姝 Academy of Management Learning and Education, 2004, Vol. 3, No. 1, 100 –115.

........................................................................................................................................................................

The Elusive Cultural

Chameleon: Cultural
Intelligence as a New
Approach to Intercultural
Training for the Global
Manager
P. CHRISTOPHER EARLEY
RANDALL S. PETERSON
London Business School

The global economy and shifting political tides make the need for intercultural
understanding and education obvious. Where historically the focus of intercultural
training has been on preparing an individual to work in a new culture, today’s
organizations routinely ask managers to work in multinational environments and move
from country to country. This challenge has created a strong debate about how to prepare
managers for such challenging assignments. How ought people be assessed to
understand their readiness for such assignments? Do high intelligence quotient (IQ)
people adjust better than others to new cultural challenges? The topic of cultural
adjustment and its assessment remains compelling but incomplete. Our focus here is the
development and exploration of the concept of cultural intelligence, or, CQ (Earley, 2003;
Earley & Ang, 2003), along with its implications for training and education for global
work assignments. Our approach suggests that training for the global manager should
include metacognitive, motivational, and behavioral components. The CQ approach
represents a significant break from conventional wisdom of focusing on cultural values
for intercultural education.
........................................................................................................................................................................

International and intercultural work has become Snell, Canney-Davison, & Hambrick, 1996). To
the norm for most large companies (Adler, 1997; make matters even more challenging, managers
Dowling, Welch, & Schuler, 1999; Schneider & are spending shorter periods in any single coun-
Barsoux, 1997). Intercultural differences have try, and they often are moved from one location
long been a challenge confronting multinational to another, making country-specific knowledge
organizations (Hofstede, 1991), a challenge that less relevant. Because their managers must often
has been exacerbated by the increasing preva- operate across borders in teams of internation-
lence of teams made up of individuals from ally diverse units, many large organizations ex-
many nations (Earley & Gibson, 2002; Snow, press the need for managers who quickly adjust
to multiple cultures and work well in multina-
The core concepts underlying this paper are presented in the tional teams. This makes the challenge of cul-
first author’s collaborative work with Profs. Ang Soon, Joo-Seng tural training increasingly difficult because con-
Tan, Roy Chua, Chay-Hoon Lee and Klaus Templer as well as ventional methods that rely on country-specific
the Nanyang Business School Cultural Intelligence Working
Group. A reader interested in more detail concerning intercul-
knowledge often prove inadequate—methods
tural training and assessment using a cultural intelligence that orient managers to dyadic interactions in
perspective is referred to Earley and Ang (2003). new countries fail to prepare them for the com-
100
2004 Earley and Peterson 101

plexity encountered in multinational teams and as a concept and framework for studying cultural
work settings. adaptation. We then describe and discuss its ap-
By far the most common (and traditional) ap- plication generally and to multinational teams. Fi-
proach to breaching cultural and national differ- nally, we discuss the future of CQ and how the
ences is through teaching country-specific knowl- construct can be used to improve intercultural in-
edge and exposing trainees to different cultural teractions in a work context.
values stemming from work by numerous anthro-
pologists and cross-cultural psychologists (Bhawuk,
A BRIEF REVIEW OF EXISTING APPROACHES TO
1998; Bhawuk & Brislin, 1992; Brislin, Landis, &
INTERCULTURAL TRAINING
Brandt, 1983; Hall & Hall, 1990; Hofstede, 1991;
Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck, 1961; Mead, 1934; Parsons Many scholars have discussed appropriate inter-
& Shils, 1951). An emphasis on values orientation ventions and assessment methods for intercultural
and understanding others through their related be- training (Bhawuk & Brislin, 1992; Bochner, 1982;
liefs and practices underlies much of current work Brislin et al., 1983; Brislin & Yoshida, 1994; Harris &
on intercultural training and management educa- Moran, 1991; Mendenhall et al., 1987; Lee & Tem-
tion. Intercultural training has become nearly syn- pler, 2003; Triandis, 1975; Triandis & Berry, 1980).
onymous with understanding cultural values mod- We do not profess to provide an exhaustive review
els by such authors as Hofstede, Hampden-Turner, of the literature here, rather, we highlight key fea-
and Tompenaars, Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck, and tures of the literatures in cultural assessment and
Triandis. However, there is a fundamental problem program design so that we can contrast existing
with a cultural values awareness approach—an approaches with our own CQ approach.
awareness of cultural values is not a substitute for
more direct knowledge of interpersonal interac-
Assessment
tions, just as values alone are not a strongly pre-
dictive feature of human behavior (Ajzen & Fish- A growing consensus in the field of intercultural
bein, 1980; Triandis, 1972). Although the literature training is that appropriate pedagogy for any pro-
on culture and management over the past 3 de- gram must begin with a thorough and suitable
cades has focused almost exclusively on the link assessment of managers’ strengths and weak-
between cultural values and individual action, nesses. Methods for individual assessment range
this link is not particularly strong or clean (Trian- from simple paper-and-pencil inventories, to elab-
dis, 1972). orate role-play exercises, to behavioral assess-
To address these limitations in the face of new ment centers. Lee and Templer (2003) specifically
global challenges and supplement the strengths in provide a thorough review of various intercultural
current approaches, we introduce and discuss a assessment procedures, and we draw from their
new conceptual framework for intercultural train- work in this section.
ing that uniquely identifies the specific capabili- Paper-and-pencil assessments are the most
ties of an individual based on a faceted model of widely used for their relative ease in admini-
cultural adaptation called the Cultural Intelli- stration. Snyder (1974), for example, developed a
gence or CQ approach (Earley, 2003; Earley & Ang, self-report measure of individual differences in
2003). Our argument is that this approach provides self-monitoring of expressive behavior and self-
a significant improvement on existing approaches presentation. Self-monitoring was defined as
for several reasons: (a) it is uniquely tailored to the self-observation and self-control guided by situa-
strengths and deficits of an individual, (b) it pro- tional cues to social appropriateness. Kealey (1989)
vides an integrated approach to training dealing found this Self-Monitoring Scale (SMS) to be pre-
with knowledge and learning, motivational, and dictive for overseas success. Dodd (1998) lists a few
behavioral features, and (c) it is built upon a uni- short self-report assessments applied to intercul-
fying psychological model of cultural adaptation tural communication including Cardot’s Self-
rather than the piecemeal and country-specific ap- Confidence Scale. This 10-item scale attempts to
proach to training typically employed. assess whether the individuals hold a positive at-
Our focus here is the development and explora- titude toward themselves, for example, if they feel
tion of the concept of CQ along with its implica- they have a number of good qualities and are
tions for global management. We begin by review- satisfied with them, or whether they feel like fail-
ing briefly existing assessment methods and ures and useless at times. These methods take
intercultural training programs that are used in existing individual differences assessments as a
most organizations with a critique of their effec- basis for predicting potential for cultural adjust-
tiveness. Next, we introduce cultural intelligence ment and interaction.
102 Academy of Management Learning and Education March

An alternative approach assesses variables we discuss later. Likewise, it is not readily gener-
more directly tied to culture. For example, Redden alizable to global managers making more than one
(1975 as cited in Kealey & Rubin, 1983) developed cultural encounter. Tung (1981) has suggested that
the Culture Shock Inventory. This self-report mea- purely informational briefings on the host country
sure attempts to predict difficulties in dealing with are not sufficient to increase an individual’s inter-
culture shock by assessing people on a variety of personal and professional effectiveness overseas.
characteristics such as, (a) degree of direct experi- As Edward de Bono asserted, “Unless you know
ence with people from other countries (including everything, what you need is thinking” (as cited in
foreign language skills), (b) individuals’ openness Tan & Chua, 2003: 223). No matter how detailed the
to new ideas and beliefs, and (c) specific cultural country or cultural information, it is impractical
knowledge. A closely related instrument is the In- and untenable to expect a manager to acquire
tercultural Communication Inventory (ICI). This 25- everything about a culture prior to journeying to it.
item measure is used to assess knowledge and In attribution-based training, the emphasis is on
awareness among employees on areas such as differing interpretations of critical incidents in-
workforce diversity, culture shock, language and volving intercultural encounters. Culture assimila-
accent, body language and gestures, communica- tors are often used for this type of intervention in
tion distortions, cultural misunderstandings, cus- which participants are shown cultural scenarios
toms and traditions, and ethnocentrism (Lee & and asked to interpret the situation. Cultural as-
Templer, 2003). More recently, Spreitzer, McCall, similators have increasingly employed a critical-
and Mahoney (1997) developed a measurement tool incident approach to present examples of culture
named “Prospector” for early identification of in- clashes between individuals from different back-
ternational executive potential. Intercultural po- grounds (Cushner & Landis, 1996). A typical cul-
tential is assessed in Prospector using 14 empiri- tural assimilator exercise would have participants
cally derived scales including: (a) sensitivity to read a number of critical incidence cultural
cultural differences, (b) business knowledge, (c) clashes. For each critical incident, the participants
courage, (d) brings out the best in people, (e) integ- are asked to attribute and interpret the behavior of
rity, (f) insightful, (g) committed, (h) takes risks; as the actors in the conflict situations. The partici-
well as several learning-oriented dimensions in- pants are then presented with a number of alter-
cluding: (i) seeks feedback, (j) uses feedback, (k) native explanations and asked to select one that
culturally adventurous, (l) seeks learning opportu- best accounts for the conflict in the critical inci-
nities, (m) open to criticism, and (n) flexibility. dents. Cushner and Landis (1996) used the culture
assimilator method to develop a culture-general
assimilator. The culture-general assimilator pro-
Program Design
vides a way of encouraging the development of
Once managers are assessed and selected for global, multicultural perspectives for those who
training programs, the key question becomes what work with people from many cultures.
design optimizes their training and development. A variation on a traditional, country-based cul-
On the whole, most intercultural training pro- tural assimilator was presented by Bhawuk and
grams emphasize increasing a manager’s cultural Brislin (1992; Bhawuk, 1998, 2001). Rather than fo-
competence in dealing with others from different cusing on a particular target country, their empha-
cultural backgrounds through enhancing their cog- sis is on a target cultural value that can be shared
nitive awareness and knowledge of the proposed across countries. For example, Bhawuk’s (2001) in-
host culture. Brislin and Yoshida (1994), for exam- dividualism cultural assimilator draws from core
ple, specifically provide a comprehensive review culture theory (i.e., Triandis’, 1995 theory of individ-
of training methods in their evaluation of intercul- ualism-collectivism) to create critical incidents
tural training by identifying five approaches in that apply across countries, rather than emphasiz-
intercultural training: cognitive, attributional, ex- ing an observed (i.e., atheoretic) incident. Critical
periential, self-awareness, and behavioral. Cog- incidents are drawn from individualism-collectiv-
nitive training tends to focus on the transfer of ism theory and cover a wide range of social behav-
cultural knowledge or basic information—the iors based on the self, goal prioritization, and mo-
techniques include short lectures, films, videos, tivation factors.
reading materials, and case studies. These cogni- Cultural assimilators are generally useful be-
tive training methods are useful, but they do have cause they provide basic cultural scripts about
a number of drawbacks. First, cognitive training specific cultures covering a wide variety of social
focuses on specific knowledge acquisition and situations and culturally appropriate responses. If
does not address metacognitive competencies as an individual knows which culture he or she will
2004 Earley and Peterson 103

be visiting, culture-specific assimilators can be Finally, in behavior training, an emphasis is on

very effective at helping the individual gain inter- observable behavior—trainees practice displaying
cultural experiences of the targeted culture (Cush- behaviors appropriate for the target culture across
ner & Landis, 1996). Most culture assimilators various scenarios. This training also emphasizes
are limited, however, because they are culture- behavior regulation and monitoring of one’s own
specific. Even Bhawuk’s (2001) values assimilator actions including nonverbal displays such as body
has some significant drawbacks that are shared orientation, proxemics, and social distances. Be-
with other cultural assimilators. First, culture and havior training is demanding of its participants
values simulators can be costly to design and time and time consuming, so it is not typically used in
consuming for participants. More important, how- intercultural training programs. As we discuss
ever, is that it remains unclear how the knowledge shortly, however, behavior training is critical in
gained in cultural values-based assimilator train- delivering a coordinated approach to training cul-
ing might transfer to theoretically similar circum- turally intelligent individuals.
stances with dissimilar surface features within the
target culture, given the documented poor transfer
General Commentary on Existing Approaches
of learning associated with teaching by analogy
(Loewenstein, Thompson, & Gentner, 2003). That is, In the literature on intercultural training, that in-
what remains unclear is whether cultural assimi- formational and experiential training work best in
lators provide metacognitive benefits for partici- tandem is fairly well established (Tan & Chua,
pants any more than do their traditional country- 2003). Thus, most existing approaches to intercul-
based counterparts. Further, the focus on a tural training and education provide something of
particular cultural value in Bhawuk’s (2001) ap- a cafeteria style of education—that is, a bit of this
proach may inadvertently lead global managers to and a bit of that in the hope that something will be
overemphasize one aspect of culture over more useful. This approach is largely consistent with
significant one’s for a particular country. For ex- current thinking in education about the need to
ample, although Thailand may be characterized provide training using multiple methods to appeal
by a certain level of individualism, power distance to people with different learning styles (e.g., Kolb,
and hierarchy are more central to social behavior Boyatzis, & Mainemelis, 2001). However, we believe
(Klausner, 1993; Komin, 1991). this approach has created a number of interrelated
In experiential training, an emphasis is on ap- problems in dealing with the needs of the global
plied training and techniques including role- manager—mostly stemming from a lack of under-
plays, field visits, and simulations. Participants lying conceptual framework that links the particu-
are more affectively engaged as they participate in lars of the training intervention with the strengths
work samples of the actual target culture. For ex- and weaknesses of the individual trainee. Rather
ample, participants can be put in social situations than drawing a selection of training events from a
with representatives from other cultures in simu- seemingly exhaustive list of possibilities, the se-
lated social or work events. The downside of this lection of a training program for a manager should
kind of training, however, is that it is typically be based on an individual needs assessment and
emotionally demanding for both the participants informed by a theoretically sound framework.
and the trainers. The first and most important weakness in cur-
Self-awareness training involves raising the rent approaches is the imbedded assumption that
trainees’ awareness of their own culture, as well all individuals need a similar exposure and train-
as typical reactions that people from other cultures ing regime. For example, cultural assimilators pro-
have to them. These programs also focus on the vide a programmed set of scenarios for trainees
potential loss of self-esteem in these settings. Self- regardless of their prior knowledge of the target
awareness training helps participants become country or its cultural values. Experiential exer-
more aware of their own values, attitudes, and cises such as BaFa BaFa (Shirts, 1973) provide an
behaviors using methods that contrast their own active format for learning but ignore individual
and the target cultures. Trainers behave in sharp differences in cultural experience and knowledge.
contrast with the preferred behavior of the partic- Similarly, intercultural training programs gener-
ipant (e.g., a culture-contrast) and explain the rea- ally assume a similar level of anticipated interac-
sons for their actions and highlight the trainees’ tion in the target site. These programs ignore the
discomfort with the experience. As with a cultural unique requirements demanded of an individual
assimilator approach, these contrasts are country in terms of intensity, duration, and nature of inter-
or culture specific, and, therefore limited in their cultural interaction (Tan & Chua, 2003). That is,
generalizability. training programs need to consider the frequency
104 Academy of Management Learning and Education March

of contact (intensity), length of assignment (dura- Finally, current methods of intercultural training
tion), and type of contact (formal versus informal, rely heavily on analogical learning. These pro-
work versus nonwork) that will be demanded of the grams assume that the trainee can make the intel-
individual because these dimensions bear direct lectual connections between the various teaching
relevance to the type of training recommended. tools used (e.g., vignettes, role-plays, and facts)
Further, these characteristics must be mapped and the situations they will encounter in the new
onto the specific qualities of the participant in the culture. Recent research suggests, however, that
program. To do this requires a way of discerning most people have relatively limited capacity for
the existing strengths of each individual partici- transferring a concept from an example case to a
pant. novel situation unless there is a specific discus-
sion of the metacognitive strategies in the various
The first and most important weakness in teaching tools (Loewenstein et al., 2003). Effective
intercultural training needs to draw participants
current approaches is the imbedded into a discussion of the broader themes or concepts
assumption that all individuals need a behind the “correct” answers to learning activities,
similar exposure and training regime. or risk trainees’ ability to adapt appropriately be-
ing limited to the very narrow surface-level simi-
The second general weakness in most current larities of the simulation. Activities such as field
approaches is that intercultural training methods visits (e.g., 1–2 day trip to the target site) can pro-
tend to focus heavily on cognitive or knowledge- vide a better opportunity to generalize by involv-
based information and awareness of the target ing them at a self-chosen level of engagement, but
culture. The problem with this type of emphasis is these are very expensive and will not necessarily
that it does not provide the metacognitive skills deepen the learning without specific guidance and
needed to learn in new situations and cultures. If discussion. Such trips may even create mini “cul-
there is a direct transference of scenario to the new ture shocks” that disrupt further training. Lacking
intercultural situation (i.e., including the surface- an appropriate set-up and ongoing experience,
level similarities), these methods are useful. How- field visits can also create or perpetuate stereo-
ever, it is often the case that the knowledge ac- types of the target culture.
quired is not significantly broad to encompass the
likely complexity and uncertainty faced by a
trainee once in the new culture. Imagine the chal- Most people have relatively limited
lenge faced by a global manager who runs a mul- capacity for transferring a concept from
tinational team consisting of members from six an example case to a novel situation
countries. Team members possess a myriad of unless there is a specific discussion of
country-specific characteristics as well as cultural the metacognitive strategies in the
values. Training specific cognitive knowledge for
various teaching tools.
all six countries is impractical in this instance.
What is critical is equipping a manager with meta-
cognitive skills so that with time and experience In sum, we argue for the notion of designing
he or she can acquire new information concerning intercultural training programs around the unique
the cultural issues in the team. capabilities of a person to adapt to new cultural
Third, many intercultural training programs as- settings as reflected by the three facets of the the-
sume a strong link between cultural values and oretical orientation in the CQ model. We describe
norms and individual behavior within that culture. these features of CQ below and then illustrate how
That is, if I know that Singapore is a collectivistic they can be used to individually tailor a program
culture, then I can predict a particular Singapore- of intercultural training.
an’s actions. However, Triandis (1972), among oth-
ers, pointed to the tenuous link of cultural values to
THE CULTURAL INTELLIGENCE APPROACH TO
action in his framework of subjective culture. Val-
INTERCULTURAL TRAINING
ues and norms represent only one of many differ-
ent features (some cultural and social, others per- Key to all forms of training and education is a
sonal and idiosyncratic) contributing to a person’s learner’s capability to acquire, retain, and inter-
behavioral intentions and action. Focusing on cul- pret various types of information and experiences.
tural values presents an overly simplistic basis for Broadly defined, this capability for adaptation is
understanding behavior based in culture and reflected by a person’s intelligence or IQ (Gardner,
country (Brockner, 2003). 1983; Sternberg, 1985). Amidst the various popular-
2004 Earley and Peterson 105

ized versions of work on intelligence come a num- may be an underlying dimension of personality.
ber of important advances representing a signifi- According to their view, social problem solving (an
cant break from traditional views. One such idea inherent part of social intelligence) is a central
was described by Salovey and Mayer (1990) and personality process that underlies social behavior.
discussed by Gardner in his books, Frames of Mind They place the locus of personal characteristics in
and Multiple Intelligences (1983, 1993), as well as social and personal schema that we store in mem-
numerous writings of Robert Sternberg (e.g., 1985). ory and retrieve in various social situations.
People having a high social or emotional intelli- Many of the schema and social or emotional
gence are thought to be relatively more able to cues used by people from one culture to ascertain
empathize, work with, direct, and interact with another person’s emotional state (e.g., empathize)
other people. High social intelligence reflects a differ radically from those used in other cultures.
person’s capacity to perform actions (such as prob- A “friendly” smile for a Canadian may seem
lem solving) with and through others. High emo- straightforward until she encounters a Thai em-
tional intelligence reflects a person’s capacity to ployee for whom over 20 separate smiles provide
understand and convey human emotion. subtle cues for radically different frames of mind
From a cross-national and cross-cultural per- (Klausner, 1993; Komin, 1991). Thus, a person hav-
spective, however, the emotional and social intel- ing high emotional intelligence in their native cul-
ligence approaches lack cultural context as they ture may be entirely incapable at generalizing
attempt to explain how and why people act as they across cultural settings, given such confusing sig-
do (see Robert Sternberg, 1985, for a notable excep- nals. Cultural intelligence (CQ) captures this ca-
tion). There are a number of differences between pability for adaptation across cultures and it re-
emotional and social intelligence and our con- flects a person’s capability to gather, interpret, and
struct of cultural intelligence. Emotional intelli- act upon these radically different cues to function
gence captures a variety of attributes related to a effectively across cultural settings or in a multicul-
person’s ability to read and respond to the affec- tural situation (Earley & Ang, 2003).
tive states of culturally similar others and to self- CQ differs from social and emotional intelli-
regulate emotion. Take, for example, President gence in other ways as well. Adaptation across
Kennedy’s charismatic speech about American pa- new cultural contexts requires that novel ways of
triotism (“Ask not what your country can do for you dealing with others be discovered. Existing strate-
but what you can do for your country . . .”). The gies must be adjusted, adapted, or reinvented de-
content of his speech drew upon the American pending on the situation and culture. Thus, CQ
ideal of the importance of each person making a places a heavy emphasis on metacognition, or
difference, and his use of dramatic pauses and “thinking about thinking.” Likewise, the activities
emotion are ideal for inspiring Americans. How- required in new cultures, unlike enacting behavior
ever, this presentation style and content would not within one’s own culture, may require people to
have the emotional appeal in dissimilar cultures. develop and expand their behavioral repertoires.
That is, the symbolism relating to individual ini- That is, CQ reflects a person’s capability of devel-
tiative and differentiation may be alienating in oping entirely novel behavior (e.g., speech sounds,
cultures for which personal identity is tied to group gestures, etc.) if required.
context. At its core, CQ consists of three fundamental
Emotional intelligence presumes a degree of fa- elements: metacognition and cognition (thinking,
miliarity within a culture and context that may not learning, and strategizing); motivation (efficacy
exist across many cultures for a given individual. and confidence, persistence, value congruence
Although researchers dealing with emotional in- and affect for the new culture); and behavior (so-
telligence do not purposely limit their models to a cial mimicry, and behavioral repertoire). These
single culture, they do not provide an adequate facets are illustrated in our example of the “Thai
discussion of cross-cultural context and how the smile” interpreted by the Canadian manager.
concept might be expanded to include it. First, she needs to observe the various cues pro-
Cultural intelligence differs from social intelli- vided in addition to the smile gesture itself (e.g.,
gence as well for many of the reasons that it differs other facial or bodily gestures, significance of oth-
from emotional intelligence. That is, the formula- ers who may be in proximity, the source of the
tions of social intelligence are relatively void of original smile gesture) and to assemble them into
multicultural richness. According to Salovey and a meaningful whole and make sense of what is
Mayer (1990), social intelligence reflects the ability really experienced by the Thai employee. Second,
to understand and manage people. Cantor and she must have the requisite motivation (directed
Kihlstrom (1985) argued that social intelligence effort and self-confidence) to persist in the face of
106 Academy of Management Learning and Education March

confusion, challenge, or apparently mixed signals. edge and metacognitive experience. Metacogni-
Third, she must choose, generate, and execute the tive knowledge refers to one’s acquired world
right actions to respond appropriately. If any of knowledge that has to do with cognitive matters
these three elements is deficient, she is likely to be and it reflects three general categories of knowl-
ineffective in dealing with the Thai national. A edge (Flavell, 1987). First, it reflects the “person”
high CQ manager has capability with all three aspects of knowledge or the cognitions that we
facets as they act in unison. We argue here that hold about people as thinking organisms. There
this CQ approach is an advance in thinking for are three types of person categories including in-
understanding manager adjustment because it traindividual, interindividual, and universal. The
captures existing approaches emphasizing values second type of metacognition refers to task vari-
orientation and fact finding, but also moves well ables, or the nature of the information acquired by
beyond that by identifying uniquely the CQ an individual. A person learns things about how
strengths and deficits for an individual manager. the type of information encountered influences
We now turn to a more in-depth discussion of the how it should be dealt with in various contexts.
features of cultural intelligence drawn from the Many people realize that very densely packed and
Earley and Ang (2003) framework.1 unique information requires a great deal of effort
to comprehend. If such information is encountered,
then a person spends more time on trying to ac-
Metacognitive–Cognitive Facet Training
quire the information. For example, the demands
The cognitive facet refers to information-process- placed on learning about a new culture that shares
ing aspects of intelligence and it is conceptualized little in common with that of an expatriate man-
using self-concept theory (Earley, 2003). The self is ager are great, and the individual is likely to real-
a person’s mental representation of her own ize that a great deal of attention and persistence is
knowledge and experience, social identity, and so- required.
cial roles. The functioning of the self depends on The final aspect of metacognitive knowledge re-
personal motives being served and on the config- fers to strategy variables, or the procedures used to
uration of the immediate social situation and roles achieve some desired goal. Whereas a cognitive
enacted. The self is a dynamic interpretive struc- strategy might be something such as adding a set
ture that mediates most significant intrapersonal of numbers to attain a total, a metacognitive strat-
and interpersonal processes. Thus, the cognitive egy might be to add the numbers several times to
facet of CQ can be viewed as the total knowledge ensure that the total is correct. The original addi-
and experience concerning cultural adaptation of tion procedure gives a “correct” answer to the
an individual stored in memory. Knowing oneself problem, but the successive checks on the total
is not sufficient for high CQ—awareness does not function differently. The follow-up operations are
guarantee flexibility. Flexibility of self-concept intended to reassure that the correct answer has
and ease of integrating new facets into it are, how- been found. Another example is that if one is ex-
ever, associated with high CQ because under- posed to very complicated reading material, a
standing new cultures may require abandoning strategy might be to read the material slowly to
pre-existing conceptualizations of how and why understand it. However, a metacognitive strategy
people function as they do. Having high CQ also would be to skim the material briefly to decide its
means that a person is capable of reformulating difficulty and what cognitive strategy might be
conceptions of self and others as new information employed to master the material most effectively.
is received. Thus, malleability and an ability to This type of metacognition might well be thought
reorganize one’s self-concept are important. of as a strategy of learning how to learn, or meta-
A critical starting point for discussing a new learning.
perspective on cultural adaptation is an avenue These higher level cognitive processes are part
referred to as metacognition (Flavell, 1979, 1987), of a person’s metacognition, or “thinking about
which refers to thinking about thinking, or knowl- thinking.” Thus, metacognition can be broken
edge and cognition about cognitive objects. Meta- down into two complementary elements including
cognition can be further broken down into two metacognitive knowledge (what and how to deal
complementary elements: metacognitive knowl- with knowledge gained under a variety of circum-
stances) and metacognitive experience (what and
1
how to incorporate relevant experiences as a gen-
The description of cultural intelligence in this section is drawn
from Earley (2003) and Earley and Ang (2003). The interested eral guide for future interactions). Metacognition is
reader is referred to these sources for a more in-depth discus- a critical aspect of CQ because much of what is
sion of CQ. required in a new culture is putting together pat-
2004 Earley and Peterson 107

terns into a coherent picture, even if one does not on a person’s sense of efficacy for social discourse
know what this coherent picture might look like. To in a novel cultural setting. A person who does not
do so requires a higher level of strategy about believe in personal capability to understand peo-
people, places, and events. For this reason many ple from novel cultures is likely to disengage after
cultural training programs fail because they over- experiencing early failures. If the motivational
emphasize the specific example at the expense of facet of cultural intelligence is weak, adaptation
a more general meta-learning process. does not occur. Highly efficacious people do not
Many companies train their global managers by require constant rewards to persist in their actions;
providing country-specific information. This ap- not only may rewards be delayed, they may ap-
proach is not only limited by a person’s involve- pear in a form that is unfamiliar. People having
ment in the training method, but it does not pre- low efficacy expectations are unable to maintain
pare a manager adequately for understanding and commitment to a course of action under such du-
mastering novel situations the training did not ress and potential personal threat. An additional
specifically cover. With an effective metastrategy, benefit of efficacy is its positive impact on strate-
this problem is overcome. gic thought and problem solving (Locke & Latham,
Cognitive processing capabilities of CQ are 1990). Individuals who have a strong sense of effi-
shown in a number of ways. Incorporating new cacy engage in a problem-solving and strategic
information and using the self as a complex filter approach to overcoming obstacles. This is very
for understanding new cultural settings is as crit- important in intercultural encounters because im-
ical as inductive reasoning. This is not merely em- mediate and obvious answers to dilemmas may be
pathy— cues determining another person’s affec- absent (Wood & Bandura, 1989). High CQ people
tive state relied upon by an empathetic individual have a strong sense of efficacy with regard to in-
may be absent or conflicting with what is ex- tercultural encounters, so they “work smart as well
pected. Expressed emotion may be misleading be- as hard.”
cause it is the underlying emotional states that are Efficacy alone, however, is not a full description
truly reflective of a person’s feelings. A high CQ of the motivational facet of CQ. An important, and
person must inductively create a proper mapping related, addition is goal setting (Earley & Lituchy,
of the social situation to function effectively. This 1991; Locke & Latham, 1990). The interactive impor-
requires a general but broad foundation of knowl- tance of goal setting and efficacy expectations is
edge about cultures and societies similar to the illustrated in work by many scholars (see Bandura,
training recommended by an anthropological view 1997 for a review). Human activities by their very
covering topics such as economic systems, reli- nature are goal directed and purposeful. In an in-
gious and political institutions, social relation- tercultural encounter, a challenge is to determine
ships, and so forth. the goals of others coming from a different cultural
and personal background. Goals specify the con-
ditional requirement for positive self-evaluation
Motivation Facet Training
(Bandura, 1997). The process of evaluating the sig-
The second facet of CQ refers to its motivational nificance of knowledge about what is happening
aspect. Knowledge of another group’s ways of with our personal well-being generates emotions.
dealing with the world is not sufficient. One must Only through the recognition that we have some-
be able (and motivated) to use this knowledge and thing to gain or to loose, that is, that the outcome of
produce a culturally appropriate response. Cul- a transaction is relevant to goals and well-being,
tural intelligence reflects self-concept and directs do we generate an emotional reaction. Thus, goal
and motivates adaptation to new cultural sur- appraisal is necessary not only for activating a
roundings. Self-efficacy is a key facet of the self response toward goal attainment, but also for gen-
(Bandura, 1986, 1997; Erez & Earley, 1993) and it erating emotions that are necessary for energizing
refers to “a judgment of one’s capability to accom- action. That is, our goals may act as cognitive
plish a certain level of performance” (Bandura, anchors, thereby guiding subsequent actions
1986: 391). People tend to avoid tasks and situations (Locke & Latham, 1990).
they believe exceed their capabilities, and efficacy Returning to our discussion of self-efficacy mo-
judgments promote the choice of situations and tive for personal growth (Erez & Earley, 1993), we
tasks with high likelihood of success and elimi- can see the interdependent nature of goals and
nate the choice of those that exceed one’s capabil- efficacy for understanding motivational aspects of
ities. CQ. Self-efficacy reciprocally influences personal
Self-efficacy plays an important role in CQ be- goals set, so individuals who are high in the mo-
cause successful intercultural interaction is based tivational aspects of CQ are likewise high in per-
108 Academy of Management Learning and Education March

sonal efficacy and will tend to set specific and everyday tasks and goal setting, the question of
challenging goals for themselves to master the value (valence) may be an embedded expectation
cultural quagmire they face. Individuals who have of the performance contract that one has with one’s
a high motivation component of CQ are efficacious organization.
with regard to intercultural interactions. These ef- Intercultural encounters are very different than
ficacious individuals have a strong sense that they the context typically experienced by an employee.
are able to deal with the divergent perspectives of These encounters challenge a person’s thinking
others, changing and unfamiliar situations, and and assumptions about their own culture by con-
handling complexity and uncertainty. However, as trasting their beliefs about right and wrong with a
we stated earlier, a strong sense of efficacy alone potentially different system. One reaction to such a
is not adequate for understanding CQ because a challenge is for the individual to isolate himself
person’s actions are goal directed; the nature and from the new culture. For example, a person low on
type of goals that people set for themselves are motivational CQ who encounters initial frustration
critical for understanding and predicting the out- of goal attainment (e.g., successful cultural en-
comes of intercultural interactions. counter) will have increasing lower efficacy ex-
A person’s norms and values are related to CQ pectations, negative self-image, and potential
and they are an important aspect of the self in that disengagement with others. One manager we in-
they guide what features of the social environment terviewed commented that after making a cultural
that a person attends to and what he or she values faux pas he simply stopped going out in his host
(Hofstede, 1991; Schwartz, 1994). The role of values community and stayed in his own home. Rather
and norms (from a motivational perspective) for than taking a chance of making more mistakes and
CQ is that they guide our choice of activities as feeling like a cultural misfit, he isolated himself.
well help define our evaluation of them (Triandis,
1972). For example, a person having strong group-
Behavior Facet Training
based values is likely to avoid situations requiring
personal actions. Further, such a person is likely to The third facet of cultural intelligence refers to the
evaluate individual, idiosyncratic behavior nega- behaviors that a person engages in. The behav-
tively. Thus, cultural adjustment may be impaired ioral aspect of CQ suggests that adaptation is not
by one’s cultural values and norms if they are held only knowing what and how to do (cognitive), and
extremely strongly and inflexibly. having the wherewithal to persevere and exert
Values and value systems serve a number of effort (motivational) but also having the responses
functions for an individual. Values are standards needed for a given situation in one’s behavioral
that lead individuals to take positions over issues, repertoire. Lacking these specific behaviors, a per-
predispose them to favor particular ideologies, son must have the capability to acquire them. CQ
guide their self-presentations, evaluate and judge reflects a person’s ability to acquire or adapt be-
themselves and others, act as a basis for compar- haviors appropriate for a new culture.
isons of morality and competence with others, de- A person’s behavior is also tied to CQ in many
termine which ideas of others should be chal- indirect ways. There are instances in which a per-
lenged, and tell how to rationalize beliefs and son may know and wish to enact a culturally ap-
actions that would otherwise be unacceptable so propriate behavior but cannot do so because of
as to preserve self-image (Rokeach, 1973: 13). Val- some deep-set reservation. For example, imagine a
ues serve to motivate instrumentally by providing manager who is thrust into an uncomfortable so-
enticement through desired end-states as well as cial situation and is not able to control his nonver-
terminally by representing superordinate goals, bal communication cues. This type of response (or
and reinforce a sense of self. lack of it) can be thought of in behavioral terms.
We are now in a position to combine our earlier Even if a person is able to provide a desired re-
discussion on values with our use of efficacy and sponse in an intercultural encounter, that the host
goals. As researchers have demonstrated (see may detect hesitation and react negatively re-
Locke & Latham, 1990 for a review), the goals that mains a problem. Behavior properly executed re-
people set are determined by their efficacy expec- quires a person willing to persist over time. Persis-
tations as well as a subjective evaluation concern- tence is necessary for the acquisition of new skills,
ing the potential outcomes they associate with and so is a person’s aptitude to determine these
goal enactment and completion. That is to say, our new skills. That is, it is not enough to be willing to
goals are determined not only by whether we think try and learn new behaviors—a high CQ person
we can achieve them but also by what we consider has an aptitude to determine where new behaviors
the outcomes of such accomplishments to be. In are needed and how to execute them effectively.
2004 Earley and Peterson 109

Self-presentation is particularly important in so- ously, metacognition and cognition are related be-
cial behaviors because behaviors enacted in the cause the latter is an inevitable by-product of the
process of social interactions are motivated pri- former (although not a requisite for the latter).
marily by the need for impression management Other facets are interrelated as well, in a similar
and self-presentation (Goffman, 1967). For exam- manner as motivation and metacognition. For ex-
ple, a person may eat at a local restaurant in a host ample, one benefit of high self-efficacy is a posi-
country. His primary goal is satisfy hunger while tive influence on strategic thinking (Bandura, 1997).
his concerns about self-presentation may be of sec- High motivational CQ means that a person will
ondary concern. Even so, he’s likely to follow eat- engage in more strategic thinking as well, and
ing etiquette so as to avoid offending others in that this, in turn, has a positive impact on actual adap-
culture. By adapting his eating behavior and eti- tation. Thus, high motivational CQ impacts meta-
quette, he satisfies both his hunger as well as a cognition, resulting in performance effectiveness
desire to maintain a positive self-image. that further bolsters motivation.
Role modeling provides an important contribution Metacognition and cognition are related to be-
to behavioral CQ, and it is a feature introduced in a havioral CQ as well, because we are not positing
number of training programs through role-play exer- learning without awareness. Although some
cises. A person with high CQ is able to adapt behav- unconscious elements of behavior may impact
ior to be appropriate to any given cultural context. behavioral functioning (e.g., Triandis’ notion of
Adopting the behaviors consistent with a target cul- habits), behavioral CQ operates largely in the con-
ture is an important aspect of intercultural adjust- scious domain. That is, the metacognitive and cog-
ment and interaction. This mimicry is not an attempt nitive knowledge gained during cultural encoun-
at subterfuge or camouflage—it is engaging in ac- ters provides a foundation for behaviors to be
tions that put people from another culture at ease engaged in. This may be largely observational
and comfort. A myriad of cues are provided through (role model) although metacognitive strategies
observing others, and observing their reactions as might be used to inform and shape a person’s
you interact with them. A person high in behavioral behavioral repertoire.
CQ integrates and mimics these cues and behaviors Although the facets of CQ have discriminant
(Bargh & Chartrand, 1999; Chartrand & Bargh, 1999). validity, there are relationships among them. That
Work on mimicry suggests that the effective mimick- is, an intervention targeting one of the facets may
ing of another person’s behavior, even if done sub- have minimal spillover effects onto other facets.
consciously, results in an increased satisfaction with Thus, to maximize benefits a training intervention
the interaction. Mimicry is subtle and often subcon- needs to focus on potential overlap and synergies
scious (Chartrand & Bargh, 1999) but it results in of CQ facets.
generally positive effects in a social encounter. A
high CQ person is a talented mimic who uses mim-
COMBINING FEATURES TO DESIGN
icry in moderate doses. That is, excessive mimicry
INTERCULTURAL TRAINING
may be misinterpreted as mocking someone. How-
ever, a high CQ person models some of the manner- If we map the three key features of CQ onto the
isms and posturing, verbal and nonverbal cues, and training needs described by Tan and Chua (2003) of
so forth, of the other person so as to create a “com- intensity, duration, and nature we can see a con-
fort” zone. For example, if I am speaking with a tent basis for intercultural training interventions.
Mexican manager whose social distance is closer This is reflected in Figure 1, and it provides a guide
than mine and I maintain my distant position, this concerning how one might think about matching
may make the manager feel uncomfortable. Al- specific training methods with a needs-based
though he may not identify the source of his discom- analysis of participant capability.
fort, he will feel apprehensive and hesitant, and this Interventions targeting the metacognitive and
will inhibit effective communication and interaction. cognitive aspects of CQ require an emphasis on
Mimicry used intelligently (and judiciously) consti- skill development in several areas. The three gen-
tutes a type of cognitive strategy as well as a behav- eral metacognitive competencies include plan-
ioral intervention. ning, monitoring, and evaluating. Planning refers
to a capability to generate cognitive structures and
strategies (higher level thinking strategies). For
Integrating the Facets of Cultural Intelligence
example, a trainee not only needs to recognize that
Although we have presented these facets of CQ as male–female work relationships differ across cul-
if they were independent and not overlapping, tures, or that a particular relationship holds in a
there are relationships among the features. Obvi- particular country, but she must also be able to
110 Academy of Management Learning and Education March

FIGURE 1
Designing an Intercultural Training

generate strategies for determining these relation- such as the general cultural assimilator or culture-
ships in new settings. It is not enough to know that based assimilator (Bhawuk, 2001; Brislin et al.,
men and women kiss on the cheek in Italy when 1983) attempt to enhance a person’s the metacog-
greeting one another while they do not in the nitive skills by focusing on tools for generalization.
United States—what is important is how to deter- These methods might be supplanted with addi-
mine rules for greetings and physical contact tional techniques emphasizing inductive logic and
across many cultural settings (even within a na- reasoning as well as introspection about thinking
tional culture). This is critical, as culturally intelli- and learning styles.
gent individuals are able to use conditional knowl- Cognitive aspects of CQ reflect the specific
edge in adjusting their cognition to different knowledge of content and process concerning a
cultures. A second metacognitive competency is target culture that is acquired through metacogni-
monitoring, which reflects a capacity to reason tive mechanisms. That is, cognitive CQ captures
inductively and deliberate, formulate hypotheses the what, who, why, and how of intercultural inter-
concerning actions, and monitor internal and ex- action. This aspect of CQ is well addressed
ternal cues. Culturally intelligent individuals are through culture assimilators and other knowledge-
able to focus attention on culturally inconsistent based training systems. Interventions focusing on
schemas (ability to detect culturally discrepant in- the acquisition of culture-specific knowledge
formation), and consequently, adjust their cogni- through documentary and experiential methods
tion to incorporate the new cultural schema may help people understand more about a given
through intelligent sense making and reduction of culture.
cultural dissonance. Finally, metacognition in- There are several general methods of enhancing
volves evaluating one’s surroundings by focusing the metacognitive and cognitive aspects of CQ
on the ability to learn about one’s own learning. described by Tan and Chua (2003). For example,
Culturally intelligent individuals are able to think Cognitive Structure Analysis systematically and
critically and reflexively on their own performance efficiently probes for different classes of knowl-
in cultural interactions. Pedagogical interventions edge representation and identifies knowledge
2004 Earley and Peterson 111

structures underlying self, social, and cultural is novel. Through the medium of drama, individu-
schemas. Cognitive structures are tacit assump- als adopt an integrative, multisensory approach to
tions and beliefs that give rise to habitual ways of the concept of learning. They are encouraged to
construing self, others, and the world. The individ- utilize the physical, emotional, sensory, and cogni-
ual’s personal schemas, current concerns, and per- tive processes to experience learning and improve
sonal goals influence the way information is pro- self-knowledge and metacognition, an enhanced
cessed and the way the individual’s behavior is understanding of the feelings and motivation of
organized. others, and to bolster self-efficacy. They suggest
Methods focusing on the motivational facet of that a dramaturgical approach helps trainees
CQ are most heavily tied to the values-orientation learn the nuances of behavior and action. Cer-
approach often employed in intercultural training. tainly this approach fits nicely with work on social
That is, an emphasis on cultural values not only mimicry by Bargh and Chartrand (1999) that we
provides specific knowledge about a target cul- described above. Training programs emphasizing
ture, but it is intended to develop empathy as well. role modeling complement such a drama-based
The shortcoming to this approach is that empathy approach as well.
and attraction to a new culture in no way imply Finally, behavior modification is another way of
efficaciousness and perseverance. That is, a per- enhancing the behavioral aspect of CQ. Behaviors
son may feel highly empathetic and positive to- that are sanctioned in a target culture are identi-
ward a host culture, but still lack the efficacy to fied and transferred to a learner. Simulations and
deal with the challenges she inevitably faces. role-plays are conducted and reinforcement and
Self-efficacy is a key to effective intercultural punishment are used to guide behavior change.
training. Cultural experiences need to be lever- Individuals wishing to increase cultural intelli-
aged as a means of building and enhancing effi- gence learn to break out of old habits and to ac-
cacy through proximate mastery situations. This quire a new repertoire of behaviors considered
implies that we ought to incrementally build a appropriate in the target culture.
trainee’s confidence toward intercultural interac-
tion by guiding the trainee through a series of
Applying CQ to a Multinational Team
successful interactions with a new culture. One
possible way is to expose an uninitiated person Working on a multinational team provides a num-
through a series of short, simple, and controlled ber of strong challenges for a member. There are at
intercultural interactions in a classroom setting. least three internal (to the team) issues confronting
As the trainee builds greater confidence, greater multinational teams as they develop and build
complexity could be added, progressively graduat- momentum— establishment of goals and common
ing to an actual encounter. A simple example of purpose, clarification of roles played by team
this confidence-building approach is to instruct an members, and delineation of rules for conduct
individual to focus on several simple but salient and interaction (Earley & Gibson, 2002; Earley &
rituals in a new country (e.g., finding out where to Mosakowski, 2000; Maznevski, 1994; Snow, Snell,
buy a newspaper or get a cup of coffee) as initial Canney-Davison, & Hambrick, 1996).
mastery experiences that, in turn, build efficacy Working in a highly diverse team consisting of
with regard to greater challenges. Once estab- members from a range of cultures and back-
lished, efficacy provides the perseverance needed grounds makes the problem of establishing goals,
to tackle greater cultural challenges. Curiosity is a roles, and rules highly problematic because of the
motivational prerequisite for exploratory behavior, additional complexity added due to cultural differ-
and this is important for cultural adjustment. Peo- ences. Take, for example, the issue concerning
ple vary in their desire to experiment and observe; rules for interaction within a multinational team.
curiosity reflects a motivational state. How should members interact and discuss core
With regard to the behavioral facet of CQ, Tan issues? If disagreements occur how are they to be
and Chua (2003) draw from Goffman’s theory of resolved? Team members who come from more
self-presentation (Goffman, 1967) and focus on a confrontational cultures may not notice the subtle
dramaturgical approach to the training of behav- cues coming from team members who come from
ioral competencies through the use of role-plays, cultures where face saving is important or where
performing, and visual arts as methods of training. conflict tends to be expressed indirectly. The sec-
Although the use of role-plays is not new as a ond big issue is the distribution of resources. If the
training method in cross-cultural training, their team receives limited resources, how should they
use of narrative plays and theater training meth- be distributed? And how might team members de-
ods for the purpose of training cultural intelligence cide individual responsibilities? A team member
112 Academy of Management Learning and Education March

coming from a strong need-based culture might of institution for training or past travel experi-
well expect that scarce resources are allocated ences. Well-traveled managers often assume they
based on need rather than accomplishment, while are naturally accepting of cultural differences.
a fellow member coming from an equity-based cul- However, this assumption is tested not when the
ture might have an opposing view. The unstated team is experiencing calm waters, but when the
assumptions concerning right and wrong, due pro- seas are turbulent. At critical points in time, such
cess, expectations for membership, and so forth as impending deadlines or negative performance
are tied to cultural background and experience. So feedback, teams lacking a strong sense of trust are
although these kinds of issues are a good starting likely to experience high relationship or emotional
point for building trusting teams within a single conflict and likely self-destruct (Earley & Mosa-
culture, they can easily become contentious issues kowski, 2000; Simons & Peterson, 2000). Once a
in the multinational team. group receives negative feedback, differences that
CQ competencies based on metacognition and were once easily overlooked can become salient
motivation are of particularly high importance for and what were quaint eccentricities can become
the multinational team. Functioning in such a unacceptable irritants resulting in personal dislik-
team requires that members acknowledge their ing (Peterson & Behfar, in press). Familiarity can
weak overlapping knowledge and focus on the breed contempt, especially at key stress points in a
most basic commonality to create a hybrid or syn- group’s life. Team members having high CQ rec-
ergistic culture that grows out of something more ognize this difficulty and remain motivated to look
fundamental than distribution of rewards and de- beyond individual differences toward what might
cision rules (Adler, 1997; Adler & Bartholomew, benefit the entire team, even at critical pressure
1992; Earley & Mosakowski, 2000). That is, all teams points.
must build momentum from their commonalities, Our point here is that success for multinational
but the multinational team has a special challenge teams does not lie with cultural values training or
insomuch as their commonalities will be harder to broad orientations to diversity. Rather, it requires
identify. Multinational teams need to resist focus- specific CQ competencies held by members to un-
ing initially on their differences. Even though the cover commonality across its membership, effec-
long-term strength of multinational teams lies in tive and appropriate role allocations, and clearly
their diversity and unique experiences as a team, defined rules for interaction based on the specific
sharing those unique perspectives in a team too needs (i.e., some cultural and some individual) and
early in the process is risky individually (Witten- interests of team members. To uncover these vari-
baum, Hubbell, & Zuckerman, 1999). Metacognitive ous elements requires team members who are able
CQ is critical for developing and identifying strat- to recognize these features in fellow team mem-
egies that might be used to determine the basis for bers as well as themselves, and to generate new
a hybrid culture. Although the old adage of goals, ways to do so as new team members are encoun-
roles, and rules is a reasonable starting point for tered. The best strategy for learning (e.g., direct
developing a hybrid culture, team-specific ele- inquiry versus passive observation) what a Ken-
ments that must be uncovered by team members yan, an Indonesian, or a German may define as
are likely as well. effective leadership may differ as much as the
content answer about the most desirable form of
leadership itself (e.g., directive versus participa-
All teams must build momentum from tive). Metacognitive CQ training addresses these
their commonalities, but the different learning strategies in the way that cogni-
multinational team has a special tive CQ training addresses the content differences.
challenge insomuch as their Motivational CQ provides the confidence to persist
when trying to determine the basis of experienced
commonalities will be harder to identify.
differences. Behavioral CQ guides appropriate
ways of interacting with others from different cul-
Multinational team building also requires strong tures.
motivational discipline because many unstated
practices and assumptions may need to be set
CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS
aside and etiquette violations overlooked. A com-
mon trap for managers (or students) participating Given the importance of intercultural training, it
in a multinational team from a nationally hetero- remains unfortunate that to date a comprehensive
geneous company (or program) is to assume that framework of cultural adaptation has not been
they are cosmopolitan by the virtue of their choice brought forward to guide training and pedagogical
2004 Earley and Peterson 113

interventions. The dominant approach used in ing assessment and training of the CQ facets) were
both corporate and educational settings is to pro- well received by the participants. A full-scale
vide managers and students with culture-specific analysis of the approach has not been completed
knowledge in the case of a targeted assignment at either school, but both programs were suffi-
(country-specific, limited duration assignment or ciently successful that the respective university
educational study-abroad program) or culture- administrators at both have decided to adopt it
general features dominated by a discussion of a more broadly in the coming year.
limited set of cultural values. These culture- We have proposed and discussed a unifying con-
general briefings are often based on conceptual ceptual framework useful for understanding and
frameworks posed by cultural researchers (Hof- training a global manager. While past approaches
stede, 1991; Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner, have often focused on limited interventions relying
1998), and they consist of idiosyncratic lists of cul- on empirical observations, we have suggested an
tural values. Unfortunately, these cultural values alternative approach and philosophy of pedagogy.
briefings can easily degrade into a values-based Note that our approach does not advocate one spe-
stereotyping of national cultures and provide ten- cific training methodology over another (e.g., role-
uous, if not downright unfounded, links to actual play exercises versus documentary learning)—it
behavior of cultural participants. provides a guide for assessing a manager’s spe-
These culture-specific interventions are prob- cific competencies to provide training in specific
lematic for a number of reasons as we have out- areas. The challenge facing a global manager is
lined above. First, they do not adjust for individual daunting from a cultural perspective, and it is crit-
differences in capability across the cognitive- ical to provide interventions tailored to the individ-
metacognitive, motivational, and behavioral do- ual. After decades of work on training and educa-
mains. Second, they fail to consider the nature of tion for international work assignments, scholars
the target culture and the work to be performed have not experienced success and mastery of this
in terms of intensity, duration, and nature. Third, challenge. Perhaps with a new approach focusing
they do not provide adequately for generalization on fundamental human capability for adjustment
across cultural settings or for multicultural experi- to others, greater progress will not be so elusive.
ences.
Our advocated approach to training and devel-
REFERENCES
opment using CQ represents a new direction for
theory and practice. At this preliminary stage, a Adler, N. J. 1997. International dimensions of organizational
group of scholars at the Nanyang Business School behavior (3rd ed.). Cincinnati, OH: South Western.
(Cultural Intelligence Working Group) in Singa- Adler, N. J., & Bartholomew, S. 1992. Managing globally compe-
pore with colleagues in the United States and tent people. Academy of Management Executive, 6: 52– 65.
England are developing an assessment tool for CQ Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. 1980. Understanding attitudes and pre-
using a paper-and-pencil method. Early findings dicting social behavior. NJ: Prentice-Hall.
suggest that a reliable and valid scale can be Bandura, A. 1986. Social foundations of thoughts and action: A
developed, and we are using this tool for assessing social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
MBA students at several universities as they enter Bandura, A. 1997. Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New
the program. Subsequently, we hope to expand York: W. H. Freeman.
this assessment method to capture the facets of CQ Bargh, J. A., & Chartrand, T. L. 1999. The unbearable automatic-
using simulations, work samples, and 360-degree ity of being. American Psychologist, 54: 462– 479.
feedback. Bhawuk, D. P. 1998. The role of culture theory in cross-cultural
As with any training intervention there is a prac- training. A multimethod study of culture specific, culture
general, and culture theory-based assimilators. Journal of
tical concern about the cost of assessment and
Cross-Cultural Psychology, 29: 630 – 655.
intervention. Will our approach using CQ prove to
Bhawuk, D. P. 2001. Evolution of culture assimilators: Toward
be cost effective and practical? We have imple-
theory-based assimilators. International Journal of Intercul-
mented a small-scale introduction of our CQ idea tural Relations, 25: 141–163.
in the entering MBA class at London Business
Bhawuk, D. P., & Brislin, R. W. 1992. The measurement of inter-
School. The first full-scale application of our ap- cultural sensitivity using the concepts of individualism and
proach has been implemented at the Nanyang collectivism. International Journal of Intercultural Rela-
Business School (Ang & Tan, personal communica- tions, 16: 413– 446.
tions, Singapore, August 28, 2003) in training non- Bochner, S. 1982. Cultures in contact: Studies in cross-cultural
Singaporean students newly entering the MBA pro- interaction. New York: Pergamon.
gram. With a sample of approximately 60 new Brislin, R. W., Landis, D., & Brandt, M. E. 1983. Conceptualiza-
students, the results of their 3-day program (includ- tions of intercultural behavior and training. In D. D. Landis
114 Academy of Management Learning and Education March

& R. W. Brislin (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural training, Hofstede, G. 1991. Culture and organizations: Software of the
(Vol. 1: 1–35). New York: Pergamon. mind. London: McGraw Hill.
Brislin, R. W., & Yoshida, T. 1994. Intercultural communication Kealey, D. J. 1989. A study of cross-cultural effectiveness: Theo-
training: An introduction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. retical issues, practical applications. International Journal
of Intercultural Relations, 13: 387– 428.
Brockner, J. In press. Unpacking country effects: On the need to
operationalize the psychological determinants of cross- Klausner, W. J. 1993. Reflections on Thai culture. Bangkok, Thai-
national differences. In B. M. Staw, & R. M. Kramer (Eds.), land: The Siam Society.
Research in organizational behavior. Greenwich, CT: JAI
Kluckhohn, F., & Strodtbeck, F. L. 1961. Variations in value ori-
Press.
entations. New York: Harper and Row.
Cantor, N., & Kihlstrom, J. F. 1985. Social intelligence: The cog-
Kolb, D. A., Boyatzis, R. E., & Mainemelis, C. 2001. Experiential
nitive basis of personality. Review of Personality and So-
learning theory: Previous research and new directions.
cial Psychology, 6: 15–33.
In R. J. Sternberg, & L. Zhang (Eds.), Perspectives on
Chartrand, T. L., & Bargh, J. A. 1999. The chameleon effect: The thinking, learning, and cognitive styles. Mahwah, NJ:
perception-behavior link and social interaction. Journal of Erlbaum.
Personality and Social Psychology, 76: 893–910.
Komin, S. 1991. Psychology of the Thai people. Bangkok, Thai-
Cushner, K., & Landis, D. 1996. The intercultural sensitizer. In D. land: National Institute of Development Administration.
Landis & R. S. Bhagat (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural
Lee, C. H., & Templer, K. J. 2003. CQ assessment and measure-
training (2nd ed., 185–201). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
ment. In P. C. Earley & S. Ang (Eds.), Cultural intelligence:
Dodd, C. H. 1998. Dynamics of intercultural communication (5th An analysis of individual interactions across cultures: 185–
ed.). Boston: McGraw Hill. 208. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Dowling, P. J., Welch, D. E., & Schuler, R. S. 1999. International Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. 1990. A theory of goal setting and
human resource management. Managing people in a task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
multinational context (3rd ed.). Cincinnati, OH: South-
Loewenstein, J., Thompson, L., & Gentner, D. 2003. Analogical
Western.
learning in negotiation teams: Comparing cases promotes
Earley, P. C. 2003. Redefining interactions across cultures learning and transfer. Academy of Management Learning &
and organizations: Moving forward with cultural in- Education, 2(2): 119 –127.
telligence. Research in Organizational Behavior, 24: 271–
Maznevski, M. L. 1994. Understanding our differences: Perfor-
299.
mance in decision-making groups with diverse members.
Earley, P. C., & Ang, S. 2003. Cultural intelligence: An analysis of Human Relations, 47: 531–552.
individual interactions across cultures. Palo Alto, CA: Stan-
Mead, G. H. 1934. Mind, self and society. Chicago, IL: University
ford University Press.
of Chicago Press.
Earley, P. C., & Gibson, C. B. 2002. Multinational work teams: A
Mendenhall, M., Dunbar, E., & Oddou, G. 1987. Expatriate selec-
new perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
tion, training, and career-pathing: A review and critique.
Earley, P. C., & Lituchy, T. R. 1991. Delineating goal and efficacy Human Resource Management, 26: 331–345.
effects: A test of three models. Journal of Applied Psychol-
Parsons, T., & Shils, E. A. 1951. Toward a general theory of
ogy, 76: 81–98.
action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Earley, P. C., & Mosakowski, E. 2000. Creating hybrid team
Peterson, R. S., & Behfar, K. J. In press. The dynamic relationship
cultures: An empirical test of international team function-
between performance feedback, trust, and conflict in
ing. Academy of Management Journal, 43: 26 – 49.
groups: A longitudinal study. Organizational Behavior and
Erez, M., & Earley, P. C. 1993. Culture, self-identity, and work. Human Decision Processes.
New York: Oxford.
Redden, W. 1975. Culture shock inventory. Fredericton, Can-
Flavell, J. H. 1979. Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A ada: Organizational Texts Ltd. (Cited from Kealey &
new area of cognitive inquiry. American Psychologist, 34: Ruben 1983.)
906 –911.
Rokeach, M. 1973. The nature of human values. New York: Free
Flavell, J. H. 1987. Speculations about the nature and develop- Press.
ment of metacognition. In F. E. Weinert, & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.),
Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. 1990. Emotional intelligence. Imagi-
Metacognition, motivation, and understanding: 21–29.
nation, Cognition, and Personality, 9: 185–211.
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Schneider, S. C., & Barsoux, J. L. 1997. Managing across cultures.
Gardner, H. 1983. Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intel-
London: Prentice-Hall.
ligences. New York: Basic.
Schwartz, S. H. 1994. Are there universal aspects in the structure
Gardner, H. 1993. Multiple intelligences: The theory in practice.
and contents of human values? Journal of Social Issues, 50:
New York: Basic Books.
19 – 45.
Goffman, E. 1967. Interaction ritual: Essays in face-to-face be-
Shirts, R. G. 1973. BaFa BaFa. Del Mar, CA: Simulation Training
havior. Chicago: Aldine.
Systems.
Hall, E. T., & Hall, M. R. 1990. Understanding cultural differences.
Simons, T. L., & Peterson, R. S. 2000. Task conflict and rela-
Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural.
tionship conflict in top management teams: The pivotal
Harris, P. R., & Moran, R. T. 1991. Managing cultural differences role of intragroup trust. Journal of Applied Psychology,
(3rd ed.). Houston, TX: Gulf. 85: 102–111.
2004 Earley and Peterson 115

Snow, C. C., Snell, S. A., Canney-Davison, S. C., & Hambrick, Triandis, H. C. 1975. Cultural training, cognitive complexity,
D. C. 1996. Use transnational teams to globalize your com- and interpersonal attitudes. In R. W. Brislin, S. Bochner, &
pany. Organizational Dynamics, 32: 20 –32. W. J. Lonner (Eds.), Cross cultural perspectives on learning:
39 –78. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Snyder, M. 1974. The Self-Monitoring of Expressive Behavior.
Triandis, H. C. 1995. Individualism and collectivism. Boulder,
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,30:
CO: Westview Press.
526 –537.
Triandis, H. C., & Berry, J. W. 1980. Handbook of cross-cultural
Spreitzer, G. M., McCall, M. W., & Mahoney, J. D. 1997. Early psychology (Vol. 2). New York: Allyn & Bacon.
identification of international executive potential. Journal Trompenaars, F., & Hampden-Turner, C. 1998. Riding the waves
of Applied Psychology, 82: 6 –29. of culture: Understanding diversity in global business (2nd
Sternberg, R. J. 1985. Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human ed.). Chicago, IL: Irwin.
intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press. Tung, R. L. 1981. Selection and training of personnel for overseas
assignments. Columbia Journal of World Business, 16: 68–78.
Tan, J. S., & Chua, R. Y. J. 2003. Training and developing
Wittenbaum, G. M., Hubbell, A. P., & Zuckerman, C. 1999. Mutual
cultural intelligence. In P. C. Earley, & S. Ang (Eds.),
enhancement: Toward an understanding of the collective
Cultural intelligence: An analysis of individual interac-
preference for shared information. Journal of Personality
tions across cultures: 258 –303. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford
and Social Psychology, 77: 967–978.
University Press.
Wood, R. E., & Bandura, A. 1989. Social cognitive theory of
Triandis, H. C. 1972. The analysis of subjective culture. New organizational management. Academy of Management Re-
York: Wiley. view, 14: 361–384.

P. Christopher Earley is chair Randall S. Peterson is associate

and professor of organizational professor of organizational be-
behavior at the London Busi- havior at London Business
ness School. He received his School. His current research ac-
PhD in industrial and organiza- tivities include investigating
tional psychology from the how personality of members af-
University of Illinois, Urbana- fects group interaction and per-
Champaign. His research inter- formance, how CEO personality
ests include cross-cultural and affects top management team
international aspects of organi- interaction and firm perfor-
zational behavior. Recent pub- mance, and the effects of con-
lications include Cultural Intel- flict in groups. Professor Peter-
ligence: Individual Interactions son holds a PhD in social and
Across Cultures (with Soon Ang) organizational psychology from
and Face, Harmony, and Social the University of California,
Structure: An Analysis of Be- Berkeley.
havior in Organizations.