier (Adler, 1981).

The approaches to repatriation as addressed in the previous section are intended to

augment the transition from the overseas assignment back to working and living in the

home country. They simply put all expatriates into a single category, which is typically

based upon two assumptions. First, expatriates and their skills will truly be needed back

home within the MNC. Second, all expatriates are looking for long-term careers within

MNCs (Caligiuri & Lazarova, in press). Yet, these assumptions may not apply to all

expatriates. Especially, when the main goal of an assignment is not to develop global

skills but rather to fill a technical or managerial gap in the host country, MNCs need to

consider whether the expatriate’s skills, gained during the overseas assignment are

needed within the company. If not, expatriates should be given a realistic preview prior to

their assignment. Their turnover upon repatriation can be considered functional. MNCs

should also expect some "natural" turnover.

Even a good repatriation program will not be able to retain all returnees because

there will always be some who will find better career opportunities in companies other

than the one that sent them abroad. Given that international experience is an asset in

42

today's job market, it is not surprising that some repatriates are willing to change

companies after completion of their international assignment. Thus, repatriation

programs have to be integrated into the broader strategic international assignment

process.

Conclusion

This review has been lengthy out of necessity, for the literature in this field has

burgeoned over the past three decades. The pioneering stage in the evolution of the field

of expatriate adjustment is over. Yet many scholars act as if they are pioneers—they

conduct atheoretical empirical studies, devise theories that seem to overlap significantly

with already extant theories, and see this domain as a small, emerging piece of the wider

IHRM field. Yet, as this review indicates, it is not a time to build a foundation; rather, it

is time to build upon the foundation of the extant literature. We hope that this paper will

aid all who work in this field to: 1) see the many vistas of opportunities in this field for

the creation of new theories that are not simply spin-offs of existing theories; 2) carefully

and thoughtfully add to the empirical findings of the field in a strategic rather than a

scatter-shot way; and 3) extend the knowledge of the field into other fields of

management via multidisciplinary integration and creative collaboration. Finally, we also

hope that this review shows practitioners that there is a solid theoretical and empirical

foundation upon which to design more effective IHRM programs, policies, and practices.

43

REFERENCES

Adams, J. 1976. The potential for personal growth arising from intercultural

experiences. In J. Adams, J. Hayes & B. Hopson (Eds.), Transition: Understanding and

managing personal change: 65-83. London: Robertson.

Adelman, M. B. 1988. Cross-cultural adjustment. A theoretical perspective on social

support. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 12: 183-204.

Adler, N. J. 1981. Re-entry: Managing cross-cultural transitions. Group &

Organization Studies, 6: 341-356.

Adler, N.J. 1987. Pacific basin managers: A gaijin, not a woman. Human Resource

Management, 26(2): 169-192.

Adler, N. J. 1997. International dimensions of organizational behavior (3rd ed.).

Boston: Kent.

Adler, N., & Bartholomew, S. 1992. Managing globally competent people.

Academy of Management Executive, 6(3): 52-65.

Adler, P. S. 1975. The transitional experience: An alternative view of culture shock.

Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 15: 13-23.

Adler, P. S. 1987. Culture shock and the cross-cultural learning experience. In L. F.

Luce (Ed.), Toward internationalism: Readings in cross-cultural communication: 24-35.

Cambridge, MA: Newbury House.

Albert, R.D. 1983 The intercultural sensitizer or culture assimilator: A cognitive

approach. In D. Landis & R.W. Brislin (Eds). Handbook of Intercultural training.

(volume 2): 186-217. New York: Pergamon,.

Amir, Y. 1969. Contact hypothesis in ethnic relations. Psychological Bulletin, 71:

319-342.

Amir, Y. 1976. The role of intergroup contact in change of prejudice and ethnic

relations. In P. H. Katz (Ed.), Towards the elimination of racism: 245- 308. New York:

Pergamon.

Argyle, M. 1982. Intercultural communication. In S. Bochner (Ed.), Cultures in

contact: Studies in cross-cultural interaction: 61-79. Oxford: Pergamon.

Argyle, M., Furnham, A., & Graham, J.A. 1981. Social Situations. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Argyle, M., & Kendon, A. 1967. The experimental analysis of social performance.

In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (volume 3). New

York, NY: Academic Press.

Arthur Andersen, Inc. 1999. Network ’99: “Hot topics” Summary Report. Chicago:

Arthur Andersen Human Capital Services.

Arthur, W. & Bennett, W. 1995. The international assignee: The relative importance

of factors perceived to contribute to success. Personnel Psychology, 48: 99-114.

44

Arthur, W. & Bennett, W, 1997. A comparative test of alternative models of

international assignee job performance. New Approaches to Employee Management, 4:

141-172.

Aryee, S. & Stone, R. J. 1996. Work experiences, work adjustment and psychological

well-being of expatriate employees in Hong Kong. The International Journal of Human

Resource Management, 7: 150-164.

Asante, M. K., & Gudykunst, W. B. (Eds.). 1989. Handbook of international and

intercultural communication. Newbury Park: Sage.

Aycan, Z. (1997). Acculturation of expatriate managers: A process model of

adjustment and performance. In Z. Aycan (Ed.), Expatriate management: Theory and

research (Vol. 4): 1-41. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Baker, J.C. & Ivancevich, J. M. 1971 The assignment of American executives

abroad: Systematic, haphazard or chaotic? California Management Review, 13: 39-44.

Baliga, G.M. & Baker, J.C. 1985. Multinational corporate policies for expatriate

managers: Selection, training, evaluation. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 50: 31-

38.

Bandura, A. 1977. Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.

Barna, L. M. 1983. The stress factor in intercultural relations. In D. Landis & R. W.

Brislin (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural training (Vol. 2): 19-49. New York: Pergamon.

Barna, L. M. 1988. Stumbling blocks in intercultural communication. In L. A.

Samovar & R. E. Porter (Eds.), Intercultural communication: A Reader (5th ed.): 322-

330. Belmont: Wadsworth.

Baughn, C. 1995. Personal and organizational factors associated with effective

repatriation. In J. Selmer.(Ed.) Expatriate management: New ideas for international

business: 215-230. Westport: Quorum Books

Baumgarten, K. 1995. Training and development of international staff. In A. Harzing,

& J. van Ruysseveldt (Eds.), International human resource management: An integrated

approach: 205-228. London: Sage.

Befus, C. P. 1988. A multilevel treatment approach for culture shock experienced by

sojourners. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 12: 381-400.

Bennett, M. J. 1986. Towards ethnorelativism: A developmental model of

intercultural sensitivity. In R. M. Paige (Ed.), Cross-cultural orientation: New

conceptualizations and applications: 27-69. Lanham: University Press of America.

Bennett, M. J. 1993. Towards ethnorelativism: a developmental model of

intercultural sensitivity. In R. M. Paige (Ed.). Education for the Intercultural

Experience: 21-71. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.

Benson, P. G. 1978. Measuring cross-cultural adjustment: The problem of criteria.

International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 2: 21-37.

45

Bhagat, R. S. & Prien, K. O. 1996. Cross-cultural training in organizational contexts.

In D. Landis & R. S. Bhagat (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural training (2nd ed): 216-230.

Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Bhawuk, D.P. 1990. Cross-cultural orientation programs. In R.W. Brislin (Ed)

Applied cross-cultural psychology: 325-346. Newbury Park: Sage.

Bird, A. & Dunbar, R. 1991. Getting the job done over there: Improving expatriate

productivity. National Productivity Review: 10, 145-156.

Bird, A., Heinbuch, S., Dunbar, R., & McNulty, M. (1993). A conceptual model of

the effects of area studies training programs and a preliminary investigation of the

model's hypothesized relationships. International Journal of Intercultural Relations: 17,

415-436.

Birdseye, M. G. & Hill, J. S. (1995). Individual, organizational/work and

environmental influences on expatriate turnover tendencies: An empirical study. Journal

of International Business Studies, 26: 787-813.

Black, J. S. 1988. Work role transitions: A study of American expatriate managers in

Japan. Journal of International Business Studies: 19, 277-294.

Black, J. S. 1990. The relationship of personal characteristics with the adjustment of

Japanese expatriate managers. Management International Review: 30, 119-134.

Black, J. S. 1992. Coming home: The relationship of expatriations with repatriation

adjustment and job performance. Human Relations, 45: 177- 192.

Black, J. S. & Gregersen, H. B. 1990. Expectations, satisfaction, and intention to

leave of American expatriate managers in Japan. International Journal of Intercultural

Relations: 14, 485-503.

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., Gregersen, H. B. & Mendenhall, M. E. 1992. Global assignments:

Successfully expatriating and repatriating international managers. San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass.

Black, J. S., Gregersen, H. B., Mendenhall, M. E. & Stroh, L. K. 1999. Globalizing

people through international assignments. New York: Addison-Wesley Longman.

Black, J. S. & Mendenhall, M. E. 1990. Cross-cultural training effectiveness: A

review and a theoretical framework for future research. Academy of Management

Review: 15, 113-136.

Black, J. S. & Mendenhall, M. E. 1991. The U-curve adjustment hypothesis revisited:

A review and theoretical framework. Journal of International Business Studies, 22: 225-

247.

Black, J. S., Mendenhall, M. E. & Oddou, G. R. 1991. Toward a comprehensive

model of international adjustment: An integration of multiple theoretical perspectives.

Academy of Management Review: 16, 291-317.

46

Black, J.S., & Porter, L.W. (1991) Managerial behaviors and job performance: A

successful manager in Los Angeles may not succeed in Hong Kong. Journal of

International Business Studies: 22, 99-113.

Black, J. S. & Stephens, G. K. 1989. The influence of the spouse on American

expatriate adjustment and intent to stay in Pacific Rim overseas assignments. Journal of

Management: 15, 529-544.

Blocklyn, P. L. 1989. Developing the international executive. Personnel, 66: 44-47.

Bochner, S. (Ed.). 1981. The mediating person: Bridges between cultures.

Cambridge: Schenkman.

Bochner, S. 1982. Cultures in contact: Studies in cross-cultural interaction. New

York: Pergamon.

Bochner, S., Lin, A., & McCleod, B.M. 1980. Anticipated role conflict of returning

overseas students. Journal of Social Psychology: 110, 265-272.

Borg, M. & Harzing, A..W. 1996. Karrierepfade und Effektivität internationaler

Führungskräfte. In K. Macharzina & J. Wolf (Eds.) Handbuch Internationales

Führungskräfte-Management: 279-297. Stuttgart: Raabe.

Briody, E.K., & Chrisman, J.B. 1991. Cultural adaptation on overseas assignments.

Human Organization: 50(3), 264-282.

Brewster, C. 1991. The management of expatriates. London: Kogan Page.

Brewster, C. & Pickard, J. 1994. Evaluating expatriate training. International Studies

of Management & Organization: 24, 18-35.

Brewster, C. & Scullion, H. 1997. Expatriate HRM: A Review and an Agenda.

Human Resource Management Journal: 7, 32-41.

Brislin, R. W. 1981. Cross-cultural encounters: Face-to-face interaction. New York:

Pergamon.

Brislin, R.W., Landis, D., Brandt, M. E. 1983. Conceptualizations of intercultural

behavior and training. In D. Landis, & R.W. Brislin (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural

training (Vol. 1):1-35. New York: Pergamon.

Brislin, R. W. & Yoshida, T. 1994. Intercultural communication training: An

introduction. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Brown, R. (1987). How to choose the best expatriates. Personnel Management,

June: 67.

Caligiuri, P. & Lazarova, In press. Strategic repatriation policies to enhance

global leadership. In Mendenhall, M., Kuhlmann, T., & Stahl, G. (eds.) Developing

Global Business Leaders: Policies, Processes, and Innovations. (Forthcoming)

Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

Campbell, J. 1968. Hero with a thousand faces. Princeton: Princeton University

Press.

47

Campbell, J. P. 1990. Modeling the performance prediction problem in industrial and

organizational psychology. In M. D. Dunnette, & L. M. Hough (Eds.) Handbook of

Industrial & Organizational Psychology (2nd. Ed.): 687-732. Palo Alto: Consulting

Psychologists Press.

Church, A. T. 1982. Sojourner adjustment. Psychological Bulletin: 91, 540-572.

Collier, M. J. & Thomas, M. 1988. Cultural identity: An interpretative perspective. In

Y. Y. Kim & W. B. Gudykunst (Eds.), Theories in intercultural communication: 99-120.

Newbury Park: Sage.

Condon, R. & Yousef, F. 1975. An introduction to intercultural communication. New

York: Bobbs-Merrill.

The Conference Board. 1996. Managing expatriates return: A research report. (Report

Number 1148-96-RR. New York: The Conference Board, Inc.

Costa, P. T. & McCrae, R. R. 1992. Revised NEO-Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R)

and NEO Five Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) Professional Manual. Odessa: Psychological

Assessment Resources, Inc.

Coyle, W. 1988. On the move: Minimizing the stress and maximizing the benefit of

relocation. Sydney: Hampden.

Cui, G. & Awa, N. E. 1992. Measuring intercultural effectiveness: An integrative

approach. International Journal of Intercultural Relations: 16, 311-328.

Cupach, W. R. & Imahori, T. T. 1993. Identity management theory: Communication

competence in intercultural episodes and relationships. In R. L. Wiseman & J. Koester

(Eds.). Intercultural communication competence: 112-131. Newbury Park: Sage.

Cushner, K. & Landis, D. 1996. The intercultural sensitizer. In D. Landis & R.S.

Bhagat (eds) Handbook of intercultural training (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage,

185-201.

David, K. H. 1971. Culture shock and the development of self-awareness. Journal of

Contemporary Psychotherapy: 4, 44-48.

David, K. H. 1972. Intercultural adjustment and applications of reinforcement theory

to problems of culture shock. Trends: 4, 1-64.

David, K. H. 1976. The use of social learning theory in preventing intercultural

adjustment problems. In P. B. Pedersen, W. J. Lonner & J. G. Draguns (Eds.), Counseling

across cultures:123-138. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Debrus, C. 1995. Die Betreuung von Mitarbeitern während des Auslandseinsatzes:

Aus der Praxis der Henkel KGaA. In T. M. Kühlmann (Eds.), Mitarbeiterentsendung ins

Ausland, Auswahl, Vorbereitung, Betreuung und Wiedereingliederung: 161-175.

Göttingen: Verlag für Angewandte Psychlogie.

De Cieri, H., Dowling, P. J. & Taylor, K. F. 1991. The psychological impact of

expatriate relocation on partners. International Journal of Human Resource Management:

377-414.

48

Deller, J. 1997. Expatriate selection: Possibilities and limitations of using personality

scales. In Z. Aycan (Ed.), Expatriate management: Theory and research (Vol. 4): 93-116.

Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Deller, J. In press. Personality scales in the selection of global leaders: Lessons

learned from research on expatriate selection. In Mendenhall, M., Kuhlmann, T., &

Stahl, G. (eds.) Developing Global Business Leaders: Policies, Processes, and

Innovations. (Forthcoming) Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

Deshpande, S. P. & Viswesvaran, C. 1992. Is cross-cultural training of expatriate

managers effective? A meta analysis. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 16:

295-310.

Dinges, N. G. 1983. Intercultural competence. In D. Landis, & R.W. Brislin (Eds.),

Handbook of intercultural training (Vol. 1): 176-202. New York: Pergamon.

Dinges, N. G. & Baldwin, K. D. 1996. Intercultural competence. In D. Landis & R. S.

Bhagat (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural training (2nd ed.): 106-123. Thousand Oaks:

Sage.

Dowling, P., Welch, D.E., & Schuler, R.S. 1999. International human resource

management: Managing people in a multinational context (3rd edition). Cincinatti, OH:

South-Western Publishing Company.

Dunbar, E. 1992. Adjustment and satisfaction of expatriate U.S. personnel.

International Journal of Intercultural Relations: 16, 1-16.

Dyal, J. A. & Dyal, R. Y. 1981. Acculturation, stress and coping: Some implications

for research and education. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 5: 301-328.

Earley, P. C. 1987. Intercultural training for managers: A comparison of documentary

and interpersonal methods. Academy of Management Journal, 30: 685-698.

Edström, A., & Galbraith, J. 1977. Alternative policies for international transfers of

managers. Management International Review, 17: 11-22.

Edström, A. & Lorange, P. 1984. Matching strategy and human resources in

multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 15: 125-137.

Engelhard, J. & Hein, S. 1996. Erfolgsfaktoren des Auslandseinsatzes von

Führungskräften. In K. Macharzina & J. Wolf (Eds.), Handbuch internationales

Führungskräfte-Management: 83-111. Stuttgart: Raabe.

Evans, P., Lank, E. & Farquhar, A. 1990. Managing human resources in the

international firm: Lessons from practice. In P. Evans, J. Doz & A. Laurent (Eds.),

Human resource management in international firms: 113-143. London: MacMillan.

Feldman, D. C. & Thomas, D. C. 1992. Career management issues facing expatriates.

Journal of International Business Studies, 23: 271-294.

Feldman, D. C. & Tompson, H. B. 1993. Expatriation, repatriation, and domestic

geographical relocation: An empirical investigation of adjustment to new job

assignments. Journal of International Business Studies, 24: 507-529.

49

Ferraro, G. P. 1990. The cultural dimension of international business. New Jersey:

Prentice Hall.

Fontaine, G. 1996. Roles of social support systems in overseas relocation:

Implications for intercultural training. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10:

361-378.

Forster, N. 1997. The persistent myth of high expatriate failure rates: A reappraisal.

The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 8: 414-433.

Friday, R. A. 1989. Contrasts in discussion behaviors of German and American

managers. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 7: 53-67.

Furnham, A. 1988. The adjustment of sojourners. In Y. Y. Kim & W. B. Gudykunst

(Eds.), Cross-cultural adaptation: Current approaches: 42-61. Newbury Park: Sage.

Furnham, A. & Bochner, S. 1982. Social difficulty in a foreign culture: An empirical

analysis of culture shock. In S. Bochner (Ed.), Cultures in contact: 161-198. New York:

Pergamon.

Furnham, A. & Bochner, S. 1986. Culture shock: Psychological reactions to

unfamiliar environments. New York: Methuen.

Gertsen, M. C. 1990. Intercultural competence and expatriates. International Journal

of Human Resource Management, 3: 341-362.

Gomez-Mejia, L. & Balkin, D. B. 1987. The determinants of managerial satisfaction

with expatriation and repatriation process. Journal of Management Development, 6: 7-17.

Gregersen, H. B. & Black, J. S. 1992. Antecedents to commitment to a parent

company and a foreign operation. Academy of Management Journal, 35: 65-90.

Gregersen, H. B., Black, J. S. & Hite, J. 1995. Expatriate performance appraisal in

U.S. multinational firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 27: 711-738.

Gregersen, H.B., Morrison, A.J., & J. S. Black. 1998. Developing leaders for the

global frontier. Sloan Management Review, 40(1): 21-33.

Goldman, A. 1992. Intercultural training of Japanese for U.S.-Japanese

interorganizational communication. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 16:

195-215.

Graham, J. L. 1985. The influence of culture on the process of business negotiations:

An exploratory study. Journal of International Business Studies, 16: 81-96.

Grove, C. L. & Torbiörn, I. 1985. A new conceptualization of intercultural adjustment

and the goals of training. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 9: 205-233.

Gudykunst, W.B., Gunzley, R.M., & Hammer, M.R. 1996. Designing intercultural

training. In D. Landis & R.S. Bhagat (eds) Handbook of intercultural training (2nd

edition): 61-80. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Gudykunst, W. & Hammer, M. 1983. Basic training design: approaches to

intercultural training. In D. Landis & R.W. Brislin (eds.) Handbook of

intercultural training (vol. 1). Elmsford, NY: Pergamon.

50

Gudykunst, W. B. & Kim, Y. Y. 1992. Communicating with strangers: An approach

to intercultural communication (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Gudykunst, W. B. & Ting-Toomey, S. 1988. Culture and interpersonal

communication. Newbury Park: Sage.

Guthrie, G. M. 1975. A behavioral analysis of culture learning. In R. W. Brislin, S.

Bochner & W. J. Lonner (Eds.), Cross-cultural perspectives on learning: 95-115. New

York: Wiley.

Guthrie, G. M. 1981. What you need is continuity. In S. Bochner (Ed.), The

mediating person: Bridges between cultures: 96-112. Cambridge: Schenkman.

Hall, E. T. 1976. Beyond culture. New York: Doubleday.

Hamill, J. 1989. Expatriate policies in British multinationals. Journal of General

Management, 14: 18-33.

Hammer, M. R. 1989. Intercultural communication competence. In M. K. Asante &

W. B. Gudykunst (Eds.), Handbook of international and intercultural communication:

247-260. Newbury Park: Sage.

Hammer, M.R. 1999. A measure of intercultural sensitivity: the intercultural

development inventory. In Sandra M. Fowler and Monica G. Mumford (Eds.). The

Intercultural Sourcebook: Cross-cultural Training Methods, Vol. II.: 61-72. Yarmouth,

ME: The Intercultural Press.

Hammer, M.R., Hart,W. & Rogan, R. 1998. Can you go home again? An analysis of

the repatriation of corporate managers and spouses. Management International Review,

38: 67-86.

Hammer, M. R., Nishida, H. & Wiseman, R. L. 1996. The influence of situational

prototypes on dimensions of intercultural communication competence. Journal of CrossCultural Psychology, 27: 267-282.

Harari, E. & Zeira, Y. 1974. Morale problems in non-American multinational

corporations in the United States. Management International Review, 14: 43-57.

Harris, P. R. & Moran, R. T. 1991. Managing cultural differences (3rd ed.) Houston:

Gulf.

Harvey, M.G. 1985. The executive family: An overlooked variable in international

assignments. Columbia Journal of World Business, 20(1): 84-93.

Harvey, M. G. 1989. Repatriation of corporate executives: An empirical study.

Journal of International Business Studies, 131- 144.

Harvey, M. G. 1997. Focusing the international personnel performance appraisal

process. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 8: 627-658.

Helmolt, K. & Müller, B.D. 1993. Zur Vermittlung interkultureller Koompetenzen.

In B.D. Müller (ed.) Interkulturelle Wirtschaftskommunikation: 509-548. München:

Iudicum.

Hiltrop, J.M. & Janssens, M. 1990. Expatriation: Challenges and recommendations.

European Management Journal, 8: 19-26.

51

Holmes, T.H. and Rahe, R. H.. 1967. The social readjustment rating scale. Journal of

psychosomatic research, 11: 213-218.

Hoopes, D. S. 1979. Intercultural communication concepts and the psychology of

intercultural experience. In M. D. Pusch (Ed.), Multicultural education: A cross cultural

training approach: 10-38. La Grange Park: Intercultural Networks.

Horsch, J. 1995. Auslandseinsatz von Stammhaus-Mitarbeitern. Frankfurt am Main:

Peter Lang.

Ivancevich, J.M. 1969. Selection of American managers for overseas assignments.

Personnel Journal, 48: 189-193.

Kealey, D. J. 1989. A study of cross-cultural effectiveness: Theoretical issues,

practical applications. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 13: 387-428.

Kealey, D. J. 1996. The challenge of international personnel selection. In D. Landis &

R. S. Bhagat (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural training (2nd ed): 80-105. Thousand Oaks:

Sage.

Kealey, D. J. & Protheroe, D. R. 1996. The effectiveness of cross-cultural training for

expatriates: An assessment of the literature on the issue. International Journal of

Intercultural Relations, 20: 141-165.

Kealey, D. J. & Ruben, B. D. 1983. Cross-cultural personnel selection: Criteria,

issues and methods. In D. Landis & R. W. Brislin (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural

training (Vol. 1): 155-175. New York: Pergamon.

Kendall, D. W. 1981. Repatriation: An ending and a beginning. Business Horizons, 6:

21-25.

Kim, Y. Y. 1988. Communication and cross-cultural adaptation: An integrative

theory. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Kim, Y. Y. 1989. Intercultural adaptation. In M. K. Asante & W. B. Gudykunst

(Eds.), Handbook of International and Intercultural Communication: 275-294. Newbury

Park: Sage.

Kim, Y. Y. & Ruben, B. D. 1988. Intercultural transformation: A systems theory. In

Y. Y. Kim & W. B. Gudykunst (Eds.), Theories in intercultural communication: 299-321.

Newbury Park: Sage.

Klineberg, O. 1982. Contact between ethnic groups: a historical perspective of some

aspects of theory and research. In S. Bochner (Ed.), Cultures in contact: Studies in crosscultural interaction: 45-76. New York: Pergamon.

Kopp, R. 1994. International human resource policies and practices in Japanese,

European, and United States Multinationals. Human Resource Management, 33: 581-599.

Kühlmann, T. M. 1995a. Die Auslandsentsendung von Fach- und Führungskräften:

Eine Einführung in die Schwerpunkte und Ergebnisse der Forschung. In T. M. Kühlmann

(Ed..), Mitarbeiterentsendung ins Ausland: 1-30. Göttingen: Verlag für Angewandte

Psychologie.

52

Kühlmann, T. M. 1995b. Vom "Kulturschock" zum "Kulturlernen": Ansätze zur

Vorbereitung auf den Auslandseinsatz. Zeitschrift für Berufs- und Wirtschaftspädagogik,

91: 142-154.

Kühlmann, T. M. In press. The German Approach to Developing Global Leaders via

Expatriation. In Mendenhall, M., Kuhlmann, T., & Stahl, G. (eds.) Developing Global

Business Leaders: Policies, Processes, and Innovations. (Forthcoming) Westport, CT:

Quorum Books.

Kühlmann, T. M. & Stahl, G. K. 1998. Diagnose interkultureller Kompetenz:

Entwicklung und Evaluierung eines Assessment Centers. In C. Barmeyer und J. Bolten

(Eds.), Interkulturelle Personalorganisation: 213-223. Berlin: Verlag Wissenschaft &

Praxis.

Kumar, B. & Steinmann, H. 1988. Führungskonflikte im Deutsch-Japanischen

Management. Journal of Labour Problems, 26: 59-76.

Landis, D., & Wasilewski, J.H. 1999. Reflections on 22 years of the International

Journal of Intercultural Relations and 23 years in other areas of intercultural practice.

International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23(4): 535-574.

Lazarus, R.S. 1980. The stress and coping paradigm. In C. Eisdorfer, D. Cohen, & A.

Kleinman (eds) Theoretical bases for psychopathology: 177-214. New York: Spectrum.

Lazarus, R.S. & Folkman, S. 1984. Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York:

Springer.

Lazarus, R.S. & Launier, R. 1978. Stress-related transactions between person and

environment. In L.A. Pervin & M. Lewis (eds) Perspectives in interactional psychology:

287-327. New York: Plenum,.

Lysgaard, S. 1955. Adjustment in a foreign society: Norwegian Fulbright grantees

visiting the United States. International Science Bulletin, 7: 45-51.

Mansell, M. 1981. Transcultural experience and expressive response. Communication

Education, 30: 93-108.

Martin, J. N. 1984. The intercultural reentry: Conceptualization and directions for

future research. International Journal of Intercultural Relations. 8: 115-134.

Martin, J. N. 1994. Intercultural communication: A unifying concept for international

education. In G. Althen (Ed.), Learning across cultures: 109-143. NAFSA.

Martin, J. N., Bradford, L., & Rohrlich, B. (1995). Comparing predeparture

expectations and post-sojourn reports: a longitudinal study of U.S. students abroad.

International Journal of Intercultural Relations. 19(1), 87-110.

Marx, E. 1996. International human resource practices in Britain and Germany.

London: Anglo-German Foundation for the Study of Industrial Society.

McCall, M. 1994. Identifying leadership potential in future international executives:

Developing a concept. Consulting Psychology Journal, 46(1): 49-62.

Mendenhall, M. 1999. On the need for paradigmatic integration in international

human resource management. Management International Review, 39(3): 65-88.

53

Mendenhall, M. In press. New perspectives on expatriate adjustment and its

relationship to global leadership development. In Mendenhall, M., Kuhlmann, T., &

Stahl, G. (eds.) Developing Global Business Leaders: Policies, Processes, and

Innovations. (Forthcoming) Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

Mendenhall, M., Dunbar, E., Oddou, G. 1987. Expatriate selection, training, and

career-pathing A review and critique. Human Resource Management. 26(3): 331-345.

Mendenhall, M., & Macomber, J. 1997. Rethinking the strategic management of

expatriates from a nonlinear dynamics perspective. In Aycan, Z. (ed) Expatriate

Management: Theory and Research, Vol. 4.: 41-61. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press,

Mendenhall, M., Macomber, J., Gregersen, H., & Cutright, M. 1998. Nonlinear

dynamics: A new perspective on international human resource management research and

practice in the 21st century. Human Resource Management Review, 8(1): 5-22.

Mendenhall, M. E. & Oddou, G. R. 1985. The dimensions of expatriate acculturation:

A review. Academy of Management Review, 10: 39-47.

Mendenhall, M. & Stahl, G.K. In press. Expatriate training and development: Where

do we go from here? Human Resource Management Journal.

Napier, N.K., & Taylor, S. 1995. Western women working in Japan: Breaking

corporate barriers. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

Naumann, E. 1993. Organizational predictors of expatriate job satisfaction. Journal of

International Business Studies, 24: 61-80.

Newman, J., Bhatt B. & Gutteridge, T. 1978. Determinants of expatriate

effectiveness: A theoretical and empirical vacuum. Academy of Management Review, 4:

655-661.

Nicholson, J.D., Stepina, L.P., & Hochwarter, W. 1990. Psychological aspects of

expatriate effectiveness. Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management,

Supplement 2: 127-145.

Nicholson, N., & Imaizumi, A. 1993. The adjustment of Japanese expatriates to

living and working in Britain. British Journal of Management, 4: 119-134.

Oberg, K. 1960. Cultural shock. Adjustment to new cultural environments. Practical

Antrhropology, 7: 177-182.

Ones, D. S. & Viswesvaran, C. 1997. Personality determinants in the prediction of

aspects of expatriate job success. New Approaches to Employee Management, 4: 63-92.

Osland, J. 1990. The hero's adventure: The overseas experience of expatriate

businesspeople. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Case Western Reserve University.

Osland, J. 1995. The adventure of working abroad: Hero tales from the global

frontier. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. The Jossey Bass Management series.

Osland, J. in press. The quest for transformation: The process of global leadership

development. In Mendenhall, M., Kühlmann, T.M., & Stahl, G.K. (eds.) Developing

Global Business Leaders: Policies, Processes, and Innovations. Westport, CT: Quorum

Books.

54

Osland, J., & Bird, A. in press. Beyond sophisticated stereotyping: A contextual

model of cultural sensemaking. Academy of Management Executive.

Parker, B. & McEvoy, G. M. 1993. Initial examination of a model of intercultural

adjustment. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 17: 355-379.

Pedersen, P. 1995. The Five Stages of Culture Shock. Westport, CN: Greenwood

Press.

Pellico, M. T. & Stroh, L. K. 1997. Spousal assistance programs: An integral

component of the international assignment. In Aycan, Z. (ed). Expatriate Management:

Theory and Research. (Vol. 4): 227 - 244. London JAI Press.

Peterson, R. B. & Schwind, H. F. 1975. Personnel problems in international

companies and joint ventures in Japan. Academy of Management Proceedings, 35: 282-

284.

Pinder, C. C. & Das, H. 1979. Hidden costs and benefits of employee transfers.

Human Resource Planning, 2: 135-145.

Podsiadlowski, A. & Spiess, E. 1996. Zur Evaluation eines interkulturellen

Trainings in einem deutschen Grossunternehmen. Zeitschrift für Personalforschung, 10:

48-66.

Price Waterhouse 1997. International assignments. European policy and practice.

Pusch, M.D. 1994. Cross-cultural training. In G. Althen (ed). Learning across

cultures: 109-143. NAFSA

Rahim, A. 1983. A model for developing key expatriate executives. Personnel

Journal, 62: 312-317.

Ratiu, I. 1983. Thinking internationally: A comparison of how international

executives learn. International Studies of Management and Organization, 13: 139-150.

Ronen, S. 1986. Comparative and multinational management. New York: Wiley.

Ronen, S. 1989. Training the international assignee. In I. L. Goldstein (Ed.), Training

and development in organizations: 417-453. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Roskies, E., Iida-Miranda, M.L., & Stroebel, M.G. 1977. Life changes as predictors

of illness in immigrants. In C.D. Spielberger & I.G. Saranson (eds) Stress and anxiety

(volume 4): 3-21. New York: Wiley.

Ruben, B. D. & Kealey, D. 1979. Behavioral assessment of communication

competency and the prediction of cross-cultural adaptation. International Journal of

Intercultural Relations, 3: 15-47.

Samovar, L. A. & Porter, R. E. .(Eds.), 1991. Intercultural communication: A reader

(6th ed.). Belmont: Wadsworth.

Seelye, H. N. 1988. Teaching culture: Strategies for intercultural communication.

Lincolnwood: NTC.

55

Seelye, H. N. & Wasilewski, J. 1979. Toward a taxonomy of coping strategies used in

multicultural settings. Paper presented at the Meeting of the Society for Intercultural

Education, Training, and Research, March 1979, Mexico City.

Selmer, J. 1997. Vikings & Dragons: Swedish Management in Southeast Asia.

Kowloon, Hong Kong: David C. Lam Institute for East-West Studies, Hong Kong Baptist

University.

Selmer, J. & Shiu, L.S.C. 1999. Coming home? Adjustment of Hong Kong Chinese

expatriate business managers assigned to the People's Republic of China. International

Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23(3): 447-466.

Schröder, A. (1995). Die Betreuung von Mitarbeitern während des Auslandseinsatzes:

Wissenschaftliche Grundlagen. In T. M Kühlmann (Eds.) Mitarbeiterentsendung ins

Ausland: Auswahl Vorbereitung und Wiedereingliederung: 144-160. Göttingen: Verlag

für Angewandte Psychologie.

Shaffer, M. A. & Harrison, D. A. 1998. Expatriates’ psychological withdrawal from

international assignments: Work, nonwork, and family influences. Personnel Psychology,

51: 87-118.

Shetty, Y. K. 1971. International manager: A role profile. Management International

Review, 11: 19-31.

Sieveking, N., Anchor, K., & Marston, R.C. 1981. Selecting and preparing expatriate

employees. Personnel Journal, 60: 197-202.

Sinangil, H. K. & Ones, D. S. 1997. Empirical investigations of the host country

perspective in expatriate management. In Z. Aycan (Ed.), Expatriate management:

Theory and research (Vol. 4): 173-205. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Spitzberg, B. 1989. Issues in the development of a theory of interpersonal

competence in the intercultural context. International Journal of Intercultural Relations,

13: 241-268.

Spitzberg, B. H. 1991. Intercultural communication competence. In L. A. Samovar &

R. E. Porter (Eds.), Intercultural communication: A reader (6th ed.): 353-365. Belmont:

Wadsworth.

Spradley, J. P. & Phillips, M. 1972. Culture and stress: A quantitative analysis.

American Anthropologist, 74: 518-529.

Spreitzer, G.M., McCall, M., & Mahoney, J.D. 1997. Early identification of

international executive potential. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(1): 6-29.

Stahl, G. K. 1998. Internationaler Einsatz von Führungskräften. München:

Oldenbourg.

Stahl, G. K. 1999. Deutsche Führungskräfte im Auslandseinsatz: Probleme und

Problemlöseerfolg in Japan und den USA. Die Betriebswirtschaft, 59: 687-703.

Stahl, G. K. (in press). Using behavioral assessment techniques as tools for

international management development: An exploratory study. In Mendenhall, M.,

56

Kuhlmann, T., & Stahl, G. (eds.) Developing Global Business Leaders: Policies,

Processes, and Innovations. (Forthcoming) Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

Stening, B. W. 1979. Problems in cross-cultural contact: A literature review.

International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 3: 269-313.

Stephens, G. & Black, J. S. 1991. The impact of spouse's career-orientation on

managers during international transfers. Journal of Management Studies, 28: 417-428.

Stoner, J.A., Aram, J.D., & Rubin, J. 1972. Factors associated with effective

performance in overseas work assignments. Personnel Psychology, 25: 303-318.

Stroh, L.K., Dennis, L.E., & Cramer, T.C. 1994. Predictors of expatriate adjustment.

International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 2(2): 176-192.

Stroh, L. K., Gregersen, H.B. & Black, J. S. 1998. Closing the gap: Expectations

versus reality among repatriates. Journal of World Business. 33: 111-124.

Sussman, N.M. 1986. Re-entry research and training: Methods and implications.

International Journal of Intercultural Relations,10: 235-254.

Swaak, R. A. 1995. Expatriate failures: Too many, too much cost, too little planning.

Compensation & Benefits Review, 27: 47-55.

Tahvanainen, M. 1998. Expatriate Performance Management: The Case of Nokia

Telecommunications. Published dissertation. Helsinki School of Economics and

Business Administration.

Takeuchi, R. and Hannon, J.M. 1996. The antecedents of adjustment for Japanese

expatriates in the United States. Paper presented to the annual meeting of the Academy

of International Business, Banff, Canada.

Thomas, A. 1994. Können interkulturelle Begegnungen Vorurteile verstärken? In A.

Thomas (Ed.), Psychologie und multikulturelle Gesellschaft: Problemanalysen und

Problemlösungen: 227-238. Göttingen: Verlag für Angewandte Psychologie.

Thomas, A. 1995. Die Vorbereitung von Mitarbeitern für den Auslandseinsatz:

Wissenschaftliche Grundlagen. In T. M. Kühlmann (Ed.), Mitarbeiterentsendung ins

Ausland: 85-118. Göttingen: Verlag für Angewandte Psychologie.

Thomas, D. C. 1998. The expatriate experience: A critical review and synthesis. In

J.L. Cheng, & R. B. Peterson, (Eds.). Advances in International Comparative

Management, vol. 12: 237-273. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press

Torbiörn, I. 1982. Living abroad: Personal adjustment and personnel policy in the

over-seas setting. New York: Wiley.

Torbiörn, I. 1985. The structure of managerial roles in cross-cultural settings.

International Studies of Management and Organizations, 15: 52-74.

Triandis, H. C. 1995. A theoretical framework for the study of diversity. In M. M.

Chemers, S. Oskamp & M. A. Costanzo (Eds.), Diversity in organizations: New

perspectives for a changing workplace: 11-36. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

57

Tung, R. L. 1981. Selection and training of personnel for overseas assignments.

Columbia Journal of World Business, 16: 68-78.

Tung, R.L. 1982. Selection and training procedures of U.S., European and Japanese

multinationals. California Management Review, 25: 57-71.

Tung, R.L. 1987. Expatriate assignments: Enhancing success and minimizing

failure. Academy of Management Executive, 1(2): 117-125.

Tung, R. L. 1988. Career issues in international assignments. The Academy of

Management Executive, 2: 241-244.

Tung, R. L. 1997. A study of the expatriation/repatriation process. In.. Exploring

International Assignees' Viewpoints: 2-12. Arthur Andersen, Inc.

Tung, R. L. 1998. American expatriates abroad: From neophytes to cosmopolitans.

Journal of World Business, 33: 125-144.

Tung, R. L., & Arthur Andersen, Inc. 1997. Exploring international assignees’

viewpoints: A study of the expatriation/repatriation process. Chicago, IL: Arthur

Andersen Human Capital Services.

Tung, R. L. & Miller, E. L. 1990. Managing in the twenty-first century: The need for

global orientation. Management International Review, 30: 5-18.

Vance, C. M., & Smith-Ring, P. 1994. Preparing the host country workforce for

expatriate managers: The neglected other side of the coin. Human Resource Development

Quarterly, 5: 337-352.

Walton, S. J. 1992. Stress management training for overseas effectiveness.

International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 16: 507-526.

Ward, C. 1996. Acculturation. In D. Landis & R. S. Bhagat (Eds.), Handbook of

intercultural training (2nd ed.): 124-147. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Ward, C. & Kennedy, A. 1999. The measurement of sociocultural adaptation.

International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23(4): 659-677.

Ward, C., Okura, Y., Kennedy, A., & Kojima, T. 1998. The U-Curve on trial: A

longtiudinal study of psychological and sociocultural adjustment during cross-cultural

transition. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 22(3): 277-291.

Weaver, G. R. 1986. Understanding and coping with cross-cultural adjustment stress.

In R. M. Paige (Ed.), Cross-cultural orientation: New conceptualizations and

applications: 111-145. Lanham: University Press of America.

Weissman, D. & Furnham, A. 1987. The expectations and experiences of a

sojourning temporary resident abroad: A preliminary study. Human Relations, 40: 313-

326.

Wirth, E. 1992. Mitarbeiter im Auslandseinsatz. Wiesbaden: Gabler.

Wiseman, R. L. & Koester, J. (Eds.). 1993. Intercultural communication competence.

Newbury Park: Sage.

58

Yeung, A. and Ready, A. 1995. Developing leadership capabilities of global

corporations: A comparative study in eight nations. Human Resource Management,

34(4): 529-547.

Yoshikawa, M. J. 1987. Cross-cultural adaptation and perceptual development. In Y.

Y. Kim & W. B. Gudykunst (Eds.), Cross-cultural adaptation: Current approaches: 140-

148. Newbury Park: Sage.

Yun, C. K. 1973. Role conflicts of expatriate managers: A construct. Management

International Review, 13: 105-113.

Zaharna, R. S. 1989. Self-shock: The double-binding challenge of identity.

International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 13: 501-522.

Zeira, Y. 1975. Overlooked personnel problems of multinational corporations.

Columbia Journal of World Business, 10: 96-103.

Zeira, Y. & Banai, M. 1984. Present and desired methods of selecting expatriate

managers for international assignments. Personnel Review, 13: 29-35.

Zeira Y., & Banai, M. 1985. Selection of expatriate managers in MNCs: The hostenvironment point of view. International Studies of Management and Organization, 15:

33-51.

Zeira, Y. & Harari, E. 1979. Host-country organizations and expatriate managers in

Europe. California Management Review, 21: 40-50.