6 items on »typolis:« tagged with
»ones&sinangil«
2006.10.18, 16:45
2. review on research: training of expatriates
[p.429]
The purpose of training is defined based on Bhawuk and Brislin (2000) as "formal efforts for preparing people for living in other cultures". Referring to Black and Mendenhall (1990) it should improve cultural awareness, interpersonal adjustment, and managerial effectiveness. Brislin and Yoshida (1994) further call for training to improve interpersonal relations and job success.
Training from 50 years ago aimed at shocking their participants. The cultural encounter was understood to provoke a culture shock which Oberg (1960) as an anxiety resulting "'from losing all your familiar signs and symbols of social discourse' (p.177)". The idea was to vorwegnehmen this shock and to then offer the possibility to discuss the matter in the safe environment of home grounds. The trainee was to be involved emotionally and actively. Consequently, lectures were substituted by experiental training methods (Harrison & Hopkins, 1967; Kolb, 1976) including area simulations (Trifonovitch, 1977) and a cultural self-awareness model developed by Kraemer (1973, 1974).
In the seventies the idea of a culture-assimilator became popular. These assimilators feature several incidents typical for cross-cultural interactions. An example would be the story of person XY who has lived in the country for 3 months already but does not find any social contact. How come? The trainee is then offered several possible answers of which one or more can be right.
While the given example bases on a general culture-assimilator, normally one of the given alternatives in a culture-specific assimilator would reflect the point of view of the host country, another the one of the expatriate's home country. The aim is to raise awareness and to prepare for better interpersonal realtionships (e.g., Chemers, 1969; Fiedler, Mitchel & Triandis, 1971; Gudykunst & Hammer, 1983; Malpass & Salancik, 1977; Tolbert, 1990).
[p.430]
Other training methods would be the cultural analysis system as introduced by Lee (1966) or the contrast-America method developped by Stewart (1966). These two methods and the general culture-assimilator aim on the trainee to become aware of his/her own values and culture-specific behavior.
Black and Mendenhall (1999) further advised training to consider social learning theory principles as described/defined by Bandura (1977) and behavior modeling training. Furthermore, Bhawuk (1995, 1998) developed culture-assimilators based on theory, thus conceptualizing the training stages as intercultural expertise development.
Examining the effectiveness of cross-cultural training concerning self-development, perception, and relationships with the host country nationals Deshpande and Viswesvaran (1992) found that training had the strongest effect on the expatriate's self-development but not so much on his/her job performance.
Ones and Sinangile conclude their chapter on expatriate training with the following numbers:
back to expatriate staffing
further to criteria for expatriates
The purpose of training is defined based on Bhawuk and Brislin (2000) as "formal efforts for preparing people for living in other cultures". Referring to Black and Mendenhall (1990) it should improve cultural awareness, interpersonal adjustment, and managerial effectiveness. Brislin and Yoshida (1994) further call for training to improve interpersonal relations and job success.
Training from 50 years ago aimed at shocking their participants. The cultural encounter was understood to provoke a culture shock which Oberg (1960) as an anxiety resulting "'from losing all your familiar signs and symbols of social discourse' (p.177)". The idea was to vorwegnehmen this shock and to then offer the possibility to discuss the matter in the safe environment of home grounds. The trainee was to be involved emotionally and actively. Consequently, lectures were substituted by experiental training methods (Harrison & Hopkins, 1967; Kolb, 1976) including area simulations (Trifonovitch, 1977) and a cultural self-awareness model developed by Kraemer (1973, 1974).
In the seventies the idea of a culture-assimilator became popular. These assimilators feature several incidents typical for cross-cultural interactions. An example would be the story of person XY who has lived in the country for 3 months already but does not find any social contact. How come? The trainee is then offered several possible answers of which one or more can be right.
- Everybody is just very busy with work. Work and social life are clearly separated.
- The host nationals already have enough friends and expected XY to have other foreigners as friends.
- XY is regarded as member of a lower social and economic class and thus not suitable as friend.
While the given example bases on a general culture-assimilator, normally one of the given alternatives in a culture-specific assimilator would reflect the point of view of the host country, another the one of the expatriate's home country. The aim is to raise awareness and to prepare for better interpersonal realtionships (e.g., Chemers, 1969; Fiedler, Mitchel & Triandis, 1971; Gudykunst & Hammer, 1983; Malpass & Salancik, 1977; Tolbert, 1990).
[p.430]
Other training methods would be the cultural analysis system as introduced by Lee (1966) or the contrast-America method developped by Stewart (1966). These two methods and the general culture-assimilator aim on the trainee to become aware of his/her own values and culture-specific behavior.
Black and Mendenhall (1999) further advised training to consider social learning theory principles as described/defined by Bandura (1977) and behavior modeling training. Furthermore, Bhawuk (1995, 1998) developed culture-assimilators based on theory, thus conceptualizing the training stages as intercultural expertise development.
Examining the effectiveness of cross-cultural training concerning self-development, perception, and relationships with the host country nationals Deshpande and Viswesvaran (1992) found that training had the strongest effect on the expatriate's self-development but not so much on his/her job performance.
Ones and Sinangile conclude their chapter on expatriate training with the following numbers:
- In the beginning of the 1990s only 25% of companies would train the employees prior to sending them abroad (Black & Gregersen, 1991).
- Of the 32 companies questioned (all ranked among the Fortune 500 companies) Anderson Consulting (Cuthill, 1997) found
94% to send their expatriates-to-be to language courses
69% to send their expatriates in preparation to a cross-cultural training - Numbers conducted by Windham International (1999) revealed 63% of 250 organization to send their expatriates to a preparing cross-cultural training.
back to expatriate staffing
further to criteria for expatriates
2006.10.18, 16:58
by julerennt
about: adjustment, success, job performance, job satisfaction, early returns, ones&sinangil
3. criteria for expatriates
Discussing how to prepare expatriates for a successful stay abroad, it has to be asked: how exactly is success defined?
[p.431]
Ones and Sinangil present the three-factor model introduced by Hawes and Kealey (1979)to define success in expatriate missions as a combination of
Thus Ones and Sinangil divide the research on expatriates' success:
· expatriate satisfaction and early returns
Premature returns have called researchers' interest because they are so expensive for the sending organization. McGoldrick (1997) estimates the costs for expatriates to be 2.5 half times more than for locally hired workers. The direct costs for sending are estimated to be $220,000 (Birdseye&Hill, 1995).
Interestingly enough, European Expatriates show a much lower return rate than expatriates with North American origin (Brester, 1991; Selmer, 1999; Price Waterhouse, 1997).
Alampay, Beehr & Christiansen (2000) found that for expatriate the same set of variables indicates job satisfaction as it does for domestic workers. These variables include:
[p.432 conclude with a part I didn't quite understand, thus as quote]
"Garonzik et al. (2000) studied non-work-related outcomes and perceived procedural fairness as predictors of premature expatriate departures. In two studies, expatriates were likely to think seriously about prematurely departing when their non-work outcomes (i.e., non-work adjustment) were unfavorable. However, all current favorability and early turnover intentions were more strongly related when perceived procedural fairness was low. In other words, organizations can focus on their institution's procedural fairness in their attempts to curb premature returns. There appears to be value to using findings from the literature on psychological contracts in understanding expatriate behaviors (Guzzo et al., 1994)."
What is procedural fairness? What are psychological contracts? What's the purpose of them?
· expatriate adaption and adjustment
Ones and Sinangil define adaption as a construct of "adjustment, identification with hosts, cultural competence, and role acculturation (Briody & Beeber Crisman, 1991; Taft, 1977)". Recent studies (e.g., Aycan & Berry, 1996; Berry, 1992; Searle & Ward, 1990; Ward, 1996) additionally define adaption as "outcome of the acculturation process [signifying] changes in the expatriate in response to environmental demands".
Adjustment on the other hand is understood as "psychological comfort expatriates feel with regard to the host culture in within which they are operating" (Gregersen & Black, 1990). Based on Black and Stephens (1989) the authors differentiate adjustment into three fields:
Ones and Sinangil argue that, nevertheless, adjustment cannot be the main criterion for success. "Adjustment is not an end in itself, but rather a part of a process that allows the expatriate to be able to focus on and carry through the tasks of the job that he/she has been sent to perform." Thus, they understand adjustment to be only a determinant not a reason for early returns and/or expatriate job performance.
· expatriate job performance
Though, as mentioned earlier, being an expatriate means to be on a job-related mission, little research has been conducted on the field of job performance and the influencing criteria. Based on the provided findings and relating to the recent industrial-organizational psychology literature Ones and Sinangil introduce a working model of expatriate job performance with the following dimensions:
[p.434]
back to table of content
back to expatriate training
further to emerging areas
[p.431]
Ones and Sinangil present the three-factor model introduced by Hawes and Kealey (1979)to define success in expatriate missions as a combination of
- intercultural interaction,
- professional effectiveness,
- family/personal adjustment and satisfaction.
Thus Ones and Sinangil divide the research on expatriates' success:
· expatriate satisfaction and early returns
Premature returns have called researchers' interest because they are so expensive for the sending organization. McGoldrick (1997) estimates the costs for expatriates to be 2.5 half times more than for locally hired workers. The direct costs for sending are estimated to be $220,000 (Birdseye&Hill, 1995).
Interestingly enough, European Expatriates show a much lower return rate than expatriates with North American origin (Brester, 1991; Selmer, 1999; Price Waterhouse, 1997).
Alampay, Beehr & Christiansen (2000) found that for expatriate the same set of variables indicates job satisfaction as it does for domestic workers. These variables include:
- task self-efficacy,
- job level,
- skill variety,
- little role ambiguity,
- task identity,
- task significance,
- role discretion,
- feedback and
- mentoring.
[p.432 conclude with a part I didn't quite understand, thus as quote]
"Garonzik et al. (2000) studied non-work-related outcomes and perceived procedural fairness as predictors of premature expatriate departures. In two studies, expatriates were likely to think seriously about prematurely departing when their non-work outcomes (i.e., non-work adjustment) were unfavorable. However, all current favorability and early turnover intentions were more strongly related when perceived procedural fairness was low. In other words, organizations can focus on their institution's procedural fairness in their attempts to curb premature returns. There appears to be value to using findings from the literature on psychological contracts in understanding expatriate behaviors (Guzzo et al., 1994)."
What is procedural fairness? What are psychological contracts? What's the purpose of them?
· expatriate adaption and adjustment
Ones and Sinangil define adaption as a construct of "adjustment, identification with hosts, cultural competence, and role acculturation (Briody & Beeber Crisman, 1991; Taft, 1977)". Recent studies (e.g., Aycan & Berry, 1996; Berry, 1992; Searle & Ward, 1990; Ward, 1996) additionally define adaption as "outcome of the acculturation process [signifying] changes in the expatriate in response to environmental demands".
Adjustment on the other hand is understood as "psychological comfort expatriates feel with regard to the host culture in within which they are operating" (Gregersen & Black, 1990). Based on Black and Stephens (1989) the authors differentiate adjustment into three fields:
- work adjustment (concerning adjustment towards work role, tasks and responsibilities),
- interaction adjustment (regarding interaction with host country nationals) and
- general adjustment (concerning the new environment including housing, food, shopping, ...).
- General adjustment correlates highly with spouse general adjustment but also with interpersonal skills, general self-efficacy, social efficacy, discretion, frequency of interactions with host country national, and spouse interaction adjustment.
- Interaction adjustment correlates highly with frequency of interactions with host country nationals but also with general self-efficacy, number of months on assignment, spouse interaction adjustment, and spouse general adjustment.
- Work adjustment is closely related to general self-efficacy, role discretion, little role ambiguity, and little role conflict. It is also related to frequency of interactions with host nationals, frequency of interactions with home headquarters, and family adjustment.
Ones and Sinangil argue that, nevertheless, adjustment cannot be the main criterion for success. "Adjustment is not an end in itself, but rather a part of a process that allows the expatriate to be able to focus on and carry through the tasks of the job that he/she has been sent to perform." Thus, they understand adjustment to be only a determinant not a reason for early returns and/or expatriate job performance.
· expatriate job performance
Though, as mentioned earlier, being an expatriate means to be on a job-related mission, little research has been conducted on the field of job performance and the influencing criteria. Based on the provided findings and relating to the recent industrial-organizational psychology literature Ones and Sinangil introduce a working model of expatriate job performance with the following dimensions:
[p.434]
- establishing and maintaining business contacts (in order to achieve desirable ends),
- technical performance (fulfilling the given tasks),
- productivity,
- communicating and persuading (concerning how information is gathered and transmitted),
- personal discipline (extend to which counterproductive behaviors at work are avoided),
- interpersonal relations (how is team performance facilitated; how does the expatriate support and champions others in the organization and unit),
- management and supervision (proficiency in delegating jobs and roles), and
- overall job performance.
back to table of content
back to expatriate training
further to emerging areas
2006.10.18, 17:00
4. emerging areas
[p.435]
Ones and Sinangil see non-work considerations (spouse and family), female expatriates and the perspective of the host country to be the emerging areas in expatriate management.
· non-work considerations
While the influence of spouse's well-being on the expatriate's job performance is mostly explained by a spill-over theory, it is widely accepted that spousal adjustment or not-adjustment has great effect on expatriates deciding to return early: "the inability to interact successfully with host country nationals can lead to isolation, loneliness, inadequate adjustment, and premature return from assignment (Tung, 1988)". Black and Gregersen (1991b) found that spousal adjustment can be supported by cross-cultural training, a social support network, an acceptable standard of living, cultural novelty, and an early involvement in selection.
· women in expatriate management
Even though the number of women in management in general is raising, only 5-12% of the expatriates are female. Adler (1987) found three reasons for this:
"(1) women are not interested in international careers;
(2) organizations refuse to send women employees abroad for fear of poor job performance in foreign cultures; and
(3) foreign cultures discriminate against women."
Research showed that women are very well interested in international careers. While organization say that they are not any less likely to send women on missions abroad, women state the opposite to be true.
[p.436]
Only the last reason, which 70% of multinationals take as reason for not sending women on an expatriate assignment, has to be differentiated culture-specific. Ones and Sinangil report from their studies in Turkey that women expatriates directly compared to their male counterparts were rated higher by their host colleagues in terms of job performance and overall adjustment.
· host country perspective
Very little research has been conducted in this field. Ones and Sinangil call for studies on the expectations of host organizations on expatriates.
back to table of content
back to criteria for expatriates
Ones and Sinangil see non-work considerations (spouse and family), female expatriates and the perspective of the host country to be the emerging areas in expatriate management.
· non-work considerations
While the influence of spouse's well-being on the expatriate's job performance is mostly explained by a spill-over theory, it is widely accepted that spousal adjustment or not-adjustment has great effect on expatriates deciding to return early: "the inability to interact successfully with host country nationals can lead to isolation, loneliness, inadequate adjustment, and premature return from assignment (Tung, 1988)". Black and Gregersen (1991b) found that spousal adjustment can be supported by cross-cultural training, a social support network, an acceptable standard of living, cultural novelty, and an early involvement in selection.
· women in expatriate management
Even though the number of women in management in general is raising, only 5-12% of the expatriates are female. Adler (1987) found three reasons for this:
"(1) women are not interested in international careers;
(2) organizations refuse to send women employees abroad for fear of poor job performance in foreign cultures; and
(3) foreign cultures discriminate against women."
Research showed that women are very well interested in international careers. While organization say that they are not any less likely to send women on missions abroad, women state the opposite to be true.
[p.436]
Only the last reason, which 70% of multinationals take as reason for not sending women on an expatriate assignment, has to be differentiated culture-specific. Ones and Sinangil report from their studies in Turkey that women expatriates directly compared to their male counterparts were rated higher by their host colleagues in terms of job performance and overall adjustment.
· host country perspective
Very little research has been conducted in this field. Ones and Sinangil call for studies on the expectations of host organizations on expatriates.
back to table of content
back to criteria for expatriates
2006.10.18, 16:30
1. definition "expatriate"
[p.425]
"Expatriates are individuals who go overseas to accomplish a job-related goal." In this they differ from tourists or students. They don't have a task to fulfill and are on a rather entertaining mission (even though this as an unintended negative connotation). People on business trip are not considered expatriates either since their contacts with the host culture remain on a rather touristic level.
The authors quote Aycan and Kanungo (1997) to further define expatriates as people working abroad for a "'pre-designated temporary time period of usually more than six months and less than five years in one term' (p.250)".
Ones and Sinangil understand expatriates to hold positions of "high complexity and high responsibility" in the complex setting of an intercultural environment. Based on Tung (1981) expatriates usually work as "CEO's, executives, managers or professionals".
back to table of content
back to definition "expatriate"
further to expatriate staffing
"Expatriates are individuals who go overseas to accomplish a job-related goal." In this they differ from tourists or students. They don't have a task to fulfill and are on a rather entertaining mission (even though this as an unintended negative connotation). People on business trip are not considered expatriates either since their contacts with the host culture remain on a rather touristic level.
The authors quote Aycan and Kanungo (1997) to further define expatriates as people working abroad for a "'pre-designated temporary time period of usually more than six months and less than five years in one term' (p.250)".
Ones and Sinangil understand expatriates to hold positions of "high complexity and high responsibility" in the complex setting of an intercultural environment. Based on Tung (1981) expatriates usually work as "CEO's, executives, managers or professionals".
back to table of content
back to definition "expatriate"
further to expatriate staffing
2006.10.18, 16:14
Becoming smart....
Mr. Sinangil and Mr. Ones are nice guys - they do all the work for me. In a book with the scary title "Industrial, Work, and Organizational Psychology" they contributed a chapter on expatriate management. Yes! It reviews the past 5 decades of research done in the field of expatriates. Yesyesyes! How could I not love these guys?
Unfortunately, I lack some brain cells - it took me 4 full days to get through 10 pages. I'm very happy they didn't write a full book: thesis time would be up before I'd been done with anything...
Anyway: content! As usual you find links to the summaries, while at the same time I will publish the most important part on the front page as well.
structure:
Ones, D.S., & Sinangil, H.K. (2005). Expatriate management. In N.Anderson; D.S. Ones; H.K.Sinangil, & C.Viswesvaran (Eds.) Handbook of industrial, work and organizational psychology, Vol.1, personnel psychology (pp.424-443). London: Sage.
Unfortunately, I lack some brain cells - it took me 4 full days to get through 10 pages. I'm very happy they didn't write a full book: thesis time would be up before I'd been done with anything...
Anyway: content! As usual you find links to the summaries, while at the same time I will publish the most important part on the front page as well.
structure:
- definition "expatriate"
- review of research
- discussion about criteria for expatriates
- expatriate satisfaction and early returns
- adaption and adjustment
- job performance
- emerging areas
- non-work and family considerations
- women expatriates
- host country perspective
Ones, D.S., & Sinangil, H.K. (2005). Expatriate management. In N.Anderson; D.S. Ones; H.K.Sinangil, & C.Viswesvaran (Eds.) Handbook of industrial, work and organizational psychology, Vol.1, personnel psychology (pp.424-443). London: Sage.
2006.10.18, 16:39
2. review of research: expatriate staffing
Even though it is widely acknowledged that a systematic assessment in recruiting employees does already half the job, there are hardly any systematic selection procedures for finding the right expatriate. Ones and Sinangil rely on numbers from the Human Resource Institute (1998) stating that 92% of companies select expatriates because of managerial recommondations. Over 50% would not use any structured procedures and around 10% would not apply any screening at all.
Ones and Sinangil imagine two reasons for this:
Based on Adler (1991) the United States Peace Corps was actually the first institution who would select their candidates for overseas assignments by personality tests and panel interviews. Unfortunately they give this system up due to research revealing a "less than stellar record in predicting success". Nowadays the results of these studies are seen questionable which Ones and Sinangil will review when they talk about criterion related-validities.
In the 1970s the United States armed service used the Navy Overseas Adjustment Scale to evaluate service people (but not technical staff). The Canadian International Development Agency also developed standardized instrument to select employees. Nevertheless, relying on Tung (1981) "only 5% of companies surveyed formally assessed interpersonal competence and relational abilities". Mumford (1983) is quoted "'People are selected for overseas assignment based on technical skills, availability and other factors, but not on their ability to get along overseas. Even in the world of diplomacy, people are not sent overseas because they are adaptable, empathic, preserving, patient and courteous...' (p.95)."
As mentioned before research was not really helping to establish systematic assessment structures. Ones and Viswesvaran (1998) get back to an earlier overview of what scholars found as important personality trait for expatriates. Copeland & Griggs (1988), for example, suggested "breadth" as an important characteristic. This would include "hardness like water" or "positive regard for others". Brislin (1981), for example, speaks of strong personality, "including self-esteem, integrity, security, loyalty, courage and self-concept" while Hammer, Gudykunst, and Wiseman (1978) call for character traits such as "communication competence (which included respect, nonjudgementalness, empathy, self-orientedness)". Ones and Sinangil criticize these outcomes because they only consider aspects of personality but don't get "to the personality roots of these proposed predictors."
[p.427]
Instead they propose to sort the proposed predictors into the so-called Big Five dimensions of personality (on which I just took a quick glance in wikipedia while I prefered the German version, I really am not a psychologist...).
Ones and Sinangil suggest the following traits to potentially predict overseas behavior. They apperrantly result out of ratings done by expatriates themselves, host country nationals and out of traditional criterion-related validity studies [Peace Corps]).
Ones and Sinangil then go over to analyze criterion-related validities. As far as I understand it the purpose of these validity-studies is to check if the assumptions where right.
As mentioned before the validity-studies in the 1960s had shown the selection system of the Peace Corp to be superfluous. There seem to be no success-predicting character traits (the authors rely on Harris, 1973, 1975). Analyzing these earlier studies, predictor-related, methodological, and criterion problems come up. No standards had been established to define different personality variables. Then not enough samples had been taken to meet statistical standards. The results were conducted with measurement and analysis problems. On top of that the studies were carried through with the Peace Corps for which volunteers were sent abroad, which is quite a different group of people with other purposes than businesses and their staff on an expatriate assignment.
Recent criterion-related validity studies draw quite a different picture of personality traits predicting expatriate's possible success or failure. The purpose of these studies is to determine which character traits effect which aspects of the expatriate's life abroad.
Sinangil and Ones (1998), for example, measured the dependability facet of consciousness according to the Prudence Scale of Hogan Personality Inventory. The results showed it to be a poor predictor for expatriate job performance but a valid predictor of overseas counterproductive behaviors.
Reviewing several results of these researches, Ones and Sinangil call on decision makers to not base their expatriate selection merely on technical skills: "There is ampel evidence that ability, knowledge and skills are valid predictors of performance in any performance domain (e.g., Kuncel, Hezlett & Ones, 2001; Schmidt & Hunter, 1992; Viswesvaran & Ones, in press) and for the complex environment that expatriates operate in, we see cognitive ability and technical skills as crucial determinants of overseas job performance."
[p.428/429]
I started reading a thesis on predictors concerning German expatriate, so I will get into this in a little more detail later. And while I trust in these personality-based predictors, I still wonder about the Wechselwirkungen with training..... thus: which influence does training have on personality and hence behavior in the foreign culture?
back to the table of content
back to definition "expatriate"
further to expatriate training
Ones and Sinangil imagine two reasons for this:
- expatriates are mostly recruited from within the organization. Thus being send on an expatriate mission is seen as a placement decision.
- research on which variables would lead a successful mission was very inconsistent in results. That made it difficult to put theory into practice.
Based on Adler (1991) the United States Peace Corps was actually the first institution who would select their candidates for overseas assignments by personality tests and panel interviews. Unfortunately they give this system up due to research revealing a "less than stellar record in predicting success". Nowadays the results of these studies are seen questionable which Ones and Sinangil will review when they talk about criterion related-validities.
In the 1970s the United States armed service used the Navy Overseas Adjustment Scale to evaluate service people (but not technical staff). The Canadian International Development Agency also developed standardized instrument to select employees. Nevertheless, relying on Tung (1981) "only 5% of companies surveyed formally assessed interpersonal competence and relational abilities". Mumford (1983) is quoted "'People are selected for overseas assignment based on technical skills, availability and other factors, but not on their ability to get along overseas. Even in the world of diplomacy, people are not sent overseas because they are adaptable, empathic, preserving, patient and courteous...' (p.95)."
As mentioned before research was not really helping to establish systematic assessment structures. Ones and Viswesvaran (1998) get back to an earlier overview of what scholars found as important personality trait for expatriates. Copeland & Griggs (1988), for example, suggested "breadth" as an important characteristic. This would include "hardness like water" or "positive regard for others". Brislin (1981), for example, speaks of strong personality, "including self-esteem, integrity, security, loyalty, courage and self-concept" while Hammer, Gudykunst, and Wiseman (1978) call for character traits such as "communication competence (which included respect, nonjudgementalness, empathy, self-orientedness)". Ones and Sinangil criticize these outcomes because they only consider aspects of personality but don't get "to the personality roots of these proposed predictors."
[p.427]
Instead they propose to sort the proposed predictors into the so-called Big Five dimensions of personality (on which I just took a quick glance in wikipedia while I prefered the German version, I really am not a psychologist...).
Ones and Sinangil suggest the following traits to potentially predict overseas behavior. They apperrantly result out of ratings done by expatriates themselves, host country nationals and out of traditional criterion-related validity studies [Peace Corps]).
- tolerance (Miller, 1972)
- interpersonal cultural sensivity (Byrnes, 1966)
- open-mindedness
- sensitivity to power (Ezekiel, 1968)
- authoritarianism/dogmatism (Smith, 1966)
- family situation
- flexibility/adaptability
- job knowledge and motivation
- relational skills
- extra-cultural openness
Ones and Sinangil then go over to analyze criterion-related validities. As far as I understand it the purpose of these validity-studies is to check if the assumptions where right.
As mentioned before the validity-studies in the 1960s had shown the selection system of the Peace Corp to be superfluous. There seem to be no success-predicting character traits (the authors rely on Harris, 1973, 1975). Analyzing these earlier studies, predictor-related, methodological, and criterion problems come up. No standards had been established to define different personality variables. Then not enough samples had been taken to meet statistical standards. The results were conducted with measurement and analysis problems. On top of that the studies were carried through with the Peace Corps for which volunteers were sent abroad, which is quite a different group of people with other purposes than businesses and their staff on an expatriate assignment.
Recent criterion-related validity studies draw quite a different picture of personality traits predicting expatriate's possible success or failure. The purpose of these studies is to determine which character traits effect which aspects of the expatriate's life abroad.
Sinangil and Ones (1998), for example, measured the dependability facet of consciousness according to the Prudence Scale of Hogan Personality Inventory. The results showed it to be a poor predictor for expatriate job performance but a valid predictor of overseas counterproductive behaviors.
Reviewing several results of these researches, Ones and Sinangil call on decision makers to not base their expatriate selection merely on technical skills: "There is ampel evidence that ability, knowledge and skills are valid predictors of performance in any performance domain (e.g., Kuncel, Hezlett & Ones, 2001; Schmidt & Hunter, 1992; Viswesvaran & Ones, in press) and for the complex environment that expatriates operate in, we see cognitive ability and technical skills as crucial determinants of overseas job performance."
[p.428/429]
I started reading a thesis on predictors concerning German expatriate, so I will get into this in a little more detail later. And while I trust in these personality-based predictors, I still wonder about the Wechselwirkungen with training..... thus: which influence does training have on personality and hence behavior in the foreign culture?
back to the table of content
back to definition "expatriate"
further to expatriate training