Assisting cross‐border manager adjustment. Psycho‐cultural and socio‐cultural interventions
| Date | 01 April 2005 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/00483480510579448 |
| Published date | 01 April 2005 |
| Pages | 225-245 |
| Author | Alan Fish |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour |
Assisting cross-border manager
adjustment
Psycho-cultural and socio-cultural
interventions
Alan Fish
School of Management, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, Australia
Abstract
Purpose – This research aimed to identify cross-cultural adjustment interventions to assist the
personal wellbeing (psycho-cultural) and cultural interaction (socio-cultural) of managers on foreign
assignments. Both pre-departure and in-country interventions were sought.
Design/methodology/approach – A questionnaire was employed and comprised two adjustment
measures. Data were collected from 244 Australians in south-east Asia working in two industry
groups – manufacturing/industrial and financial/services. Exploratory factor analysis was employed
to identify adjustment constructs. Pearson correlations, as well as ANOVAs and t-tests, were
employed to explore the effect of industry group, respondent group, number of cross-border
assignments, age and gender.
Findings – Eight adjustment interventions were identified and were labelled: quality of life
awareness; host business and cultural awareness; family impact awareness; staff and business
colleague awareness; home country networks; cultural reinforcement and support; cultural inclusion;
and host language skills.
Research limitations/implications – The research was limited to a specific business region, to
one cross-border manager cultural grouping and an exploratory technique was employed. Hence
further work is needed to confirm the constructs and to assess the generalisability of the results to
other business regions and to other cross-border manager groups.
Originality/value – Whilst some important differences existed, the implications and value of the
research may be evident in assisting psycho-cultural problems such as anxiety and stress, and to
encourage socio-cultural interaction such as involvement in and with cultural environments and
decreasing the potential for failed assignments.
Keywords Expatriates,Cross-cultural management, Personnelpsychology, Social dynamics
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
There will invariably be some surprise when a new environment is encountered for the
first time. This should not be a concern, but can become problematic when associated
with cross-border management assignments. False and misleading information and
perceptions surrounding a new role, and its particular circumstances can, and ind eed
does contribute to problematic adjustment. Hence, it is only natural that how a
prospective cross-border appointee perceives a new appointment, that person will
begin to “paint a picture” as to the assignment, including its career costs and benefits.
There will be a sense of anticipation as to the new circumstances an d as a consequence
“anticipatory adjustment” (Black et al., 1992, p. 123) will begin. As a manager under
consideration, or actually selected for a cross-border assignment, may not have worked
The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister www.emeraldinsight.com/0048-3486.htm
Cross-border
manager
adjustment
225
Received October 2003
Accepted January 2004
Personnel Review
Vol. 34 No. 2, 2005
pp. 225-245
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0048-3486
DOI 10.1108/00483480510579448
in, lived in or even visited a foreign location, it is critical that appropriate interventions
to assist effective adjustment are factored into the appointment process, if not the
broader management development agendas of cross-border organisations more
generally.
Within such a context there are bound to be a variety of disparate thoughts and
views. Hence, questions and concerns as to the role and what will be experienced
within and across new cultural settings and how one should react and behave are
bound to surface. This becomes particularly so where the “cultural distance” (Shenkar,
2001) is potentially large and appropriate behavioural strategies are unclear . Hence, the
more informed the interventions and support, the more likely it is that adjustment will
occur without too many difficulties.
Nevertheless, it is now more than 30 years since unsatisfactory adjustment and as
a consequence poor individual and business performance resulting from
“cross-border assignments” began to receive research attention as a key challenge
for cross-border organisations. In the intervening period much has been written on
cross-border assignment problems, including “failure”, and questions have been
raised whether “failure” actually exists to the levels suggested, or indeed whether
“failure” has been accurately portrayed or reported (Harzing, 1995).
Where problems existed blame has largely been apportioned to issues such as, poor
adjustment founded on poor or inappropriate organisational interventions (Brewster
and Pickard, 1994; Pfaendler, 2002), poor acculturation choices (Stierle et al., 2002) and
the lack of spouse/partner assistance (Adler, 1991; Black and Gregersen, 1991,
Stephens and Black, 1991). Also, a lack of willingness to adapt, along with the
psychological consequences of globalisation and an endeavour to understand
behavioural outcomes linked to movement to new cultural circumstances have also
been considered (Arnett, 2002).
Recommendations have been associated with the improving awareness as to the
new job, the cultural settings, as well as the business environment and the impact of
the appointment on the partner/family (Mendenhall and Oddou, 1985; Black et al., 1991;
Insch and Daniels, 2002; Takeuchi et al., 2002). More recently, attention has extended to
selection criteria based on factors such as “personality” (Caligiuri, 2000), “learning
orientation” (Newman, 2000) an “ability and willingness to learn” (McCall, 1994;
Spreitzer et al., 1997), “gender differences” (Guthrie et al., 2003) and “attachment style”
(Manning, 2003).
The continued search for appropriate interventions appears to suggest a number of
problems. First, that organisations are failing to heed research results. Second, that
researchers may be failing to appropriately promulgate their results. Third, that
researchers are failing to distinguish key constructs in the first place. Unfortunately,
whilst awareness of what a cross-border manager is required to adjust to appears to be
known, there appears less awareness as to the more specific personal and behavioural
strategies needed to assist adjustment. That is, the extent to which interventions
effectively address the “personal wellbeing” (psycho-cultural) and the “willingness to
interact” (socio-cultural) of those who are required to adjust (Ward and Kennedy, 1993;
Ward and Ran-Deuba, 1999; Zakaria, 2000; Kosic, 2002; and Ward and Kennedy, 2001).
With few exceptions (Black et al., 1991; Caligiuri, 2000; Vance and Paik, 2002; Clegg
and Gray, 2002), there has been a tendency to examine adjustment in a piecemeal
fashion, with little thought as to the structure of the interventions, their potential
PR
34,2
226
To continue reading
Request your trial