The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at The current issue and full text archive

ive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister www.emeraldinsight.com/0025-1747.htm

An exploratory
Cross-cultural conflict and study
expatriate manager adjustment
An exploratory study
837
Avan Jassawalla, Ciara Truglia and Jennifer Garvey
Jones School of Business, State University of New York at Geneseo,
Geneseo, New York, USA
Keywords Expatriates, Cross cultural studies, Managers, National cultures
Abstract A key reason for the return of expatriates before the official end of their foreign
assignment is the uncertainty and frustration resulting from poor cross-cultural adaptation. The
literature provides this general, normative view without much to say about the interpersonal
conflict expatriates experience in the workplace abroad caused by cultural differences. Our
exploratory study finds that conflicts with co-workers in host countries occur frequently causing
high stress and discomfort, and provides three specific sources of conflict as recounted by sample
managers. The implications of our findings include: selecting expatriate managers with high
emotional intelligence, providing extensive pre-departure cultural training that consists not only of
cultural facts but also interpersonal skills such as active listening, conflict management, and ethical
reasoning, utilizing sensitivity training techniques to better prepare managers for new situations,
and sending the expatriate on one or two pre-sojourn visits to familiarize themselves with the host
culture and workplace norms even before the actual expatriate assignment begins. An additional
implication is training the host-country workers, particularly those who will work most closely with
the expatriate manager, on home country cultural beliefs and workplace norms. We aim to
stimulate managerial thinking and further research on the workplace conflicts that challenge
expatriates managers.

When expatriate managers return before the official completion of their overseas
assignments, the stress and low job-satisfaction resulting from culture shock is often
blamed (Newman et al., 1978). Many who stay until completion also reportedly struggle
with cross-cultural adaptation and operate at decreased capacity (Cavusgil et al., 1992).
This results in lowered return on investment for the firm, and lowered self-esteem and
slower career development for the expatriate (Yavas and Bodur, 1999). Why does this
happen? From what is currently written, one of the principal causes seems to be the
inability of expatriate managers to deal with cross-cultural adaptation – a broad term
that includes issues related to differences in culture and language, living conditions,
uprooting spouses and families, and working harmoniously with co-workers with
different cultural backgrounds (Yavas and Bodur, 1999).
Our recent study of expatriates suggests that while a host of cross-cultural issues
are important, none is more important than issues of interpersonal conflict arising from
cultural differences. The general notions in the literature about the impact of
cross-cultural adaptation fail to reflect this reality. For those interested in the specifics
Management Decision
This paper is based on research supported by the Center for International Business (CIB), Jones Vol. 42 No. 7, 2004
School of Business, State University of New York at Geneseo. The authors wish to thank CIB for pp. 837-849
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
their support and the anonymous reviewers of Management Decision for their constructive 0025-1747
feedback. DOI 10.1108/00251740410550916
MD of managing or preventing conflict situations during their foreign assignments, the
42,7 literature offers little in the way of actionable insights.
In this paper, we take the initiating steps towards understanding interpersonal
conflict as the key component of cross-cultural adaptation. Based on an exploratory
study of 13 overseas assignments described by eight expatriates, we discuss how
interpersonal conflict in the workplace is inherent to cross-cultural experiences of
838 expatriates, identify some of its causes, and show what firms do and fail to do. Our
small sample size, consistent with our exploratory intent, generates learning aimed at
stimulating thinking and identifying useful avenues for new research and not
generalizable findings.

Current thinking about cross-cultural adjustment

Current thinking about expatriate-related cross-cultural adjustment is normative, and
has much to say about what expatriates and firms must do. For instance, scholars
agree that expatriates must:
.
reach a cognitive and emotional comfort level with the values, attitudes and
behavioral practices considered the norm in the host culture (Caligiuri, 2000;
Tung, 1987); and
.
integrate the cultural assumptions of the host-country and adapt to the
differences that exist in the physical, psychological, and communication
environments (Wright et al., 1996).
Scholars recognize that:
.
distinguishing between more and less acceptable behaviors, language, and
expressions can cause stress, and require unlearning of their existing and
learning of new response strategies appropriate to the host cultures (Sanchez
et al., 2000); and
.
the inability to learn new behaviors and respond appropriately during
interpersonal interactions, scholars caution, raise the likelihood that expatriates
will reject the host culture, develop a divisive, “us versus them” mindset, and
return early (Sanchez et al., 2000).
The literature has identified some of the important personal characteristics of expatriate
managers associated with successful cross-cultural adaptation including openness and
sociability (Caligiuri, 2000), and tolerance for ambiguity (Yavas and Bodur, 1999).
However, much of the blame for poorly performing expatriates is placed on the firms.
The notable difference in the planning horizons and the more extensive training firms
provide to their expatriates are identified as the chief reason for Japanese and European
expatriates to succeed more with cross-cultural adaptation than their American
counterparts (Tung, 1987). Moreover, scholars blame firms for (Sanchez et al., 2000):
.
selecting managers for their technical skills and experience while ignoring issues
of personality; and
.
poor pre-departure training that is often focused more on cultural facts and
figures and less on the nuances of interacting with others.
There is a clear tradition of research on conflict management across cultures that
examines how people from different countries express and manage conflict in the
workplace. For instance, scholars have compared and contrasted organizational An exploratory
conflict as it occurs in Middle-Eastern countries and in Turkey versus the US
(Elsayed-Ekhouly and Buda, 1996; Kozan, 1997). Differences in cultural artifacts, such
study
as language, religion, geographical location as well as in cultural beliefs and values, are
identified as some of the key causes for the differences in conflict management styles.
The norm-heavy writings about differences across cultures and in the styles of conflict
management, however, fail to speak to the practical realities of expatriates in our study 839
who, in a general way, know the merits of openness and of understanding and
adapting to other cultures, but are nevertheless hampered by interpersonal conflict
situations arising from cross-cultural differences. Moreover, the state-of-the-art
precludes drawing of literature-derived hypotheses that can yield practical and
generalizable insights, and implicates an exploratory study. Our research therefore,
focuses on exploring key cross-cultural conflict issues of expatriates to identify and
generate interesting ideas that deserve additional academic scrutiny.

Research methodology
Through in-depth interviewing, we studied 13 overseas assignments experienced by
eight former expatriates from nine firms (i.e. one expatriate recalled two experiences
with two separate firms, and several recalled more than one experience in the same
firm). The participants had served in Brazil, Canada, Germany, Hong Kong, Japan,
Switzerland, UK, and Venezuela. Seven participants (five males and two females) were
US citizens, who had spent one or more years on foreign assignments for American
firms. One participant was a current expatriate from the UK, and assigned to his
British firm’s New York City branch for the past 1 year. Participants represented
high-technology manufacturing, consulting, banking, and software development firms.
This reflects a convenience sample based on multinational companies and expatriate
managers who were available and willing to be interviewed in person.
We asked several open-ended, literature derived questions to each participant
during our depth-interviews:
(1) What was the nature of each expatriate assignment you experienced?
(2) What were the key challenges you faced during each overseas assignment?
(3) What were the cultural differences you found most challenging?
(4) Which personal strengths did you find most helpful during your overseas
assignment?
(5) What types of training (and other types of support) did you receive from your
firm?
(6) What are your recommendations for future preparation of expatriate managers?
While these questions were asked to each participant, and in the same order, the
interviews were strongly shaped by the probing questions we posed to seek further
details and actual examples. We also practiced active listening aimed at motivating
each interviewee to provide more descriptions and explanations. As active listeners,
we suspended judgment, listened attentively, used eye-contact, and paraphrased each
interviewee’s responses to indicate our understanding and to provide opportunities for
clarification or additional information.
MD Each interview lasting about 45 min was tape recorded and transcribed. The
content analysis of interview transcripts, based on guidelines provided by Bogdan and
42,7 Biklen (1982) and Miles and Huberman (1994), was highly iterative. We initially coded
the transcripts and identified broad commonalities and differences. Then we identified
the emerging themes and patterns in the data and reinforced them with actual
instances from the transcripts (i.e. using managerial responses). To ensure inter-coder
840 reliability, we separately analyzed the transcripts, compared and contrasted the
findings from each interview, independently derived themes and patterns, and
collectively reconciled these as presented next.

Learning
When we asked managers about the most challenging aspect of their experiences while
on foreign assignments, all recount the difficulty with interpersonal conflict situations
they encountered in the workplace as a result of cross-cultural issues. While we
expected and anticipated discussion of problems associated with adjusting to new
living conditions, managing spouses and family in new environs, and living with new
cultural norms and mores, we found issues of cross-cultural conflict focal in
their consciousness. Moreover, despite the literature’s strong advocacy for training, its
actual incidence in practice was dramatically low. To fully explicate the
cross-culturally rooted interpersonal conflict experiences of expatriates, we next
focus on the chief causes of conflict, how managers coped, and what their firms did or
did not do.

Why interpersonal conflict occurred

We can cluster the multiple causes expatriates attribute to their experience with
interpersonal conflict into three broad categories, each referring to culture-related
differences in perceptions, norms, and practices. We highlight these clusters next.
Differing perceptions of time, urgency, and implementation. The difference in work
ethic is strongly recounted as a cause of interpersonal stress and conflict. Our sampled
expatriate managers describe several specific instances from their own work
experiences overseas as examples of cultural differences related to time, urgency and
implementation. For instance, they note, American managers are:
(1) accustomed to working toward project deadlines, without much regard to the
hours they devote; and
(2) willing to start early and work well into the night to complete projects, and
expect others to do the same.
In contrast, working overtime during “unsociable hours” (as one sampled manager
describes) is frowned upon in many European countries. While this statement based on
narrow personal experience can represent an overt generalization, it is validated by
other voices as well. For instance, both American managers expatriated to the UK, and
UK managers assigned to the New York City office recount this issue as a cause for
conflict. A manager returning from South America notes that his co-workers
emphasized the importance of spending more time on social and family life than on
work. The British manager in the New York City, describes the attitude of workers
in the US as “very ambitious and driven” – contrasting sharply with what he is
accustomed to in the UK.
 Conflicts also arise because of the cultural differences related to the sense of urgency An exploratory
around producing results. American managers assigned to the UK and Germany study
express frustration over the length of time taken for new ideas to gain acceptance, and
for new policies to take effect in corporate Europe. One manager describes this as the
constant insistence on testing each idea already proven to be effective in the US
environment – that among other things – inordinately delays implementation.
Another expatriate reports her frustration with long-drawn decision-making processes 841
in Europe. Describing how her co-workers spent longer time during the discussion
phase to ensure that the final decision would be accepted and implemented by all
concerned, the expatriate manager notes:
The decision they (co-workers in the host-country) typically make is very, very similar to
what you would make, but the way you get there is very different. In the UK they see the
glass as half empty. So, you’re sitting there and thinking: “don’t you think we can do
anything? Maybe there’s a possibility we can do this or that?” On the flip side, they would say
that Americans are too . . . happy. We don’t think about anything, we just go off and do it –
which, in some ways, is really how we do a lot of things. We just go do it and then figure
(things) out on the way. If it’s not quite working, we fix it and (it’s) sort of – ready, fire, aim
sort of approach. Eventually, you’ll end up in the same place but the path or how you’re
getting there is gonna be different and you can become very frustrated.
The insistence on “testing” ideas introduced by expatriates emerges as an
often-experienced passive-aggressive resistance from host-country managers.
Conflicts and frustrations appear to also arise from the differences in attitudes
toward taking action. Our sample uniformly suggests that expatriates display a
greater bias for action than local managers – at least when they find themselves in
foreign locations. A manager recounts his frustrations with the extensive amount of
time spent talking about alternatives versus the American norm of “just doing it”.
Negative stereotypes. Negative stereotypes held by co-workers against Americans
are cited as a cause of conflict experienced by nearly every American manager in our
sample. In South America, one sample manager explained that expatriate Americans
are viewed as “gringos (who) come in and stay for two to three years, fill their pockets,
and leave”. American expatriates recount problems associated with the feeling
prevalent among employees in host countries who view them as exploiters of the local,
underdeveloped economy, without a similar interest in investing in the local
community. One manager recalls the hostility she faced because she was perceived as
“spying for corporate headquarters”. This caused conflict in the initial stages of her
overseas assignment because co-workers jumped to the conclusion that she would be
insensitive to the needs of their division.
Ethnocentricity also seem to cause cross-cultural conflict. For instance, American
managers in Europe report facing the resentment of local staff, who felt belittled by
the prospects of taking orders from an “outsider”. One participant, recounting his
problems arising from the attitudes of his South American counterparts who opposed
centralization of decisions by the American headquarters, and were insistent on
designing their own unique procedures, reports:
The hardest thing for me was the local mindset of: “we are different from everybody else,
we’ve got to do things differently”. For the sake of efficiency, you want to execute the
manufacture and sale of (your) product worldwide in a relatively uniform way. I wouldn’t say
they (host-country co-workers) didn’t agree but they always wanted to test the proven success
MD that came from the US. The US policies were always suspect when they came overseas. (They
would say) “Just because it’s worked in the US doesn’t mean it’s going to work here”. And
42,7 I suppose there’s some truth in that, but it became almost a knee-jerk reaction. So, that was
challenging.
The cynicism about American greed and arrogance that expatriates encountered
appears closely linked to the strongly negative attitudes toward US foreign policy that
842 exist in other parts of the world. One expatriate in our sample with experience working
in Asia explained that anti-American sentiments bubbled just below the surface. Any
political incident led to angry expressions and arguments from his co-workers. After a
US bombing of the Chinese embassy, this expatriate manager located in Hong Kong
found himself in a heated office debate that led to extended tensions with his
colleagues.
Another negative stereotype commonly held is that Americans are overly pushy
and opinionated. Host nationals, our sample reports, hold this negative view because in
their own countries, ostensibly, greater emphasis is placed on listening, discussion, and
consensus building. Many expatriate managers faced conflict early in their
assignments because this negative stereotype pre-existed, and hurt their attempts to
gain credibility for their ideas. Some sample managers shed light on the basis for the
stereotypes. One expatriate explained that this often occurs because “Americans go
overseas thinking they’re the best, they’re there to teach, to instruct, or to manage from
a position of superiority”. Another expatriate described how he had observed many US
expatriates “get together and bash the locals”.
Ethical dilemmas. Sampled managers note that conflicts arise not just because the
legal systems in less-developed countries differ from those in the US, but there are clear
differences in how laws are enforced. While bribing governmental officials, providing
cash incentives to buyers and sellers to obtain special treatment are illegal in most
countries, these laws are less rigorously enforced in some. Moreover, because legal
systems are complicated and often obscure in some countries – it is impossible for
American expatriates to ensure that all their actions are unquestionably legal. In other
words, when laws are too many and unclear, virtually any action taken by the
expatriate (and the host organization) can be defined as a transgression of some legal
boundary. This raises the unique specter of bribery to ensure that one is not
continually prosecuted or suffers the wrath of local governmental officials with high
nuisance value. Expatriates often face conflict because local customs and business
ethics abroad clash with those in the US. Bribing governmental officials, an accepted
custom in parts of Asia and Latin America, a manager recounts, caused his greatest
ethical dilemma. One sample manager who had worked in South America, describing
similar ethical dilemmas arising when American managers face subtle pressure to use
local, but substandard, suppliers or products and services, noted:
Another challenge, a big one for me, was different value systems. All things being equal, if
your product or service was as good as a local one or the local guy could do things you could
not do (you would use the local company). Competing on a level playing field is very difficult
and (the government insisted that) we would not want to do things that local companies
can do. Let’s say (these are) bribes or certain incentives or tax incentives by the government
to use local firms. (These were seen as) perfectly understandable, perfectly ethical. So, it was
a combination of outright bribes and corruption, and incentives that the government out
rightly offered local firms.
How managers coped An exploratory
Although conflict frequently occurred, expatriate managers report that they learned to study
cope and eventually win the cooperation and respect of colleagues in the host-country.
They relied on several personality traits, or acquired and internalized skills and
abilities to overcome conflict situations. Good listening skills, loyalty toward the firm,
open-mindedness, and going native (i.e. interacting and living with locals versus living
in “American Ghettos”), and developing a strong sense of humor, are recounted as 843
useful initiating steps. Two managers note that the time they and their spouses took to
learn the language of the host-country before going overseas represented a useful step.
Three other inherent or acquired abilities are also cited as useful.
First, for instance, managers recount the importance of flexibility, i.e. the inherent or
acquired ability to think on one’s feet, being able to shrug off disagreements as “these
things happen,” taking the initiative to talk to co-workers to better understand them,
willingness to learn and adapt on the job, patience with the new situation, and, as one
manager expressed, understanding that “your way isn’t the right way, it’s just one of
the ways to do things”. A sample manager, recommending flexibility and patience,
explains:
I am not a very patient person by nature but I became a patient person particularly in Asia,
where it can take Asians literally days to get around to the point. To plunge right into
business is considered impolite, rude, so you sit through countless hours of showing one
another’s pictures of families, talking about your background. On the whole, Asians truly
enjoy that (and) I think for them it creates a bond with an otherwise completely foreign
person – this person looks different, and this person talks different. And sharing one’s pride
in one’s family creates a bond. I think for them it sets the tone of what they like to . . . a phrase
they like to use is “mutual benefit”. It levels the playing field.
Second, a personality trait manager recounts as particularly useful an infectious sense
of optimism, i.e. their inherent or acquired ability to focus on the net benefits – i.e. the
trade-off between what they get, and what they give up – during their foreign
assignment – that allows them to deal with conflict situations. For instance, managers
note the opportunities for monetary incentives (housing and hardship allowances),
career advancement, and travel to new places tends to offset the negative aspects of
expatriation including interpersonal conflict. Third, managers recount their
well-developed sense of adventure and the enjoyment they derive from interacting
with new people. A manager explained how just plain smiling at his new co-workers –
regardless of the facial expressions he encountered – helped create a positive
experience.

What support firms did or did not provide

Six of the eight managers note that their firms provided no formal training for their
sojourns. One recounts his firm’s “sink or swim” policy that places the responsibility of
learning about the foreign culture squarely on the manager. One manager notes that
the firm provided two books to read on her own. Two describe their personal initiative
to learn the new lingua franca. One describes his personal initiative to contact his
foreign counterpart and discuss the details of his new assignment. One manager notes
that he received an overview of the foreign division upon his arrival in the
host-country. Two managers note that they were familiarized with the business
practices of the host-country via a 1-day training seminar prior to departure.
MD What the managers recommend
Managers make two types of recommendations – one aimed at the individual
42,7 expatriates and other aimed at the firms. Managers suggest that individual expatriate
managers should:
.
visit the foreign location with their spouses beforehand to gain realistic
perspectives on what to expect when they eventually go there to work; and
844 .
adopt an optimistic posture, expect the unexpected, listen, appreciate the
differences, and increase sensitivity and tolerance toward others.
Similarly, sampled managers recommend that multinational firms should:
.
select people carefully, based on their personalities and their ability to adapt to
foreign cultures, in addition to their technical problem-solving skills and
knowledge;
.
make clear what is expected of the expatriate manager; and
.
provide a domestic mentor, who serves as the chief liaison and a proponent
during the employee’s absence.

Implications
While our learning concurs with the literature that has stressed: selection based on
personality traits, pre-departure training, a focus on adjusting to new housing (and
other) arrangements for family, and developing new interpersonal relationships in the
host environment, expatriate voices provide new perspectives into areas that deserve
additional academic scrutiny. Because they find themselves unprepared and often
overwhelmed by conflict situations, sample managers stress the importance of
preparedness. Their voices point to the naivety of selecting expatriates based only on
technical skills and a track record of success in the home environment, and expecting a
replication of their performance in foreign locations.
In terms of value added implications from our study, there are four issues we can
derive from the integration of our learning with current thinking in the literature. Two
caveats are important, however, at this juncture. First, because they emerge mostly
from the voices of American expatriate experiences in foreign locations, our
implications are more likely to speak to American businesses with operations overseas
than to others. Second, because they emerge from an exploratory study, our
discussions are not presented as generalizable implications but as issues that deserve
the attention of managers and scholars.
Selecting expatriates
Concurring with the literature, we learn that expatriates’ personality matters.
Flexibility, optimism, enthusiasm and humility seem to help expatriates adjust and
manage interpersonal conflict. This learning concurs strongly with current views of
expatriate selection which conclude that:
.
majority of firms use technical competence as the sole selection criterion but
technical skills are insufficient in helping expatriates with adjustment issues
(Sanchez et al., 2000);
. managing cross-cultural conflicts relies more on personality traits (Caligiuri,
2000); and
 .
selection and training combined can help expatriate managers with An exploratory
cross-cultural adaptation (Odenwald, 1993). study
Similarly, our learning also concurs with writings that show the importance of
openness and sociability (Caligiuri, 2000), patience and tolerance for ambiguity (Yavas
and Bodur, 1999), self-confidence and willingness to change (Forster, 2000) as
personality traits of successful expatriates.
What the literature has yet to adequately discuss are practical issues of actual 845
expatriate selection, i.e. the literature has failed to significantly address the practical
question focal in the minds of HR managers: how should potentially successful
expatriates be identified? In this regard, we find clear advantages in integrating the
thinking that has occurred in the area of emotional intelligence (EI) with our learning
about better selection of expatriates (Goleman, 1998). For instance, Goleman contends
that while IQ has long been used as a measure of a manager’s competence, EI is equally
good if not a more important indicator (Dulewicz and Higgs, 1999). Moreover, the
potential advantages of integrating this stream of thinking are clear from the evidence
that shows enhanced performance of salespeople (Sojka and Deeter-Schmeiz, 2002),
accountants (Kirch et al., 2001), and leaders (Cooper, 1997; Goleman, 2000; Sosik and
Megerian, 1999) upon the application of EI concepts.
Table I shows the links we derive between Goleman’s EI dimensions and the personal
traits and abilities of expatriates we identify from our study as those that relate to
effectively managing interpersonal conflict in cross-cultural situations. For instance,
applying the notion of EI to our context suggests that expatriate selection should be
based on: self-awareness; i.e. the ability to recognize one’s own emotions, moods, and
reactions; self-regulation, i.e. one’s intuitive ability to control or express emotions,
suspend judgment, and deal with ambiguity; self-motivation, i.e. one’s resilience and

Components of EI Skills and abilities that increase cross-cultural adaptation

Self awareness Knowledge of differences between home and host cultures, realization
of the impact of cultural values on performance, admitting initial
difficulties in adjusting to new cultural norms and seeking help
Self regulation Being open to new perspectives, managing uncertainties with self
learning and improvement, resisting the urge to impose own values on
host culture, understanding the link between host culture and
cross-cultural conflicts, being flexible and patient when uncomfortable
situations arise
Self motivation Maintaining optimism in the face of new challenges, effectively
handling stress, seeking new ways of achieving assignment goals,
consciously balancing advantages of overseas assignments against
challenges and stressors
Empathy Listening skills, sensitivity to differences, asking questions and
seeking to understand before reacting, willingness to change so as to
show respect for others, openly sharing information that provides
others with more understanding, respecting opposing view points
Social skill Being outgoing, smiling and friendly, building friendships, seeking Table I.
common ground despite cross-cultural differences, being open-minded EI components and
and engaging in discussion rather than passing judgment, socializing selection criteria for
and communicating informally to build rapport and future cooperation expatriate managers
MD ability to persevere despite obstacles; empathy, i.e. one’s ability to place oneself in
42,7 another’s shoes and understand differences in values and perspectives; and social skill,
i.e. one’s ability to build relationships by seeking commonalities and friendships
regardless of differences.
How can the EI of potential expatriates be assessed in practice? For drawing
inferences about the EI quotient of potential expatriates, there are clear advantages in
846 conducting face-to-face interviews and posing situational and behavioral questions
over paper-pencil tests (Goleman, 1998). In such interviews, questions are posed in the
form of hypothetical situations that expatriates are known to face, and candidates are
asked to imagine themselves in such situations and describe the actions they are most
likely to take (Latham et al., 1980). Behavioral questions are also used to inquire into
actions candidate have taken in the past. The premise of behavioral interviews is
simply stated: past actions are good predictors of future performance ( Janz et al., 1986).
Other avenues that Goleman (1998) recommends for evaluating the EI quotient of
potential candidates include surveys of previous and current co-workers and
supervisors. In sum, therefore, while scholars have studied expatriate selection
and many have advocated selection based on personality traits, our findings implicate
two specific areas for future research:
(1) actual selection methods used by multinationals to assess personality traits and
interpersonal skills; and
(2) link between expatriates’ EI and success in handling workplace conflicts
overseas.

Training expatriates
Our study identifies several new areas for training the better prepared expatriate.
Current thinking advocates two types of training:
(1) language training for improved communication in the host environment
(Andreason, 2003); and
(2) cultural training for intelligent responsiveness in different psychosocial and
cultural milieus (Tung, 1982; Yavas and Bodur, 1999). Descriptions of best
practices in expatriate training are also reported in the literature (Tung, 1987).
There are, however, two issues relevant to real-world expatriate experiences that
remain unaddressed. First, expatriate training in any meaningful form seems largely
absent in practice, resonating with the writings of Forster (2000) and Leiba-O’Sullivan
(1999). We find that pre-departure training, when it occurs, is often limited to provision
of materials to familiarize managers with facts about the host-country and the key
aspects of their overseas assignment. Second, while we can see how pre-departure
training in language and culture can be useful to expatriate managers, such training
seems inadequate for managing some of the key challenges of their day-to-day reality;
i.e. unexpected situations that require extensive renegotiation, ethical dilemmas that
defy solutions, and the loss of composure and temper that can severely impede
effectiveness. Provision of facts and figures, and language training, however, does not
make a training program. Our study implicates pre-departure training in skills such as
active listening, ethical reasoning, and conflict management. Additional research and
new thinking about training is clearly needed for developing well-prepared expatriates.
 In this regard, the use of sensitivity training to help expatriates suspend judgment, An exploratory
listen, reason, and win hearts and minds in foreign locations is clearly implicated. Our study
sample suggests that they need to learn:
.
new and effective ways of building relationships and trust with people in foreign
locations; and
.
informed perspectives into how host nationals define and interpret situations, and
why they behave the way they do in light of their culture-bound interpretations. 847
While scholars have referred to the importance of such sensitivity training (Cavusgil
et al., 1992; Dowling et al., 1999), and computer-assisted learning modules seem
available (Cushner and Landis, 1996), practice has trailed the thinking in the literature
by a wide margin. We urge future research on:
.
types and methods of pre-departure training that firms actually provide their
expatriate managers; and
.
contrasting those expatriates who receive interpersonal skills training versus
those who do not in terms of their cross-cultural adjustment.

Training host-country nationals

At least a notable cause of conflict that expatriates experience in host environments
seem associated with negative stereotypes of American managers held by
host-nationals. It is curious to find the literature largely placing the burden of
learning and adaptation on the expatriate; i.e. “when in Rome, do as do the Romans”.
Our study highlights not just the importance of training expatriates for effectively
engaging unexpected and other situations in the host environment, but also the
importance of training key host nationals for interacting and collaborating with
visiting expatriates. There is some support for this line of thinking in the literature
(Odenwald, 1993). For instance, Vance and Pederon (1993) define such training as an
ethical imperative for global firms because training key host nationals can help lower
stress and increase the expatriate’s effectiveness. Such training is known to help reduce
discriminatory treatment that expatriates often face, and which can lead them to reject
the host culture (Sanchez et al., 2000). Additional research is needed in firms that do
provide training to key host nationals on the nature of such training as well as its
impact on expatriate managers’ cross-cultural adaptation and success.

Pre-sojourn visits
Managers we interviewed report great benefits and learning when the company
sponsored a visit for the expatriate and his/her spouse to the host-country months
before the start of the overseas assignment. Such a visit provided them the opportunity
to become intensely aware of:
.
The nature and extent of culture shock that can occur, and the nature and extent
to which one’s familiar vocabularies, expressions, and modes of conduct fail to
produce desired responses from host nationals; and
.
Reinforce the commitment to intensify/accelerate language training.
Pre-departure visits, we learn, serve as trial runs that help managers get a
second chance at making first impressions (Forster, 2000; Yavas and
MD Bodur, 1999). Additional research is needed to gain an understanding of the cost
42,7 and benefits of such pre-sojourn visits over the long-term.

Conclusion
Cross-cultural adaptation is the biggest challenge that derails expatriate success. Our
848 study sheds light on one key area of adaptation and provides multiple guidelines for
human resource managers and senior executives hoping to ensure expatriate success.
Managerial voices seem to urge firms to:
.
focus on helping expatriates understand and manage conflict situations arising
from cross-cultural differences;
.
use emotional intelligence assessment as a vital part of selection;
.
enhance training content and methods to prepare participants for the day-to-day
reality of interacting with host nationals;
.
train key host nationals for collaborating with expatriates; and
.
create opportunities for lower-stress, familiarizing pre-sojourn visits.
Additional exploratory research that can access a wider array of experiences and
voices promise to shed light on these important components of managing vital human
resources in foreign locations.

References
Andreason, A.W. (2003), “Direct and indirect forms of in-country support for expatriates and
their families as a means of reducing premature returns and improving job performance”,
International Journal of Management, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 548-52.
Bogdan, R.C. and Biklen, S.K. (1982), Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to
Theory and Methods, Allyn and Bacon, Boston, MA.
Caligiuri, P.M. (2000), “Selecting expatriates for personality characteristics: a moderating effect
of personality on the relationship between host national contact and cross-cultural
adjustment”, Management International Review, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 61-80.
Cavusgil, T., Yavas, U. and Bykowicz, S. (1992), “Preparing executives for overseas
assignments”, Management Decision, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 54-8.
Cooper, R.K. (1997), “Applying emotional intelligence in the workplace”, Training and
Development, Vol. 51 No. 12, pp. 31-8.
Cushner, K. and Landis, D. (1996), “The intercultural sensitizer”, in Landis, D. and Bhagat, R.S.
(Eds), Handbook of Intercultural Training, 2nd ed., Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks,
CA, pp. 185-201.
Dowling, P.J., Welch, D.W. and Schuler, R.S. (1999), International Human Resource Management,
3rd ed., International Thompson Publishing, Cincinnati, OH.
Dulewicz, V. and Higgs, M. (1999), “Can emotional intelligence be measured and developed?”,
Leadership and Organization Development Journal, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 242-61.
Elsayed-Ekhouly, S.M. and Buda, R. (1996), “Organizational conflict: a comparative analysis of
conflict styles across cultures”, International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 7 No. 1,
pp. 71-81.
Forster, N. (2000), “The myth of the international manager”, International Journal of Human
Resource Management, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 126-42.
Goleman, D. (1998), “What makes a leader?”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 77 No. 3, pp. 93-102. An exploratory
Goleman, D. (2000), “Leadership that gets results”, Harvard Business Review, pp. 78-90. study
Janz, T., Hellervik, L. and Gilmore, D.C. (1986), Behavioral Description Interviewing, Allyn and
Bacon, Boston, MA.
Kirch, D.P., Tucker, M.L. and Kirch, C.E. (2001), “The benefits of EI in accounting firms”, The
CPA Journal, Vol. 71 No. 8, pp. 60-1.
Kozan, M.K. (1997), “Culture and conflict management: a theoretical framework”, International 849
Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 338-60.
Leiba-O’Sullivan, S. (1999), “The distinction between stable and dynamic cross-cultural
competencies: implications for expatriate trainability”, Journal of International Business
Studies, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 709-25.
Latham, G.P., Saari, L.M., Pursell, E.D. and Campion, M.A. (1980), “The situational interview”,
Journal of Applied Psychology, pp. 424-7.
Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M. (1994), Qualitative Data Analysis, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.
Newman, J., Bhatt, B. and Gutteridge, T. (1978), “Determinants of expatriate effectiveness: a
theoretical and empirical vacuum”, The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 3 No. 3,
pp. 655-69.
Odenwald, S. (1993), “A guide for global training”, Training and Development, Vol. 47 No. 7,
pp. 22-30.
Sanchez, J.I., Spector, P.E. and Cooper, C.L. (2000), “Adapting to a boundaryless world: a
developmental expatriate model”, The Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 14 No. 2,
pp. 96-106.
Sojka, J.Z. and Deeter-Schmeiz, D.R. (2002), “Enhancing ei of salespeople”, Mid-America Journal
of Business, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 43-50.
Sosik, J.J. and Megerian, L.E. (1999), “Understanding leader emotional intelligence and
performance: the role of self-other agreement on transformational leaders help
perceptions”, Group and Organization Management, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 367-90.
Tung, R.L. (1982), “Selection and training procedures of US, European, and Japanese
multinationals”, California Management Review, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 57-71.
Tung, R.L. (1987), “Expatriate assignments: enhancing success and minimizing failure”, The
Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 117-26.
Vance, C.M. and Pederon, E.S. (1993), “An ethical argument for host country workforce training
and development in the expatriate management assignment”, Journal of Business Ethics,
Vol. 12 No. 8, pp. 635-43.
Wright, P.C., Geroy, G.D. and Baker, N. (1996), “Managing expatriates: a systems approach”,
Management Decision, Vol. 34 No. 10, pp. 32-42.
Yavas, U. and Bodur, M. (1999), “Correlates of adjustment: a study of expatriate managers in an
emerging country”, Management Decision, Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 267-78.